Show Us The Money: When Can Productions Expect To Reap Benefits Of California's Proposed $750M Film & TV Tax Credit Expansion?
Amid the swirl of the Trump administration's nascent plans to 'Make Hollywood Great Again,' California is on the verge of revamping its Film & TV Tax Credit Program in the hopes of reinvigorating the state's production pipeline. But, it could be more than a year before production workers begin to feel the affects of the proposed changes, if they are approved by the Legislature.
After years of strife for the California film and television industry, Gov. Gavin Newsom in October proposed a significant increase to the overall cap on incentives, more than doubling it from $330 million to $750M annually. The sister bills currently making their way through the state Senate and Assembly, SB630 and AB1138 — a hot topic of conversation at this past week's Deadline-hosted SAG-AFTRA event gathering politicians and industry labor leaders — seek to do more than just provide additional finance incentives to studios who bring physical production back to California.
More from Deadline
Newsom To The Rescue: Governor Supersizes California's Film & TV Tax Credits To Get Hollywood Back To Work
CA Film & TV Tax Credit Expansion Bills Clear State Assembly, Senate Committees: 'Motion Picture's Last Hope For California' — Update
Sweetened New York Production Incentives A Go As State Budget Passes
The bills, sponsored by state Sen. Ben Allen and Assembly members Rick Chavez Zbur and Isaac Bryan, respectively, are also meant to 'amend, update, and modernize' the program. In other words, lawmakers are trying to remove some of the red tape that makes California less accommodating to production than it once was.
Deadline understands that the refresh is high on Newsom's priority list, and the prospects for the eventual passage of these bills are positive.
So, when can Californians expect to reap the benefits?
Since their introductions to both chambers February 20, both bills have successfully made it to the Appropriations committees, where they currently remain.
While lawmakers expressed some skepticism early on about the proposed amendments to the program, and whether more than doubling the current incentive cap is the best use of those funds in the state budget, they have passed fairly easily through committee votes thus far.
Next up is Newsom's 'May Revision,' when he will release an updated budget proposal that reflects the latest economic forecasts and revenue projections for the year. Sources tell Deadline that the tax-credit funding is expected to survive that revision process, given how much the governor is prioritizing this issue.
After the May Revision comes a period of intense negotiations that are likely to result in some changes to the bills as they are currently written as lawmakers work toward agreeing upon a unified budget.
If all goes well, additional funding could be available to productions as soon as July 1. There's also a scenario where funds don't come available until January 1. Then, there's a middle option.
Option 1: In the best-case scenario, the proposed changes to the program will be signed into law in June along with the new budget. Sources tell us this is the most ideal outcome, since it would mean the rejuvenation of the state's film and television industry can begin sooner rather than later. It's also the most politically and structurally complicated, because it would likely mean attaching the proposed changes to the program in the actual budget bill, which can often cause hiccups with the Legislature.
Option 2: It's more likely the funding will remain separate from the proposed amendments to the program, which could lead to two outcomes. First, the budget passes in June and the other structural changes come at a later date. As one source notes that 'everybody feels a sense of urgency' to solve this issue within the state, the goal would be to inject at least some energy into the production pipeline as quickly as possible.
Option 3: Newsom waits to sign the funding into effect until the bills get approval from both chambers. Sources predict the bills will be approved sometime between September and January. This is both the least likely and the least desirable outcome.
If the bills are signed into law, the California Film Commission will need to go through a regulatory process to develop guidelines for implementation. This process can take between six months to a year. This means that, while the $750M in funding could be earmarked for the Film & TV Tax Credit Program by July 1, it would likely be several more months before that money is distributed.
The application window for Program 4.0, which does not include the additional funding or updated provisions, begins in mid-June. For that cohort, the funding cap will remain at $330M, with a 20% base credit for individual productions.
Sources don't seem to know what to expect with this version of the program. On one hand, it could entice some of the major studios now that they have the option of up to 90% refundability, meaning they can get cash back if they don't have sufficient state tax liability (which many of the major studios do not).
However, with much of Hollywood waiting with bated breath for the new program updates, some sources wonder whether there will be an underwhelming response to the upcoming application process. 'Is anyone going to apply if they wait three months longer and get 35% [credit]?' one source asked.
One potential solution is to offer productions the ability to retroactively receive a 35% credit on qualified expenditures, pending approval from the state. However, this comes with obvious risks considering that, as one source familiar with the process notes, 'nothing is guaranteed.'
In any case, the application review process can take between 4-5 weeks, putting at least another month on the clock.
AB1138 and SB630 would expand the definition of a qualified motion picture, allowing additional projects to apply for the program including series with episodes averaging 20 minutes or more; animated films, series, and shorts; and large-scale competition shows.
Additionally, the bills propose increasing the available credit amount for an individual project from 20% to 35% for amounts paid or incurred in Los Angeles, also giving the California Film Commission leeway to allow for additional credit percentages of 5% in other areas of economic opportunity.
While there haven't been many objections to the bills' current contents, there has been discussion about what is missing from them. The two glaring omissions are post-production and commercials.
Even in the newly proposed bills, California Film & TV Tax Credit Program does not currently allocate specific funds to post-production, a lucrative part of the production pipeline that has been drawn away from the state due to program provisions elsewhere. New York, for example, offers $45M annually specifically to fund post-production.
Some parties are also pushing for commercials to be considered eligible projects, as they are in many other territories, for similar reasons. Both are expected to become topics of discussion as the bills make their way to the Senate and Assembly floors, which could potentially slow the approval process.
When can California production workers expect any sort of reprieve? The short answer is it depends.
The longer answer is that, pending a host of regulatory processes, it could take anywhere from about nine months to more than a year for the proposed changes and expanded funding to take effect — and even longer for projects to actually be accepted into the program.
So, while help is certainly on the way, just about the only thing that is absolutely clear is that it won't come overnight.
Best of Deadline
All The Songs In Netflix's 'Forever': From Tyler The Creator To SZA
2025 TV Series Renewals: Photo Gallery
2025 TV Cancellations: Photo Gallery
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


CBS News
12 minutes ago
- CBS News
8 charged after game wardens take down poaching ring in Cambria County
Eight people pleaded guilty to dozens of charges after the Pennsylvania Game Commission said wardens took down a poaching group in Cambria County. The Game Commission said a lengthy investigation into the taking of 11 white-tailed deer and a gray fox in Cambria County between 2023 and 2024 resulted in 35 charges and more than 70 years' worth of license revocations. Authorities said the investigation began when a game warden checked the license of one of the suspects while they were fishing in Indiana County. When the warden asked about the guns and ammunition found in the vehicle, the Game Commission said the suspect admitted to shooting deer at night using a spotlight. After serving three separate search warrants, investigators determined eight people were poaching deer at night while using spotlights. They also failed to tag deer, took bucks that didn't meet antler restrictions, used tags from other states and exceeded the legal limits, the Game Commission said. Jason Wise, Sandra Wise, Daniel Wise, Issac Keith, Dan Sodomont, Marina Morgan, Dennis Corson and Levi Corson all pleaded guilty to summary counts. They were ordered to pay $35,000 in restitution and they lost their hunting and trapping privileges for a combined 70 years. "Great work by all wardens involved in ensuring these senseless crimes didn't go unpunished, helping to uphold the law and protect our wildlife for current and future generations," the Pennsylvania Game Commission's Southwest Region wrote on Facebook. People are encouraged to report wildlife crimes by calling Operation Game Thief at 1-888-PGC-8001 or by going online.


Fox News
13 minutes ago
- Fox News
NEWT GINGRICH: Pay less, know more — Trump is slashing red tape and lowering your healthcare costs
One of the boldest and most consistent themes in President Donald J. Trump's healthcare agenda is his determination to reduce the role and power of middlemen. From insurance companies to pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) – and even hospitals –these intermediaries profit from the inefficiencies of our bloated health system. The result is higher costs for American families. As I explain in my new book, "Trump's Triumph: America's Greatest Comeback," the U.S. healthcare system isn't expensive just because care is costly. It's expensive because the system is complex – by design. The third-party payment structure, whether public or private, adds layers of bureaucracy. This opens the door for middlemen to offer supposed solutions that serve their own bottom lines – not patients. It's a vicious cycle: more rules lead to more middlemen, which lead to even more rules, red tape, and rising costs. President Trump understood this – and he took action. In his first term, he issued a groundbreaking executive order on price transparency. For the first time, hospitals were required to disclose the real cost of procedures, enabling patients to compare prices before receiving care. While the Biden administration weakened enforcement, Trump doubled down in his second term with an even stronger push for what he called "radical transparency." Radical transparency is the antidote to healthcare's worst inefficiencies. When patients and employers can see wide price differences for the same procedures – even within the same hospital system – the games played behind the scenes get exposed. These inflated prices often have little to do with quality and everything to do with how well insurers negotiate – or how many middlemen take a cut. The same is true for prescription drugs. PBMs – giant corporations that control which drugs are covered and at what cost – use their market power to inflate prices. Three PBMs control 80 percent of the market. They're often subsidiaries of major insurers, forming vertically integrated monopolies. New data from the Pacific Research Institute shows that most PBMs skim more money off high-cost prescriptions than European countries charge. It's no wonder Americans are paying more. Hospitals play a role as well. Many exploit a well-intentioned federal program known as 340B, which allows them to purchase drugs at steep discounts. Instead of passing the savings to patients, they bill insurers full price and pocket the difference. The program was meant to expand care for low-income patients, but there's little oversight to ensure this happens. President Trump's recent executive order on drug pricing targets this broken system. By creating a pathway for manufacturers to sell directly to patients, health plans, pharmacies, and clinics – without the markup – he's offering a way to bypass the middlemen. This isn't theory – it's already working. When insulin makers launched direct-to-consumer programs, they sold the same drug at one-fourth the price patients were paying through insurance – while still making a profit. That's the power of real market competition – without a single government price control. This stands in sharp contrast to the Left's top-down vision. Whether it's price controls, centralized purchasing, or government-run insurance, the left's answer is always more bureaucracy. But more bureaucracy means more complexity – and more room for middlemen to thrive. Perhaps the most visionary part of President Trump's health care agenda is his call to Make America Healthy Again. For decades, we've operated a "sick care" system focused on treating illness after it strikes. Trump's approach is different. It emphasizes prevention, lifestyle, and personal responsibility – turning Americans from passive recipients into active participants in their own health. In this model, the government's role isn't to run the system but to create an environment in which patients and doctors can lead – with access to better tools, more transparency, and useful information. That means clearer labeling for ultra-processed foods, ensuring gold standard scientific data free of conflicts of interest, and addressing environmental factors that contribute to chronic disease. These kinds of structural reforms empower people to make informed choices and live healthier lives – without mandates or micromanagement. It's a model that eliminates the ultimate middleman: the system itself. President Trump's leadership has laid the groundwork for a transparent, patient-centered, free-market healthcare system. But the job isn't done. Congress should join him in continuing this fight – not just to lower costs, but to restore power to the American people. America deserves a healthcare system that benefits Americans – not industry middlemen.


Fox News
20 minutes ago
- Fox News
Sen. Tim Scott expresses confidence about codifying DOGE cuts
All times eastern Making Money with Charles Payne The Evening Edit with Elizabeth Macdonald FOX News Radio Live Channel Coverage WATCH LIVE: House DOGE subcommittee holds hearing to expose NGOs' use of funds