FILMMAKER
The Magazine of Independent Film

FILMMAKER BLOG Blog RSS Feed

Saturday, February 07, 2009
ARTS FUNDING, FILM BREAKS STRIPPED FROM SENATE STIMULUS BILL 

Stripped from the version of the economic stimulus bill being sent to the Senate for vote are two provisions that affect the film community. First, a bill offering a tax break for film production that appeared in the House version was cut, and, second, increased funding for the National Endowment for the Arts was eliminated.

Jim Puzzanghera reports in the Los Angeles Times, explaining that the film provision consisted of a bonus depreciation tax break allowing investors to take an immediate 50% write-off on projects begun in 2009. (Here I need the help of some of our regular tax-break-savvy readers because this is not my expertise, but my understanding is that Section 181 of the Jobs Creation Act, which is still in effect, allows for a 100% write-off against passive income in the first year for up to the first $15 million of production costs; the House provision in the stimulus plan, thus, would allow larger budgeted films to qualify for a tax break.)

From Puzzanghera's story:


The MPAA argued that filmmakers should get the same depreciation tax break in 2009 as other businesses in the bill.

"Every sector of the economy is eligible, plus software," said Michael O'Leary, the group's chief counsel for federal affairs and policy. "Our view is films are intellectual property the same as software, [and] we create jobs and tax revenues."

The so-called bonus depreciation in the stimulus package is designed to spark economic growth. It gives companies an incentive to make large capital purchases in 2009 by increasing the amount of the cost they can write off in the first year.

Baucus said the movie industry incorrectly had been left out of previous versions of the temporary bonus depreciation tax break.

"The film industry is like any other industry: like the steel industry, like the auto industry, like other manufacturing industries," Baucus said.


Senator Tom Colburn (R-Okla) argued against including film production in the bill, saying, "They [the film industry] has their best January ever."

Michael Kranish at the Boston Globe reports on the reaction to the House's increased $50 million in the bill of National Endowment for the Arts funding -- spending that was stripped from the Senate compromise.

While the NEA money is a minuscule portion of the $819 billion House bill, it has become a lightning rod for some critics, who question whether the dollars for the arts will create many jobs - and who see the money as a symbol of House Democrats trying to lard up the plan with spending wish lists that have been pent up for years.

The criticism has reached such a crescendo that some arts advocates are concerned that the push for the $50 million could backfire, reigniting a debate over the value of taxpayers funding everything from "poetry out loud" events to community theater.


Robin Bronk, executive director of the Creative Coalition, argues for the spending on The Huffington Post:


Why is it so hard for some to realize that jobs in the arts support millions of Americans and are no less worthy than any other job that puts food on the table? Economic studies indicate that 2.98 million Americans are employed in the arts or in arts-centric businesses. Each dollar allocated to the arts not only supports those individuals; the benefits flow outward to their communities and to other businesses. Movie production doesn't require only actors and directors. Stay for the credits after a film ends and you can't help but notice the incredible army of workers required to bring a story to the screen. In turn, each of those individuals and businesses spends money and pays taxes in their communities. The economic returns and stimulative effects are clear.

Beyond the finances, though, investing in the arts during these tough times can ensure that America doesn't lose a generation of creative talent to our temporary economic woes. Somewhere in America today, there are individuals with the potential of Orson Welles and the artistic gifts of Mark Rothko. It is foolhardy to attempt to save our economy by ignoring our talent.


Bookmark and Share
# posted by Scott Macaulay @ 2/07/2009 12:04:00 PM
Comments (2)

 
Scott-

I would like to post some of your article in our company newsletter. We are huge proponents of the arts in schools. This will help us raise awareness. Can I get your permission to do so?

Thanks,
John Daugherty
Vital Film Works
www.vitalfilmworks.com
johnd@vitalfilmworks.com
# posted by Blogger Jondy @ 2/10/2009 12:38 PM  

 
Yes, feel free.
# posted by Blogger Scott Macaulay @ 2/10/2009 1:06 PM  


This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?



FALL 2009

Fall 2009 Cover

RECENT POSTS

NEW YORK FILM TAX CREDIT ON HOLD
THE ORPHANAGE SHUTS DOWN
LIONSGATE, TWC FILE LAWSUITS OVER PUSH
LUX INTERIOR, R.I.P.
TICK, TICK, TICK... NOT
HEY, WE'RE RECESSION PROOF... AREN'T WE?
YOUTUBE CAST-OFF'S, READ THIS!
I AGREE WITH HARRY...
2ND BABELGUM FEST KICKS OFF
A MONTH OF OSCAR


ARCHIVES

Current Posts
January 2004
February 2004
March 2004
April 2004
May 2004
June 2004
July 2004
August 2004
September 2004
October 2004
November 2004
December 2004
January 2005
February 2005
March 2005
April 2005
May 2005
June 2005
July 2005
August 2005
September 2005
October 2005
November 2005
December 2005
January 2006
February 2006
March 2006
April 2006
May 2006
June 2006
July 2006
August 2006
September 2006
October 2006
November 2006
December 2006
January 2007
February 2007
March 2007
April 2007
May 2007
June 2007
July 2007
August 2007
September 2007
October 2007
November 2007
December 2007
January 2008
February 2008
March 2008
April 2008
May 2008
June 2008
July 2008
August 2008
September 2008
October 2008
November 2008
December 2008
January 2009
February 2009
March 2009
April 2009
May 2009
June 2009
July 2009
August 2009
September 2009


blog | back issues | buy print subscription | buy digital subscription | subscription FAQ | advertise | contact
© 2009 Filmmaker Magazine