Cato calls Jindal's hand on film tax welfare-- | Page 6 | TigerDroppings.com

Posted byMessage
BigJim
LSU Fan
Baton Rouge
Member since Jan 2010
2971 posts

re: Cato calls Jindal's hand on film tax welfare--


So the complaint is that Jindal is only the 5th most fiscally conservative governor??







Back to top
I B Freeman
Member since Oct 2009
6230 posts

re: Cato calls Jindal's hand on film tax welfare--


quote:

So the complaint is that Jindal is only the 5th most fiscally conservative governor??


Nope BigJim just saying Cato called him out on the subsidies.

Some of your old friends are looking for you BTW.






Back to top
VOR
New Orleans Pelicans Fan
New Orleans
Member since Apr 2009
42382 posts

re: Cato calls Jindal's hand on film tax welfare--


quote:

I B Freeman



You've got a serious hard on about this subject.






Back to top
I B Freeman
Member since Oct 2009
6230 posts

re: Cato calls Jindal's hand on film tax welfare--


quote:

The million job example was a terrible attempt to make his point - through hyperbole - that the net effect of this "corporate welfare" would always be negative. That is, 50 billion in salaries paid to La workers by outside companies, would have to be reimbursed at 35% to those employers (17.5 billion) - an amount that the state could of course never afford to pay them (even with the new tax revenues coming in). The example is too simplistic and doesnt account for lots of other factors (which you and Catman88 have pointed out multiple times).

I am not defending his conclusions, only his premise.


Sorry about that TigerRad. But perhaps you can better communicate my position.

Let me ask you a question since at least you understand the state would never have the revenue to finance the tax credit. If somehow the logic of Catman and Russian work then why aren't the credits 100%? If 35% is good and magically multiplies without harm to other industries or cost to tax payers then why not 200%?






Back to top
I B Freeman
Member since Oct 2009
6230 posts

re: Cato calls Jindal's hand on film tax welfare--


quote:

quote:
I B Freeman


You've got a serious hard on about this subject.


It is a serious screwing of taxpayers. Shouldn't you get 35% of your expenses if a film company does?






Back to top
  Replies (0)
Golfer
LSU Fan
Coral Bay, St. John, USVI
Member since Nov 2005
57768 posts

re: Cato calls Jindal's hand on film tax welfare--


quote:

Nope BigJim just saying Cato called him out on the subsidies.


And they are incorrect in their report...

Namely on this item...

quote:

In 2011 he even made the state’s digital media tax incentives “refundable,”which means that the government will hand out cash to favored digital media businesses.


The refundable nature of the credits actually saves the state money as companies and elect to receive 85% of the cashable value.

Additionally, the credit is a statutory incentive so it cannot favor one digital media company over another.



This post was edited on 10/9 at 7:48 pm


Back to top
LSURussian
LSU Fan
Baton Rouge
Member since Feb 2005
84434 posts

re: Cato calls Jindal's hand on film tax welfare--


Math and logic are not your strengths.





Back to top
  Replies (0)
I B Freeman
Member since Oct 2009
6230 posts

re: Cato calls Jindal's hand on film tax welfare--


quote:

quote:
Nope BigJim just saying Cato called him out on the subsidies.


And they are incorrect in their report...

Namely on this item...


Can you answer this question Golfer--

quote:

Let me ask you a question since at least you understand the state would never have the revenue to finance the tax credit. If somehow the logic of Catman and Russian work then why aren't the credits 100%? If 35% is good and magically multiplies without harm to other industries or cost to tax payers then why not 200%?






Back to top
Golfer
LSU Fan
Coral Bay, St. John, USVI
Member since Nov 2005
57768 posts

re: Cato calls Jindal's hand on film tax welfare--


You clearly don't understand economic multipliers just like Cato doesn't even understand the Digital Media Tax Credit as I noted above.


This post was edited on 10/9 at 7:52 pm


Back to top
  Replies (0)
I B Freeman
Member since Oct 2009
6230 posts

re: Cato calls Jindal's hand on film tax welfare--


quote:

Namely on this item...

quote:
In 2011 he even made the state’s digital media tax incentives “refundable,”which means that the government will hand out cash to favored digital media businesses.


The refundable nature of the credits actually saves the state money as companies and elect to receive 85% of the cashable value.

Additionally, the credit is a statutory incentive so it cannot favor one digital media company over another.



You don't understand. The credit is refundable at 85% from the state but can be sold to any tax payer and used at full face value by the taxpayer--100%. The state is giving away a minimum of 85% but most probably 100% of 35% of their expenses.






Back to top
Golfer
LSU Fan
Coral Bay, St. John, USVI
Member since Nov 2005
57768 posts

re: Cato calls Jindal's hand on film tax welfare--


quote:

You don't understand. The credit is refundable at 85% from the state but can be sold to any tax payer and used at full face value by the taxpayer--100%


You're right. I only helped write the dammed thing and promulgate the rules.

Once a company elects to receive the 85% value, they have been sold back to the state.







Back to top
I B Freeman
Member since Oct 2009
6230 posts

re: Cato calls Jindal's hand on film tax welfare--


I challenge any of you film tax welfare advocates to explain how much the $200 million in film tax credits meant in state revenue and in state economic activity and how much economic activity and state revenue would be generated if the credits you love at 35% were 100%?





Back to top
I B Freeman
Member since Oct 2009
6230 posts

re: Cato calls Jindal's hand on film tax welfare--


quote:


You're right. I only helped write the dammed thing and promulgate the rules.

Once a company elects to receive the 85% value, they have been sold back to the state.


Then you know they don't have to sell it back to the state. They can sell it to any tax payer and the credit will reduce taxes by 100%. But either way it is a cost to taxpayers.

Now if 35% is so good in your mind and can be given away without economic impact on other producers in the economy then why not make the credit 100%?






Back to top
Golfer
LSU Fan
Coral Bay, St. John, USVI
Member since Nov 2005
57768 posts

re: Cato calls Jindal's hand on film tax welfare--


quote:

Then you know they don't have to sell it back to the state. They can sell it to any tax payer and the credit will reduce taxes by 100%. But either way it is a cost to taxpayers.


They aren't selling the DM credit to anyone other than the state since its a refundable credit.






Back to top
C
LSU Fan
The Woodlands, TX
Member since Dec 2007
22223 posts

re: Cato calls Jindal's hand on film tax welfare--


quote:

to explain how much the $200 million in film tax credits meant in state revenue and in state economic activity


At least $660Million.






Back to top
  Replies (0)
LSURussian
LSU Fan
Baton Rouge
Member since Feb 2005
84434 posts

re: Cato calls Jindal's hand on film tax welfare--


quote:

You don't understand

quote:

You're right. I only helped write the dammed thing and promulgate the rules.








Back to top
  Replies (0)
I B Freeman
Member since Oct 2009
6230 posts

re: Cato calls Jindal's hand on film tax welfare--


quote:

quote:
Then you know they don't have to sell it back to the state. They can sell it to any tax payer and the credit will reduce taxes by 100%. But either way it is a cost to taxpayers.


They aren't selling the DM credit to anyone other than the state since its a refundable credit.


Are you saying the DM credit is not transferrable like the film tax credit?

But you do agree that the DM tax credit is basically a cash rebate of expenses by the state? that the credits can be turned to cash at 85% of their value by the state?






Back to top
Golfer
LSU Fan
Coral Bay, St. John, USVI
Member since Nov 2005
57768 posts

re: Cato calls Jindal's hand on film tax welfare--


quote:

Are you saying the DM credit is not transferrable like the film tax credit?


Why would you transfer a refundable credit?


quote:

But you do agree that the DM tax credit is basically a cash rebate of expenses by the state? that the credits can be turned to cash at 85% of their value by the state?


It is a refundable tax credit based on qualified expenditures made within the state, yes.






Back to top
LSURussian
LSU Fan
Baton Rouge
Member since Feb 2005
84434 posts

re: Cato calls Jindal's hand on film tax welfare--


quote:

It is a refundable tax credit based on qualified expenditures made within the state, yes.


I B Freeman:







Back to top
  Replies (0)
I B Freeman
Member since Oct 2009
6230 posts

re: Cato calls Jindal's hand on film tax welfare--


quote:

Why would you transfer a refundable credit?


Film tax credits can be transferred (sold) to other taxpayers for more than the 85% state buy back. Why would you sell it to the state for 85% when you can get 95% from other taxpayers?

But back to your original point about Cato. They are not mistaken at all. The credits are very costly as they said. Making them rebates instead of only tax credits is very costly to the state. It is one thing to say here is a tax credit you can use to offset taxes you owe that you generated by having your business in Louisiana. It is an entirely different thing to say here is redeemable tax credit (rebate) that the state is giving you whether or not you owe income taxes or generated any tax obligations in Louisiana. Rebates are basically subsidies--welfare.

Cato is right too when the say " to favored digital media businesses." The digital media businesses are favored over other businesses.

I will agree that having business here that do not cost us any state revenue result in a multiplier effect. To give a car plant tax deductions or even credits against taxes that they generate cost us nothing. We are basically giving them their own money.

Film and DM credits are not like that. We take money from the state treasury either directly or indirectly and give it to them. It is money the state has taken from other state residents THUS I say we cannot apply a multiplier to those subsidies because the subsidies came out of the investments and activity of other citizens.

Now if you still say these things are good and multiply explain why 100% redeemable credits instead of 35% are not a better thing.



This post was edited on 10/9 at 8:47 pm


Back to top


Back to top