By Kellyn Brown, 7-26-09
Despite appearing as the desperate half in the relationship, Montana’s courting of Hollywood will continue for some time. In 2007, the Legislature voted to extend “The Big Sky on the Big Screen Act” until 2015 and sweetened the incentives offered to filmmakers in hopes of luring more movies here. And, although the rewards are dubious, the state recently announced that it would take it one step further.
The Montana Department of Commerce Film Office has launched a new campaign dubbed “Studio 406” that bundles incentives with more resources aimed at attracting even more movies. Now, for a Hollywood film, along with tax breaks, the state is offering everything from free location scouting to free police protection.
“Since the Big Sky on the Big Screen Act was implemented in 2005, film productions have contributed over $38 million to Montana’s economy and helped employ 183 people a year,” Gov. Brian Schweitzer said. “That’s a significant impact – and Studio 406 is going to capitalize on the progress we’ve already made.”
I’m all for jobs in Montana, and really enjoy a good flick. But the fact remains that measuring the economic impact of movies made in Montana is subjective at best. And now, with more than 40 states tripping over each other to give Hollywood the best deal, the benefits are even more elusive.
Many Louisiana state lawmakers recently raised concerns that offering a 30 percent tax credit to filmmakers would simply continue a bidding war for movies with other states at a time when none of them can afford to lose tax revenue. In a desperate attempt to keep the television series “Burn Notice” from leaving South Florida that state doubled the production incentives it offers to $10 million, while cutting its state budget by $3 billion (it should be noted that “Miami Vice” never received government aid). And Massachusetts, which has spent about $166 million on incentives the last two years, has concluded that the state’s taxpayers aren’t getting their money’s worth.
Meanwhile, more states are offering Hollywood incentives than ever before, and many of their proponents keep saying that the productions provide a much-needed economic boon once cameras start rolling. Yet more critics are beginning to question whether, in fact, states are getting played by Hollywood, which is the only guaranteed beneficiary as it shops around for bargain-basement deals.
“The industry has been able to play off North Carolina against South Carolina against Louisiana against Georgia. Louisiana raises its incentives and it puts pressure on South Carolina, North Carolina and other states to do likewise,” Bob Orr, a former North Carolina Supreme Court justice who heads an anti-incentives group, told the Associated Press.
Montana offers backdrops that few other states can duplicate, and we should still offer some incentives to filmmakers in order to remain competitive. But while Montana has expanded its offerings, not surprisingly, so too has Wyoming.
Sten Iversen, the state’s film office executive, recently told the Hollywood Reporter that he hopes to brand this state as an “indie incubator.” His office wants to bring more small productions to Montana, where his office will have a hands-on role to make filming as seamless and cost-effective as possible.
“Film commissions don’t just have to be about a production guide and a tax incentive,” Iversen told the trade magazine.
I think that’s the right approach. But the state should still remain wary of offering more than a film’s worth. While we stand to benefit from landing the next “The River Runs Through It,” or “Horse Whisperer,” as more states compete for Hollywood’s attention, it’s becoming easier for lawmakers to become star struck. And it’s at once becoming easier for taxpayers that work outside the film industry to ask, “Where’s my tax break?”
[End of article]When you realize that politics is one of the performing arts, you also realize that Hollywood and politics go together like cream and coffee.You're going to have to bitch a little while longer till you have overwhelming proof that luring Hollywood is a bum deal for the average state taxpayer.
Comment By democratsarefascists, 7-28-09Yeah, I don't know if the Supreme Soviet in DC has told you this, but the economy is shot, thanks to Chairman ObaMao. Montana needs every dollar it can get, unless you liberals want to get real jobs. Personally, I'd be fine with keeping the Hollywood creeps out, but unless you Democrats stop killing business, you party's going to be out of power PDQ.
Comment By Damon Ristau, 7-29-09It's not just Hollywood benefiting from the film incentive programs mentioned in this article, but LOCAL production companies as well. There is no minimum budget required to qualify for the Big Sky on the Big Screen Act rebate. As the owner of a small Montana production company, this program, coupled with the Montana Film Office's vast resource network has greatly contributed to my company surviving in Montana.
Comment By Mike Crill, 7-29-09I would love to see a Libby Mt 2 by High Plains as a follow throu on what they did 10 years ago.Libby Mt 2 could be about the lies of the last 10 years when OMB/EPA were told to" Lie to the People of Libby".Epa came to town and offered the evils of Libby a great deal at a cost of MORE human life.When the Evils were told is that MILLIONs are to be made and the concern can not be the heath and safety of the people.In order to do this and get away with it, the EPA spent $17,000 dollars to advertise Libby as a safe place to live and raise a family.Right after the town was told why we are sick and dying.And since 1999, over 300 people have moved to Libby to be sentenced to death as the rest of the town.And the Health Emergency declaration that said nothing about protecting the people from something that is known to kill them.Oh I could go on and on but their is a story to be told after we learned why we are sick and dying.10 years now and the sick and dying has not stopped on new generations of family to suffer till death as I and most of Libby Mt.Maybe Libby would be shut down to stop killing more people if the country sees it is still continueing.Stay away from Libby Mt would be the title.Thank you.ps.Let me know, I can contribute alot...all true
Comment By Al Jones, 7-30-09Lots of films have been filmed in and around Billings and quite a few folks were suppliers to the big budget, major studio ones. The contracts were for a few days, a few thousand dollars, the "luckiest" got okay wages for several months of grueling work that taught them nothing. The high wage folks aren't local, the equipment's rented, and everything local they try to negotiate quite discounted prices on (lodging, meals, rentals, labor, buildings, etc.) as they're fighting their own budgets throughout (wife's uncle was a studio CFO, it's an eternal struggle.) Incentivizing something that lasts a few days to a few months at it's biggest scale is so hard to justify with tax dollars (pretty much anything else would have a better ROI) that the glamour is about all that makes sense for it's appeal and importance. The substitute for Montana is Alberta in scenery and lower costs, most Montana-set films in a decade or more have been shot there just as Toronto's supplanted NYC, Vancouver many others. Recruiting filmmakers in the 1920's away from New Jersey certainly worked for Los Angeles real estate values, but that's the only place and time you find the bump in the history of film and tv (lured from NYC to LA for more outdoor filming days for westerns, etc.) We do a lot of ill-considered stuff with scarce resources, this is just one of the weirdest since the lottery that would solve education funding.
Comment By Awe', 8-04-09Hopefully, the tax breaks for the film industry will spread to tax breaks for individual taxpayers. Less taxes always means a higher standard of living for everyone.
This article was printed from www.newwest.net at the following URL: http://www.newwest.net/city/article/montana_stuck_in_hollywood_bidding_war/C396/L396/