Big changes could be coming for Hawaii's film industry — and they aren't good
HONOLULU (KHON2) — A bill meant to boost the film industry in Hawaii, now threatens to do the opposite according to an industry expert. The lawmaker who introduced the bill said the changes are sending the wrong message.
'Rescue HI Surf,' 'Hawaii Five-O,' 'White Lotus,' 'Magnum PI' and countless other series and movies have been filmed in Hawaii.
HIFF Opio Fest: The Future of Film
'They continually marketed Hawaii the best way they possibly could,' Sen. Lynn DeCoite said.
But in recent years, there have been fewer productions.
DeCoite, who chairs the Senate Economic Development and Tourism committee, had hoped to change that. So she set out to support the industry she said helps generates income, promotes tourism and creates jobs for local residents.
'Our investment of $50 million has come back to us in about $116 million in taxes,' she explained. 'About a billion dollars in spend, take less to $50 million, and you got about $66 million in monies back to our general budget.'
DeCoite introduced SB732, meant to sweeten the pot and encourage productions to film here, with additional tax incentives.SB732 initially increased the tax break from $50 million to $60 million, had language to include streaming productions, and would redesignate the industry as manufacturing, which lowered the GE tax from 4.5% to .5%.
Tui'ana Scanlan, the IATSE president representing production crew members, said recent amendments to the bill stripped it bare.
'If it is passed in its current form, it may be devastating towards our industry,' Scanlan said.
According to Scanlan, the amendments made by the House Finance Committee, would now repeal the tax program, add a1/6 annual reduction of the $50 million spending cap, and took out language allowing streaming productions.
'It makes it so that we are out of the global competition for filming location,' he explained.
Can Hawaiʻi's legislature save our film industry?
Scanlan said it would mean fewer jobs for hundreds of local residents who rely on productions for income and it would also impact the tourism industry.
'There is a ripple effect that this industry has on the rest of the ecosystem, the economic ecosystem of the state that I don't think gets as much attention,' he added.
'This sends a completely different message to the very thing we should be marketing. We always talk about marketing our people, marketing our culture, but that's a funny way of showing it,' DeCoite said. 'If we ain't going to promote our very own what are we doing?'
SB732 now goes to the full Senate floor. If it passes, it will head to the Governor for his signature. If it doesn't, it will go into conference.
Check out more news from around Hawaii
Other bills also advancing through the legislature include a bill to add a new cruise ship tax (HB504), one to increase the state vehicle weight tax (HB1231) and another to allow sports betting online (HB1308).
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hamilton Spectator
an hour ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Charlotte Le Bon is focused on directing, but has ideas for a ‘White Lotus' return
TORONTO - Since her breakout role in season 3 of HBO's hit dramedy 'White Lotus,' acting offers have been pouring in for Charlotte Le Bon. But for now, the Montreal native is just not interested. 'Making films is my main focus more than acting, to be honest,' Le Bon said during a sit-down interview in Toronto Thursday. Le Bon recently returned from the Cannes Film Festival, where she held meetings in search of a financing partner for her sophomore feature — a still-untitled Montreal-shot drama exploring themes of loss. 'It's autobiographique,' says the bilingual actor, reluctant to reveal too much. 'It's a very, very personal movie and I think the goal is to try to make a very light-hearted movie on grief. It's a challenge, but that's what I'm aiming for.' The Montreal-based Le Bon was in town for Bell Media's 2025/26 programming showcase, where Etalk hosts interviewed her during a splashy event for media buyers about the last season of 'The White Lotus,' which streams on Crave. In Mike White's eat-the-rich anthology series she plays Chloe, a socially savvy French-Canadian expat living in Thailand with her much older boyfriend, and the series' main antagonist, Greg, who now goes by 'Gary.' She's seemingly unaware of Greg's history: in Season 2, he pulled off a plot to murder his wife Tanya, played by Jennifer Coolidge, in order to inherit her wealth. Le Bon says she was ready to take a hiatus from acting when she was offered the 'White Lotus' role. Though she'd built a successful career — with roles opposite Joseph Gordon-Levitt in the 2015 biographical drama 'The Walk' and Christian Bale in the 2016 war epic 'The Promise' — her passion had shifted to working behind the camera. Her 2023 horror-romance 'Falcon Lake,' which she directed and co-wrote, premiered at Cannes to strong critical acclaim. 'I was thinking about taking a break from acting because I was like, 'Oh, I don't know if I still like it.' I was just asking myself some questions about it... I sometimes played characters that were not really inspiring for me for some reason,' she says. 'And then 'White Lotus' arrived and I was like, 'There's no way I can not do this. It's just an amazing opportunity'... Between the moment where I sent the self-tape and the moment I was in the plane flying to Thailand, there were probably like 10 days.' Le Bon says the experience of being part of such a pop-culture juggernaut was hard to wrap her head around. 'It's kind of overwhelming when you're taking part in such an important thing in culture. Even when it started to come out, when I started to see memes on it on social media, it was really exciting,' she says. While acting isn't her current focus, Le Bon says she would be down to return for Season 4 — and has some ideas about how it could play out. 'If their relationship is based on true love, which I think it is, then maybe she'll come back with Greg, because Greg has to come back, for sure,' she says. Le Bon muses that Chloe could be Greg's accomplice or even the one who serves him his inevitable comeuppance. 'She could either become Greg's ally and they can be like a duo of villains, or she can maybe be the one who will create the karma for Greg. Maybe she'll give it to him,' she says. 'He has to get it at some point, so we'll see what happens.' While Chloe's relationship with Greg may seem transactional on the surface, Le Bon argues the two share a deeper 'understanding' of one another. 'I think what she likes in this relationship is she thinks she's found a way to be free… just by spending a lot of money and partying and having sex with whoever she wants,' Le Bon says. 'I think they find an agreement by the end of the season where it's clear that's her intention and maybe he can take part in this and have fun with it as well.' If that setup sounds peculiar, Le Bon says that's just the kind of thing that interests her. 'There needs to be a singular aspect to a part that really inspires me in order for me to move my butt and be an actress again,' she says. 'It needs to be weird.' This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 7, 2025.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
GOP's health care plan: We're all going to die, so whatever
If death and taxes are the only certainties, Joni Ernst is here to cut one and fast-track the other. 'We all are going to die," she said. You might think that's a line from a nihilistic French play. Or something a teenage goth said in Hot Topic. Or an epiphany from your stoner college roommate after he watched Interstellar at 3 a.m. But that was actually the Iowa Senator's God-honest response to concerns that slashing Medicaid to achieve President Trump's 'Big Beautiful Bill' would lead to more preventable deaths. The full exchange at a May 30 town hall included one audience member shouting at the stage, 'People will die!' And Ernst responding, 'People are not — well, we all are going to die, so for heaven's sake.' That's not a health care policy — that's a horoscope for the terminally screwed. As you can imagine, the internet didn't love it, because losing your health should not trigger the equivalent of a shrug emoji from someone elected to serve the public good. But rather than walking it back, Ernst leaned in, filming a mock apology in a graveyard because nothing says, 'I care about your future,' like filming next to people who don't have one. Opinion: Nurses are drowning while Braun ignores Indiana's health care crisis Ernst's comments aren't just philosophical musings. She's justifying policy choices that cause real harm. If passed, this bill would, according to the Congressional Budget Office, remove health coverage for up to 7.6 million Americans. That's not just 'we all die someday' territory. That's 'some people will die soon and needlessly.' What makes this even more galling is that the people pushing these cuts have access to high-quality, taxpayer-subsidized healthcare. Congress gets the AAA, platinum, concierge-level government plan. Meanwhile, millions of Americans are told to try their luck with essential oils or YouTube acupuncture tutorials. Honestly, it felt more like performance art than policy: 'Sorry about your grandma getting kicked out of her assisted living facility. Please enjoy this scenic view of her future! LOL!' We're not asking you to defeat death, senator. Death is both inevitable and bipartisan. But there is a broad chasm between dying peacefully at 85 and dying in your 40's because your Medicaid plan disappeared and your GoFundMe didn't meet its goal. Fundamentally, governing is about priorities. A budget is a moral document. When a lawmaker tells you 'we're all going to die' in response to a policy choice, they're telling you 'I've made peace with your suffering as collateral damage.' And if a U.S. Senator can stand in a cemetery and joke about it, you have to wonder — who do our federal legislators think those graves are for? Opinion: Indiana DCS cut foster care in half — and now claims children are safer This isn't just about one comment or one bill. It's about a mindset that treats healthcare as a luxury rather than a right. If death is inevitable, then access to healthcare you can afford is what helps determine how long you have, how comfortably you live, and whether you get to watch your kids grow up. Healthcare isn't about escaping death. It's about dignity and quality of life while we are here. Ernst got one thing right: death will come for us all. But leadership, real leadership, is about helping people live as long and as well as they can before that day comes. You want to make jokes, Senator? Fine. But if your punchline is 'You're all going to die anyway,' don't be surprised when your constituents realize the joke's on them. Kristin Brey is the "My Take" columnist for the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. This article originally appeared on Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: Joni Ernst films graveyard video after telling sick people "we all die" | Opinion
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Trump and Musk can both hurt each other in their feud. Here's how.
An explosive breakdown in the relationship between President Donald Trump and his biggest political donor turned part-time employee, Tesla CEO Elon Musk, has been foreshadowed since their alliance first took shape. When Trump brought Musk along for the ride as he moved back into the White House, the looming question was always how long the two could possibly stay in sync. After all, neither the most powerful person in the world nor the richest person on Earth is known for keeping his ego in check. The main thrust of the Trump-Musk feud boils down to who can assert dominance over the other. In the intense back-and-forth that had everyone glued to their screens Thursday, we saw bullies used to getting their way desperately trying to find leverage over each other. But unlike the flame wars of old, where internet trolls would hurl insults at each other across message board forums, Trump and Musk can do serious damage to each other in the real world — and to the rest of us in the process. Musk first gained access to Trump through his vast fortune; he donated almost $300 million during last year's election and hasn't been afraid to throw his money around in races this year. Though he said in May he would be 'spending a lot less' on funding political races, he has also been quick to threaten pumping money into the midterms should lawmakers back the massive budget bill currently working its way through the Senate. And Musk has made clear that he expects a return on his investments, having already snidely claimed on his X platform that Trump would have lost and Democrats would have taken Congress without his backing. Trump is reportedly more focused on the midterms than he was during his first term, worried that a new Democratic majority would lead to more investigations and/or a third impeachment. While he's already sitting on $600 million to help hold on to a GOP majority, Musk's money could throw a spanner in the works, especially if he follows through on his public musing about bankrolling a third party to 'represent the 80% of Americans in the middle.' Though Trump has his own social media platform, Truth Social, X remains a much louder microphone to amplify Musk's messaging to the right, including his supposed 'bombshell' about Trump's presence in the Jeffrey Epstein files. (Musk provided no evidence for the claim and Trump has previously denied any involvement with Epstein's criminal behavior.) Trump, in turn, has threatened Musk's lucrative government contracts, which would include billions of dollars funneled toward his SpaceX company, as well as the subsidies that Tesla receives for its electric car production. Musk responded by warning about cutting off access to SpaceX launches, which would potentially cripple NASA and the Defense Department's ability to deploy satellites. But that would prove a double-edged sword for Musk, given how large a revenue stream those contracts have become. By Thursday evening, Musk had already backed down from his saber-rattling about restricting access to the Dragon space capsule, but he could change his mind again. That he made the threat in the first place has raised major alarm bells among national security officials. The Washington Post reported Saturday that NASA and the Pentagon have begun "urging [Musk's competitors] to more quickly develop alternative rockets and spacecraft" to lessen his chokehold on the industry. Notably, Trump isn't alone in his fight against Musk, though as ever those wading into the brawl have their own motives. Former White House strategist Steve Bannon took the opportunity to launch a broadside against Musk. 'People including myself are recommending to the president that he pull every contract associated with Elon Musk,' Bannon told NBC News on Thursday night. Bannon requested that 'major investigations start immediately' into, among other things, Musk's 'immigration status, his security clearance and his history of drug abuse.' There are already several federal investigations of Musk's companies that have been underway for years, which critics had previously worried might be stonewalled due to his influence with Trump. While the extremely public breakup makes for high drama and more than a little schadenfreude, the pettiness masks a deeper issue. The battle Musk and Trump are waging is predicated on both wielding a horrifying amount of unchecked power. In a healthy system of government, their ability to inflict pain on each other wouldn't exist, or at least such an ability would be severely blunted. Musk being able to funnel nearly unlimited amounts of spending into dark money super PACs is an oligarchical nightmare. Trump using the power of the presidency to overturn contracts and launch investigations at a whim is blatant authoritarianism in action. In theory, there are still checks to rein each of them in before things escalate much further. Musk's shareholders have been unhappy with his rocky time in government, and the war of words with Trump sent Tesla's stock price tumbling once more. Trump needs to get his 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act' passed into law and — next year — ensure Congress doesn't fall into Democrats' hands. Trump and Musk have incentives, then, to stay in each other's good graces despite their wounded pride. Trump made clear to NBC News in an interview Saturday that he has no real interest in patching things up with Musk, warning that there will be "very serious consequences" if his one-time ally funds Democratic campaigns. Even if the two eventually reach a détente, it's unlikely to be a lasting peace, not so long as one feels his authority is challenged by the other. The zero-sum view of the world that Trump and Musk share, one where social Darwinism and superior genetics shape humanity, doesn't allow for long-term cooperative relationships. Instead, at best they will return to a purely transactional situationship, but one where the knives will gleefully come back out the second a new opening is given. Most importantly, there is no protagonist when it comes to the inciting incident in this duel, as a total victory won't benefit the American people writ large. Trump wants Congress to pass his bill to grant him more funding for deportations and to preserve his chances of staying in power. Musk wants a more painful bill that will slash the social safety net for millions. No matter what the outcome is as they battle for supremacy over each other, we're the ones who risk being trampled. This article was originally published on
