logo
A lifeline for Hollywood jobs or a corporate giveaway? The film tax credit debate returns

A lifeline for Hollywood jobs or a corporate giveaway? The film tax credit debate returns

Yahoo25-04-2025

It's showtime for Hollywood at the California Capitol.
The state's entertainment industry has spent months begging for help from Sacramento to stem the decline of film and TV production and save thousands of jobs.
This week, after months of speeches and promises from public officials, two bills meant to boost the beleaguered business cleared their first legislative hurdles.
The bills are intended to make California's film and TV production incentive more competitive with other states and countries by increasing the tax credit up to 35% of qualified expenditures and expanding the types of productions that would be eligible.
It's a potential lifeline for the entertainment industry, which has been battered in recent years by production slowdowns wrought by the pandemic, the dual writers' and actors' strikes in 2023, a pullback in spending by the studios, the recent Southern California wildfires and productions fleeing the Golden State.
"We don't want to become the car industry in Detroit or aerospace in California," said Rebecca Rhine, president of the Entertainment Union Coalition and Western executive director of the Directors Guild of America. "When our industry thrives, we think California thrives.'
The bills won unanimous votes out of the state Senate revenue and taxation committee and the Assembly arts and entertainment committee.
But despite Gov. Gavin Newsom's initial call last year to more than double the money allocated to the state's film and TV tax credit program, passage of the two bills is far from a done deal.
Read more: Los Angeles continues to see decline in film and TV production, report says
Critics have been skeptical of the film and TV tax credit program since it was introduced in 2009 under former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. Some say the tax credits are corporate giveaways and don't deliver as much economic value as proponents claim.
'The economy does best when government doesn't pick winners and losers,' said Wayne Winegarden, senior fellow of business and economics at Pacific Research Institute, a California-based think tank that advocates for free markets. "This is not the right way to get a pro-growth fiscal business environment that accelerates job growth.'
Additionally, California now faces a difficult economic outlook, as officials brace for potential cuts in federal funding, as well as tariff-related pressures on state revenues and stock market volatility that could reduce tax collections that fund state programs.
That all forces difficult questions for legislators about which priorities to fund.
In a recent post on X, Assemblymember Corey Jackson said Democratic voters in California "should be outraged that we aren't spending more on housing, allowing seniors to fall into homelessness, and allowing so many children to live in poverty. For corporate and movie studio tax breaks."
Reached by phone, Jackson said that while expanding film and TV tax credits is a worthy policy, state lawmakers must consider what they'd have to sacrifice for them, particularly as the state budget is under stress.
Read more: Even before the L.A. fires, Hollywood jobs were hard to find. Will the work ever come back?
"If we were back in the period where we have more money than we can spend, this would be a no-brainer," Jackson said. "But it's time to bring people back to reality. This should not just be a slam-dunk to people.'
Hollywood workers argue that an expanded film and TV tax credit would generate economic returns beyond the industry, with ripple effects touching tourism as well as small businesses such as dry cleaners, florists and caterers that rely on entertainment spending. And after years of struggles, workers say the industry is at an inflection point.
That has led to a major lobbying effort on Hollywood's part.
More than 100,000 letters have been sent to individual state lawmakers in support of the bills, with an additional 22,000 letters sent to the Senate revenue and taxation committee.
Dozens of representatives from all of the major entertainment industry unions trekked to Sacramento to support the legislation, as did studio executives, their lobbyists and the Motion Picture Assn. trade group.
It's the kind of show of force State Sen. Ben Allen and Assemblymember Rick Chavez Zbur, two of the bills' co-sponsors, had called for when they spoke to a crowd last week at Burbank's Evergreen Studios recording facility and urged entertainment workers to contact their representatives.
"It's going to be a fight to get this done because of the headwinds," Allen told the crowd, noting that there are many competing priorities at the state level. Just the mention of the legislation was enough to elicit applause and cheers from the audience.
Industry insiders and lawmakers, including at the Burbank town hall, have tried to fend off criticism that this is a gift to corporations.
They described them as jobs bills that will reward the productions that generate the most employment and will not allow companies to use the tax credits until after production has wrapped.
California currently provides a 20% to 25% tax credit to offset qualified production expenses, such as money spent on film crews and building sets. Production companies can apply the credit toward any tax liabilities they have in California. Raising the credit to 35% is significant, supporters say. Projects that shoot elsewhere in the state could get a credit of 40%.
The legislation also would expand the types of productions that would qualify, including animated films, shorts and series, along with large-scale competition shows. Independent productions will be allocated 10% of the total amount in the program, up from the current 8%.
"In some respects, the headwinds have actually strengthened the bill," Allen told The Times. "They've forced really careful, intense, thoughtful, targeted conversations and negotiations.'
Outside of Hollywood, the bills have the backing of the California Labor Federation, whose executive council unanimously voted to support the legislation in February, said President Lorena Gonzalez.
Though the organization is not always supportive of tax credits, the federation has always supported the film and TV program, she said.
"The fact is the unique situation with Hollywood being so unionized," said Gonzalez. "In order to preserve those good union jobs and the middle-class lives that are developed as a result, we'd like to keep those jobs here.'
The lobbying effort has led to unusual alliances, particularly in the wake of the strikes, with both studios and Hollywood unions rallying on the same side. Both groups, however, have worked together on previous film and TV tax credit proposals.
In a letter to the leaders of the Assembly committee on revenue and taxation, Motion Picture Assn. Chief Executive Charles H. Rivkin wrote that the changes to the film and TV tax credit program would "help attract more productions and jobs in California."
If the bill were enacted, he wrote, the studios will submit more applications to the California Film Commission, "leading to locating more of their productions in California, which will create and retain good jobs for Californians."
But even within Hollywood's overall push, there are differing priorities among stakeholders. During the Burbank town hall meeting, postproduction workers and music scoring professionals called for carve-outs, noting that other states and countries now offer specific rebates for this work.
That has led to a steep decline in production for these workers. The average number of booked recording days for a sampling of L.A.'s scoring stages is now 11 days for 2025 so far, a far cry from the average of 127 days for all of 2022 during the peak of the streaming boom, said Peter Rotter, founder of Encompass Music Partners, who helped organize the town hall.
Much scoring work has moved to Europe or even Nashville, while some postproduction work has been diverted to places like Canada and London.
'It's going to take a village," Rotter told The Times. "We have one shot at this right now.'
Sign up for our Wide Shot newsletter to get the latest entertainment business news, analysis and insights.
This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Johnson brushes off Musk campaign spending threats: ‘It doesn't concern me'
Johnson brushes off Musk campaign spending threats: ‘It doesn't concern me'

The Hill

time14 minutes ago

  • The Hill

Johnson brushes off Musk campaign spending threats: ‘It doesn't concern me'

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) in an interview Friday brushed off Elon Musk's campaign spending threats in light of the tech billionaire's public fallout with President Trump, suggesting he isn't worried. The spat between Trump and Musk began with the latter's criticism of the president's legislative agenda making its way through Congress. Johnson said he built a closer relationship with the then-special government employee and that the tech mogul has been led astray regarding the 'big beautiful' spending package. 'Look, it doesn't concern me. We're going to win either way because we're going to win on our policies we're delivering for hardworking Americans and fulfilling those promises,' Johnson told Fox News's 'Jesse Watters Primetime.' 'But look, I like Elon and respect him. I mean, we became friends in all this process,' he continued. 'I've been texting with him even this week … in trying to make sure that he has accurate information about the bill. I think he has been misled about it.' Musk, who contributed hundreds of millions of dollars to assist in Trump's win in the 2024 presidential election, was the biggest donor during the White House race. Amid his recent spat with Trump, which broke out in public as the two traded insults and threats, Musk argued that without his political expenditures, Trump would have lost to former Vice President Harris, Republicans would lose the majority in the House and the GOP would have failed to flip the majority in the Senate. Trump then threatened to have all federal contracts associated with the billionaire's companies to be cut off. As the fight between the two intensified, the tech executive floated the idea of forming a third party and accused the president of being named in the late Jeffrey Epstein's files. Trump has denied close ties to the disgraced financier. Musk's opposition to the GOP megabill — which he called a 'disgusting abomination' — is largely tied to deficit spending. The billionaire argued the legislation would balloon the national debt and fails to slash enough spending. The package faces an uphill battle in the Senate. While Musk, who recently left his position as the top adviser to Trump's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), seemed open to repairing ties on Friday, the president appeared to be OK with moving on. Johnson in the interview Friday defended the spending bill and commended Trump for his handling of the squabble. 'We're going to make good on this… I like the president's attitude. You know, he is moving on. He has to,' he told the host. 'He's laser-focused on delivering for the people. And House and Senate Republicans are as well. So, we've got our hand at the wheel.' 'We're going to get this done just like we told the people,' the Speaker continued. 'And if you are a hardworking American that is struggling to take care of your family, you are going to love this legislation.' The Louisiana Republican added, 'I'm telling you, all boats are going to rise and everybody's going to be in a much better mood before we go into that midterm election in 2026.'

Trump's big bill also seeks to undo the big bills of Biden and Obama
Trump's big bill also seeks to undo the big bills of Biden and Obama

San Francisco Chronicle​

time17 minutes ago

  • San Francisco Chronicle​

Trump's big bill also seeks to undo the big bills of Biden and Obama

WASHINGTON (AP) — Chiseling away at President Barack Obama's Affordable Care Act. Rolling back the green energy tax breaks from President Joe Biden's Inflation Reduction Act. At its core, the Republican 'big, beautiful bill' is more than just an extension of tax breaks approved during President Donald Trump's first term at the White House. The package is an attempt by Republicans to undo, little by little, the signature domestic achievements of the past two Democratic presidents. 'We're going to do what we said we were going to do,' Speaker Mike Johnson said after House passage last month. While the aim of the sprawling 1,000-page plus bill is to preserve an estimated $4.5 trillion in tax cuts that would otherwise expire at year's end if Congress fails to act — and add some new ones, including no taxes on tips — the spending cuts pointed at the Democratic-led programs are causing the most political turmoil. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said this week that 10.9 million fewer people would have health insurance under the GOP bill, including 1.4 million immigrants in the U.S. without legal status who are in state-funded programs. At the same time, lawmakers are being hounded by businesses in states across the nation who rely on the green energy tax breaks for their projects. As the package moves from the House to the Senate, the simmering unrest over curbing the Obama and Biden policies shows just how politically difficult it can be to slash government programs once they become part of civic life. "When he asked me, what do you think the prospects are for passage in the Senate? I said, good — if we don't cut Medicaid," said Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., recounting his conversation last week with Trump. 'And he said, I'm 100% supportive of that.' Health care worries Not a single Republican in Congress voted for the Affordable Care Act, known as Obamacare, in 2010, or Biden's inflation act in 2022. Both were approved using the same budget reconciliation process now being employed by Republicans to steamroll Trump's bill past the opposition. Even still, sizable coalitions of GOP lawmakers are forming to protect aspects of both of those programs as they ripple into the lives of millions of Americans. Hawley, Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and others are wary of changes to Medicaid and other provisions in the bill that would result in fewer people being able to access health care programs. At the same time, crossover groupings of House and Senate Republicans have launched an aggressive campaign to preserve, at least for some time, the green energy tax breaks that business interests in their states are relying on to develop solar, wind and other types of energy production. Murkowski said one area she's "worried about' is the House bill's provision that any project not under construction within 60 days of the bill becoming law may no longer be eligible for those credits. 'These are some of the things we're working on,' she said. The concerns are running in sometimes opposite directions and complicating the work of GOP leaders who have almost no votes to spare in the House and Senate as they try to hoist the package over Democratic opposition and onto the president's desk by the Fourth of July. While some Republicans are working to preserve the programs from cuts, the budget hawks want steeper reductions to stem the nation's debt load. The CBO said the package would add $2.4 trillion to deficits over the decade. After a robust private meeting with Trump at the White House this week, Republican senators said they were working to keep the bill on track as they amend it for their own priorities. Senate Majority Leader John Thune said the president 'made the pitch and the argument for why we need to get the bill done." The disconnect is reminiscent of Trump's first term, when Republicans promised to repeal and replace Obamacare, only to see their effort collapse in dramatic fashion when the late Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz, voted thumbs down for the bill on the House floor. Battle over Medicaid In the 15 years since Obamacare became law, access to health care has grown substantially. Some 80 million people are now enrolled in Medicaid, and the Kaiser Family Foundation reports 41 states have opted to expand their coverage. The Affordable Care Act expanded Medicaid to all adults with incomes up to about $21,500 for an individual, or almost $29,000 for a two-person household. While Republicans no longer campaign on ending Obamacare, advocates warn that the changes proposed in the big bill will trim back at access to health care. The bill proposes new 80 hours of monthly work or community service requirements for able-bodied Medicaid recipients, age 18 to 64, with some exceptions. It also imposes twice-a-year eligibility verification checks and other changes. Republicans argue that they want to right-size Medicaid to root out waste, fraud and abuse and ensure it's there for those who need it most, often citing women and children. 'Medicaid was built to be a temporary safety net for people who genuinely need it — young, pregnant women, single mothers, the disabled, the elderly,' Johnson told The Associated Press. 'But when when they expanded under Obamacare, it not only thwarted the purpose of the program, it started draining resources.' Initially, the House bill proposed starting the work requirements in January 2029, as Trump's term in the White House would be coming to a close. But conservatives from the House Freedom Caucus negotiated for a quicker start date, in December 2026, to start the spending reductions sooner. Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer has said the changes are an Obamacare rollback by another name. 'It decimates our health care system, decimates our clean energy system,' Schumer of New York said in an interview with the AP. The green energy tax breaks involve not only those used by buyers of electric vehicles, like Elon Musk's Tesla line, but also the production and investment tax credits for developers of renewables and other energy sources. The House bill had initially proposed a phaseout of those credits over the next several years. But again the conservative Freedom Caucus engineered the faster wind-down — within 60 days of the bill's passage. 'Not a single Republican voted for the Green New Scam subsidies,' wrote Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, on social media. 'Not a single Republican should vote to keep them.'

Sam Altman's Brief Ouster at OpenAI Is Getting the Movie Treatment
Sam Altman's Brief Ouster at OpenAI Is Getting the Movie Treatment

Gizmodo

time22 minutes ago

  • Gizmodo

Sam Altman's Brief Ouster at OpenAI Is Getting the Movie Treatment

At some point, Hollywood decided the world of tech was a nice little well for drama, but it can probably just throw out the latest material that it's happened into rather than serving it to the rest of us. According to The Hollywood Reporter, we're going to be getting a movie based on the five-day period that Sam Altman was ousted and ultimately reinstated as the head of OpenAI. The film, which will reportedly be titled 'Artificial,' already has a pretty star-studded call sheet, though everything is still in the rumor period, it seems. Luca Guadagnino, director of Call Me by Your Name and Challengers, is reportedly in talks to direct the picture. Andrew Garfield is currently the favorite to play Altman, which is very much in his wheelhouse after his performance as Facebook co-founder Eduardo Saverin in The Social Network. Monica Barbaro, who played Joan Baez in A Complete Unknown, is reportedly in talks to play former OpenAI CTO Mira Murati, and Anora breakout star Yura Borisov is up for company co-founder and Altman antagonist Ilya Sutskever. Comedy writer Simon Rich, who wrote for 'Saturday Night Live' and created 'Miracle Workers,' is reportedly responsible for the screenplay. One of the problems for Hollywood repeatedly going after these real-life Big Tech dramas is that the industries are now so entangled. This OpenAI flick, for instance, is handled by Amazon MGM Studios. Amazon is about $8 billion deep into investments into OpenAI rival Anthropic. So like, do they have the motivation to trash OpenAI in this thing? (Not that external pressure to do so is necessary, but still.) And sure, the drama at OpenAI is compelling. It's not too often that the founder of one of the hottest companies around gets kicked out by the board because they no longer trust him, only for him to be reinstated five days later. And, as stories like the Wall Street Journal's accounting of the events highlight, there is no shortage of intrigue and backstabbing along the way that will probably play well on the big screen. But ugh is the list of these Silicon Valley dramas getting long, and it doesn't feel like it's really accomplishing much other than pumping the egos of the subjects. The Social Network remains probably the best work the genre has produced (save for HBO's 'Silicon Valley,' which hasn't aged a day since it came to an end), and even that failed to really capture just how greedy and unethical these people would turn out. (Though, give Aaron Sorkin this, he probably was ahead of the curve on calling out the bro-ish-ness of Zuckerberg that is now on display when he pops up on Joe Rogan's podcast.) The rest of the offerings have their charms, to be sure. 'The Dropout,' 'WeCrashed,' and 'Super Pumped' all manage to pull out some great performances and are built around compelling stories. But none of them really sufficiently get at the greed, corruption, and frankly, the disdain for everyone from regulators to actual, regular people who get harmed while these people amass their fortunes. Maybe that's because the stories typically follow the central figures—the Altmans and Zuckerbergs and Holmeses of the world—from their seats in the C-suites, and they are so rarely confronted with reality there.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store