Why economics and politics ARE important to Cinematography.com

[Brian Dzyak]

Yeah but it's glamorous. :D

 

 

 

 

There are a large number of indirect investments that are not counted in these studies. For instance, does the study you present calculate the amount of money that went to hotel owners to put up the cast and crew? The hotel then in turns pays its employees, who in turn pay taxes, so the state recovers money here. They also recover money when the hotel employee buys goods and services and pays sales taxes etc.

 

The money goes much deeper into the economy than your superficial study would suggest.

 

 

 

 

Well we've been down this road before. It's simply a pipe dream Brian that all film workers in S. Calif will be employed 12 mos a year just because they choose to live in a place where a shoe box of a house sells for $700, 000.00!

 

Tell me what I am supposed to do with the project I am working on now....NONE of the locations I need are in S. Calif, so what would you have me do? Tear up the script and write some thing that takes place in S. Calif?

 

If a movie is set in London it's set in London, if a movie is set in Alaska, it's set in Alaska. No amount of jumping up and down about shooting in S. Calif will change that.

 

If it's any consolation to you, NZ is now turning the tables on Canada. This movie is set in Canada in the actual movie, but filmed in NZ!

 

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0243462/

 

So that meant BC film workers where out of jobs on this one. That's life I'm afraid.

 

R,

 

 

Straw man arguments. OF COURSE locations matter in the film industry. No argument there. But presently, production companies and studios BASED IN LA will choose somewhere else to do their stage work ONLY because of tax bribes offered by other governments. Yes, a movie goes to London or Alaska or wherever when the script demands that locale, but stage work can be done anywhere. It used to be done primarily in So Cal where thousands of people (crew) lived and built families and lives. This IS where the stages were built as well as the infrastructure (vendors, etc) set up shop to support this industry. Yes, there have always been other areas where SOME production took place, but the primary origination of the film industry has been in So. Cal.

 

But, tax "incentives" entice TRILLION DOLLAR Corporations into taking that work away from the experienced crews who have built lives in a specific place. Karl suggests that there is some kind of similarity between a social ssfety net that helps suffering poor people in need get basics like food... and trillion dollar Corporations that are just seeking greater profits for their already wealthy stockholders. Those are apples and oranges and it's ridiculous to even consider any kind of similarity. Corporations that are already making millions, billions, and trillions in profits have no business receiving tax incentives. I don't care if it's the film industry, the oil business, automobiles, or anything else. They don't need bribes like that and governments that DO need the tax revenue shouldn't hand out bribes like that. It's just common sense for those municipalities so they can receive the funds they need for their own infrastructures. The alternative is taxing the Middle Class and Poor at higher rates or just cutting social services (like education) altogether. All so that billion-dollar Corporations can hand out bigger bonuses to their already wealthy executives.

 

So yes, by all means, a movie should film wherever it needs to, but governments shouldn't be handing out bribes to wealthy Corporations that hurt their own interests and ultimately the employees in the film industry.

[Guest]

So yes, by all means, a movie should film wherever it needs to, but governments shouldn't be handing out bribes to wealthy Corporations that hurt their own interests and ultimately the employees in the film industry.

 

You do forget one important point, in Canada at least the tax credits are available to all filmmakers. Not just the US studios.

 

There are hundreds of small independent producers all across Canada that use the tax credits every year. They are middle class people like you and me. They are by no means trillion dollar corporations, or highly paid executives.

 

That's a large part of what I like about the tax credit scheme they really do help every one regardless of budget size. Yes if you spend more you get more back, that's true.

 

When I apply for the tax credits I don't view it as corporate welfare at all. 1) I hire a lot of people. 2) Taxes are so high in Canada that at the very worst the tax credits are revenue neutral to the gov't.

 

R,