Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
North Carolina close to axing tax break for movie companies
North Carolina is close to dropping one of the most extensive programs for awarding tax breaks to film companies, reports The Wall Street Journal.The move would be a high-profile retreat from an arms race among states, including Georgia, to lure Hollywood productions, the paper says.The WSJ adds that more than 800 movies and television shows have been filmed in North Carolina since the 1980s, when "Dirty Dancing" was shot along the banks of this mountain-ringed lake. The state began providing incentives in the early 2000s.
According to the WSJ, “In, 2012, it [N.C.] paid $69 million in incentives to draw such productions as "The Hunger Games," and it has netted an average of $168 million in direct production spending a year over the past six years, according to the.”North Carolina trails only California, New York, Georgia and Louisiana in production revenue, the film office said.But the budget for the next two fiscal years approved in July by the state legislature lets the incentive program sunset on Jan. 1, 2015. Both Republicans and Democrats say North Carolina would be better off cutting taxes across the board or giving incentives to manufacturers offering long-term jobs.The state’s program consists of a 25 percent refundable tax credit, the WSJ adds. Dama Claire, a tax expert who advises producers on where to film, told the WSJ that the number of states offering incentives has declined as they cite shifting priorities or problems with individual programs or productions.
Aaw man...can' read the article... You have to subscribe...I personally am against them cutting the incentives to film companies. What other better way to diversify the NC economy.
The Wall Street Journal is a media propaganda firm? Tin-foil hat much?
well now that you mention it, yes. The quality of the WSJ has been in the gutter ever since it was bought up by Fox News.
But that is neither here nor there, because if you read the article, the study the rest of us are talking about was conducted by The North Carolina Film Office
Who describes themselves as: "offering guidance in the interest of the state's film industry."
as opposed to: "offering guidance in the interest of the state."
^ Yeah, admittedly I didn't read the article as it's subscription only. I thought you were referring to the WSJ, as the OP quotes those figures "according to the WSJ".
But if NC raises tax rates on movie companies doesn't that mean the state will make more revenue?
That's the central issue up for debate.
Pro-incentive people say that the incentives "pay for themselves." I think in order to make such a claim, you'd need rigorous and transparent policy analysis that few organizations are capable of performing.
The last people on earth I'd trust to perform the analysis, though, are the people making money from the incentives.
But if NC raises tax rates on movie companies doesn't that mean the state will make more revenue? They need to pay their fair share.
They do! Incentives have always been a major part of luring new companies/business but you can't give away the farm to add 10 apple trees. The filming industry has become an ultra-competitive environment especially with our neighbor to the north that provides govco healthcare and huge incentives to film there.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.