I disagree with many of your assertions. Let's start with the North Carolina Film Tax Credit and take a look at the hard numbers. Let's start with the definitive study, “A Supply Chain Study of the Economic Impact of the North Carolina Motion Picture & Television Industry”, by North Carolina State University Poole College of Management distinguished professor Dr. Robert Handfield. The entire study in PDF can be found here. "Beginning in 2007, when the incentive was first enacted, through 2012, the film and television industry has spent $1.02 billion in the state, and generated a projected $170,000,000 in tax revenue. The cost of the credit over the same time period was $112,000,000. The result means that for every dollar of credit issued, the industry generated $9.11 in direct spending and contributed $1.52 in tax revenue back to North Carolina." Below are highlights of the study’s key findings: • The direct spend by the film and television industry in North Carolina from 2007-2012 is $1,020,000,000. When compared to the cost of the credit ($112,000,000) over the same period of time, the result is for every dollar of the credit issued, the industry spends $9.11 within the State. • The projected tax revenue collected as a result of film and television production from 2007-2012 is $170,330,307. When compared to the cost of the credit ($112,000,000) over the same period of time, the result is for every dollar of the credit issued, the industry generates $1.52 in tax revenue back to the State. • For 2012 alone, the production tax incentive contributed a net positive cash flow of $25.3 million for North Carolina. This is the difference between the 2012 cost of the incentive ($60.14M) and tax revenue collected by state and local government ($85.4M). • The incentive has allowed North Carolina to maintain a permanent crew base, providing 4,259 jobs at an average wage of $66,000, which is over a third higher than the national average for private industry ($41,750). • Using predictive modeling forecasts, the study finds that if the production incentive is allowed to expire, 4,046 jobs would be eliminated and the industry’s tax contribution would shrink to $4.3M. Additionally, research predicts a loss of over $164M in business revenue to more than 1,000 small businesses across the State. • The predictive model shows a significant benefit to the State associated with extending the production incentive. Empirical survey results and cost model projections suggest the industry would grow to a projected $587M, which would begin to rival the size of the industry in Georgia ($880M). The extension would also result in a projected work force of nearly 31,000, nearly 6,400 of which would be full-time production jobs. The study was released ahead of the upcoming General Session, scheduled to begin in May, in which state lawmakers are expected to discuss the merits of the 25% refundable tax credit that is offered to filmmakers who have a qualified direct in-state spend of at least $250,000 and whether or not to continue the program. The tax credit is scheduled to sunset on January 1, 2015.
As a follow-up this may be a good time to mention that NC House Bill HB-89 was filed this week to restore the NC Film Tax Credit. Also Republican Senate Leader Phil Berger admitted recently that allowing the NC Film and Preservation Tax Credits to expire was probably a mistake and hurt the state economy. Just to provide everyone with some history, the demise of the North Carolina Film Tax credit began in 2007 with the "Hounddog" controversy. This movie was shot in North Carolina and screened at Utah’s Sundance Film Festival; the movie depicts a child rape, but the focus of the film is about the harm caused by child sexual abuse. A number of Christian groups in North Carolina such as the Christian Film and Television Commission demanded the film makers be prosecuted - both NC & UT prosecutors declined while stating the movie contained no child pornography despite the assertions of these Christian groups - Utah, N.C. prosecutors: Film depicting child rape broke no laws These Christian groups backed Berger, Tillis and other Republicans running for the legislature. These groups demanded the state rescind the anti-Christian film tax credit. Berger originally pushed for "legislation that would require any film seeking North Carolina’s tax credit for television and movies to receive script approval from the state. Berger said the state should ensure its citizens aren’t subsidizing what many may consider inappropriate." This proposal did not move forward. After this the Republicans in the legislature drove for the elimination of the NC Film Tax Credit which they succeeded in eliminating in 2013 (sunset at the start of 2015). It has been replaced with a film grant system which only will allow small grants to be given to films approved by an appointed conservative committee (in other words only Christian films will be given a grant). The Hounddog "controversy" and a celebration of Screen/Society
Bulls, Bears, Donkeys and Elephants Since 1929, Republicans and Democrats have each controlled the presidency for nearly 40 years. So which party has been better for American pocketbooks and capitalism as a whole? Well, here’s an experiment: imagine that during these years you had to invest exclusively under either Democratic or Republican administrations. How would you have fared? As of Friday, a $10,000 investment in the S.& P. stock market index* would have grown to $11,733 if invested under Republican presidents only, although that would be $51,211 if we exclude Herbert Hoover’s presidency during the Great Depression. Invested under Democratic presidents only, $10,000 would have grown to $300,671 at a compound rate of 8.9 percent over nearly 40 years.
What's better for capitalism is not necessarily what is better for "the American pocketbook". We've seen clearly over the past seven years that the upper tiers have done very well for themselves while the rank-and-file has not. If the average American were fully invested, that would help. But he's not. Most are barely getting by, much less investing in the stock market. So, yes, since Republicans are more friendly to business than Democrats are, it is not surprising that the market would do better under Republican administrations, or at least administrations that are largely Republican. Whether or not this translates into better lives for the ordinary American is another matter.
Stupid chart that has no basis in reality, which one of the clinton initiatives led to the tech boom? Besides Gore claiming he invented the internet. You really wanna tell me had bush been in office from 1992-2000 we wouldnt have seen explosive growth in technology? Same thing with Obama's presidency, why dont you name all the pro business policies that Obama has created that has lead to the stock market rise? I can name a half a dozen that were big taxes on businesses. Also Obama and the dems love to claim that Obama faces unprecedented obstruction from the GOP, well if they blocked everything he tried to do, whose really to blame for the economy. Its all a joke. Other than massive changes to Fiscal policy like obamacare, it has far less of an effect than monetary policy. This nonsense reminds me of Obama taking credit for the energy boom, when he has done everything in his power to screw people in charge of gathering fossil fuels. I can name a half a dozen of his policies off the top of my head that have attacked the fossil fuel industry. Name 1 obama policy that has been pro fossil fuel. And no lending a half a billion dollars to solyndra doesnt count.
"to be given to films approved by an appointed conservative committee" Lol, gwb, when I got to that point I saw "anointed" instead of appointed. : )
Oh the irony. And, re your claim on Al Gore and the internet... http://www.snopes.com/quotes/internet.asp
You say you want to start off with the 'hard numbers'. Uh, they are not hard numbers. They are numbers concocted in a study that is almost certainly funded in some way by the film industry. "Hard numbers" are numbers that the state auditor of the state of North Carolina would come up with in a detailed audit of the impact on the state of the tax credits. These kind of hard numbers have been formulated in other states by their state auditors of the same kind of film subsidies and found that the projections were a complete sham and a waste of taxpayer money. I really don't want to keep going back to this every time another so called audit is produced or another projection from an industry funded source. A NC revenue dept audit does not calculate return on investment. All they do is determine that the film spent some money like they were supposed to. A state of North Carolina Auditor audit would determine the total impact on the state and relate that to the state's investment and then determine what the rate of return was to the state on the investment. And since multiple other state auditors have determined that the projections were a sham, any audit by the NC state auditor that determined otherwise would be highly suspect. And of course that's if the state of NC auditor ever were to do an audit. And some republican legislator saying it was a mistake to stop the funding or some other one saying they want to only fund Christian films does not prove anything, either. There is only one thing that proves anything and that is an actual audit of results. So far something which the state of NC has not done and other states which have done them show the credit to be a massive waste. And that is all that matters. So why do you keep pushing it?
This is nothing more than the govt trying to pick winners. Why should one industry be favored over others? Basically you are asking all of the other businesses in NC to subsidize the film industry. Eventually other states do what NC does and after time, there isn't any real benefit. Sad to see my state of VA doing the same dumb thing..... Some experts and critics say subsidizing the film industry lets politicians pick winners and losers, distorting the free market system. They argue such credits cause funding losses in such areas as education, forcing taxpayers to make up the revenue elsewhere. “The tax rate that the rest of us have to pay, unless they reduce spending, will have to be higher to offset this privilege for the film industry,” said Matt Mitchell, a senior research fellow with George Mason University’s Mercatus Center in Fairfax. http://watchdog.org/128090/hollywood-tax-credits/