could assess and collect taxes from those favored by the unlawful discrimination to put them on equal footing with those who had been discriminated against. Id. Third, it could apply a combination of a partial refund and a partial retroactive assessment. Id. These three options were available because the tax law was not invalid per se, but only because it discriminated against interstate commerce. Therefore, the Due Process Clause demanded only a remedy that insured that “the resultant tax actually assessed during the contested tax period reflects a scheme that does not discriminate against inter state commerce.” McKesson, 496 U.S. at 41, 110 S.Ct. 2238; see also Fulton Corp. v. Faulkner, 516 U.S. 325, 346-47, 116 S.Ct. 848, 133 L.Ed.2d 796 (1996). In M i 1, 868 P.2d 419, 426-27 (1994) (<HOLDING>). Other courts have held that the refund option
holding that director of taxation may select remedial option holding that granting an option to purchase constituted a trigger holding that under an option requiring renewal at the expiration of the lease the lessee was required to exercise the option on or before the last day of the lease holding that a company that sold an option to buy stock while secretly intending never to honor the option violates  10b and rule 10b5 holding that even if the doctrine applies to option contracts no conversion would take place until the option were exercised by the party having the right of election