Page 1
Page 1
Started By
Message
locked post

BR Business Report on Film "Tax Breaks"

Posted on 8/21/14 at 8:32 am
Posted by ragincajun03
Member since Nov 2007
21255 posts
Posted on 8/21/14 at 8:32 am
quote:

Louisiana enacted a relatively modest Motion Picture Investor Tax Credit Program in 2002. Lawmakers have since expanded the program into arguably the most generous in the country.

Film incentives are doled out as tax credits; they're not really "tax breaks." Films typically are produced by single-serving limited liability corporations with out-of-state owners that don't have Louisiana tax liability. Producers can sell the credits on the open market or back to the state at 85% of face value (see a more detailed explanation).

So the incentive isn't a "break" from taxes that otherwise would be paid by filmmakers. If a producer spends more than $300,000 making a movie, state government essentially pays him, with your money, almost a third of what he spent.

Government constantly spends money to support the private sector, notes Greg Albrecht, the Louisiana Legislature's chief economist. But if the state builds a road to attract business, the road one day will be finished and state residents will get jobs at businesses that locate there. If government spends money to educate a child, it is with the expectation that the child will grow up and pay taxes.

But with film, the more movies get made, the more we have to pay.

"It's not an investment," Albrecht says. "It's a subsidy."



quote:


How much of a subsidy? Depends on which number you want to look at. In 2012 the total face value of the tax credits certified was about $241 million, according to a report commissioned by Louisiana Economic Development. By Albrecht's count, based on the Department of Revenue's numbers, $1.057 billion worth of credits have been claimed from fiscal year 2006 through fiscal year 2013.

Of course, the movie business spends plenty of money in Louisiana—more than $717 million in 2012 alone. But Louisiana, like other states with similar programs, has found that film tax credits are a net negative for the state's fiscal picture. The state treasury lost $168.2 million on the program in 2012, the LED study says. (See page 23 for a closer look at the ROI.)

And while state government shoulders the cost, film credits are pretty much a free-money windfall for parishes where filming takes place.

"That's why they love the program; they don't have to pay for it," Albrecht says. "I've suggested maybe they should split the costs with us. I don't get very far with that suggestion."



LINK
Posted by doubleb
Baton Rouge
Member since Aug 2006
36046 posts
Posted on 8/21/14 at 8:38 am to
Thxs for sharing

So the big winners are mostly out of state entrepreneurs, local govts., and local businesses who are able to work with the out of state companies.

The state loses tax revenues which to a large extent leaves the state and doesn't stay in La.
Posted by SmellslikeKevinBacon
Louisiana
Member since Dec 2012
6185 posts
Posted on 8/21/14 at 8:39 am to
Nb4ibfreeman
Posted by Tchefuncte Tiger
Bat'n Rudge
Member since Oct 2004
57222 posts
Posted on 8/21/14 at 8:56 am to
Isn't this what I.B. Freeman has been stating for quite a while?
This post was edited on 8/21/14 at 8:57 am
Posted by ragincajun03
Member since Nov 2007
21255 posts
Posted on 8/21/14 at 9:05 am to
Pretty much, but he only does it because he hates Jindal.

(BR Business Report is run by Rolfe McCollister, who headed up the pro-Jindal group Believe in Louisiana)
This post was edited on 8/21/14 at 9:05 am
Posted by Ole War Skule
North Shore
Member since Sep 2003
3409 posts
Posted on 8/21/14 at 9:46 am to
EVERY independent study done on the subject has shown that these subsidies to be big losers for the states that pay them.

and even if they are an overall economic benefit, they are wrong since the put state government into the economic planning business by paying off their chosen industries while others foot the bill

while all of these nonsensical incentives/payoffs to businesses are bad, the movie subsidy is unprecedented in its size and stupidity

cheers!
Posted by Asgard Device
The Daedalus
Member since Apr 2011
11562 posts
Posted on 8/21/14 at 1:34 pm to
quote:

Film incentives are doled out as tax credits; they're not really "tax breaks." Films typically are produced by single-serving limited liability corporations with out-of-state owners that don't have Louisiana tax liability. Producers can sell the credits on the open market or back to the state at 85% of face value (see a more detailed explanation).

So the incentive isn't a "break" from taxes that otherwise would be paid by filmmakers. If a producer spends more than $300,000 making a movie, state government essentially pays him, with your money, almost a third of what he spent.



quote:

"It's not an investment," Albrecht says. "It's a subsidy."


Yet, the comments section and these threads continue to be full of fail. They think that if government spends money and then more money gets spent as a result then it is automatically a win-win for everyone, which is a ridiculous notion. Not to mention a slippery-slope.
Posted by ragincajun03
Member since Nov 2007
21255 posts
Posted on 8/21/14 at 1:43 pm to
quote:

They think that if government spends money and then more money gets spent as a result then it is automatically a win-win for everyone, which is a ridiculous notion.


Yep. And that Susie Labry lady you see in the comments section is usually one of the first people to throw in every time an article comes out about how the film "tax credits" may be more like money-sucking subsidies. Yet, she likes to go around BR area making herself out to be some great promoter of conservatism and Republican policies.
Posted by stegs_81
Baton rouge
Member since Jun 2014
211 posts
Posted on 8/21/14 at 1:52 pm to
I still want to know the breakdown to credits for Above the line Services and Below the Line services.

This is a negative ROI no matter how you cut it, but if the bulk of the activity is below the line, as would be typical of a film budget, then the bulk of the money is staying in the local economy.

I would like to see a good holistic study that gives a clear picture of the direct revenues, which LFO tag at about 15% of the credits and the indirect revenues.

I know this is massively expensive and wasteful program, but an outright end to it could do more harm than good in the short time. These credits are issued about two years after earned. So if we cut the program tomorrow we would still have hundreds of millions of credits already earned to issue, then we would lose the revenues the program does create.

But at least the industry guy says Louisiana it is harder to commit fraud than in Georgia.

quote:

Industry insiders complain LED still doesn't have enough staff to handle the volume of paperwork, and some feel the department is turning the screws a little too tight. Will French, president of the Louisiana Film Entertainment Association, says after the early scandals the state's focus shifted from promoting to policing the industry.

"Georgia this whole time has been in a positive marketing position with the industry," French says. "I think that's why they've gotten the leg up on Louisiana."


LINK
This post was edited on 8/21/14 at 1:57 pm
Posted by Choctaw
Pumpin' Sunshine
Member since Jul 2007
77774 posts
Posted on 8/21/14 at 2:02 pm to
quote:

EVERY independent study done on the subject has shown that these subsidies to be big losers for the states that pay them.


link?
Posted by doubleb
Baton Rouge
Member since Aug 2006
36046 posts
Posted on 8/21/14 at 8:31 pm to
LINK

Here's one
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram