decision rendered tax returns privileged. Since Maryland law is silent on this point, we must look to cases in other jurisdictions to decide this issue. On the other hand, we find no Maryland statute or case law to the contrary. Courts in both California and Massachusetts have read state statutes that prohibit tax officials from disclosing tax return information as also making tax returns privileged in the hands of taxpayers. See e.g., Brown v. Sup. Ct. of San Francisco, 71 Cal.App.3d 141, 139 Cal.Rptr. 327 (1977) (interpreting a statute that prohibits tax officials from disclosing tax return information to extend to taxpayers; the privilege is not nullified simply by demanding the information from the taxpayer directly); Goto v. Goto, 187 Cal.App.2d 594, 10 Cal.Rptr. 14 (1960) (<HOLDING>); Webb v. Standard Oil Co., 49 Cal.2d 509, 319
holding that the lower court erred both in requiring production of copies of the defendants income tax returns and in receiving the returns into evidence over objection holding that tax returns and tax return information cannot regain their confidential status once the returns have become part of the public record by their use in a public trial holding that agency could not claim confidentiality for tax returns that had been exhibits in tax court and were therefore public records holding that late state income tax returns fail to comply with applicable filing requirements holding that tax returns are privileged under the statutes that prohibited the tax board and employees from disclosing any information and this privilege should not be nullified by allowing third parties to obtain the information by demanding copies of the returns