Governor Jerry Brown today signed legislation granting a two-year extension of California’s $100 million-a-year film and television tax credit program, which now will run until July 2017. Today was the deadline for Brown to sign the nearly identical Assembly and state Senate bills. Currently dispensed under a lottery system, California’s program was first introduced in 2009 to help stem the runaway production to other states with more generous incentives and lower costs. A total of 28 projects won a piece of the up to 25% tax credit program this June.
The Governor’s signing today comes after a summer in which lawmakers in Sacramento debated the effectiveness of the incentive, especially against the backdrop of the cash-strapped state budget. A study last year by the Los Angeles County Economic Development Corp fund estimated that in its first two years the state tax credits program generated more than $3.8 billion in economic output, supported more than 20,000 jobs and returned more than $200 million to state and local governments in taxes. Some, while supportive of the credit program, doubt that enough time has passed to yet gauge it’s effectiveness. “I think you need to have a full three-year cycle and then do the analysis in the 12 and 24 months following on a new tax-incentive program like California’s,” said an industry insider. “It takes time to see the change because you are not just trying to change how many productions you can keep or have but ultimately you are trying to change migration patterns. You’re moving a glacier.” Others think California has to get much more aggressive to keep Hollywood at home. “The next round would be to double down and to make the process easier,” says a studio number crunching source. “The pot is too small and the lottery system is too random to be able to rely on, that’s what still driving production out of state.”
Related: TV Production Takes Another Big Hit Says FilmLA
Despite a period of decline in the past 15 years as other states and nearby locations like British Columbia have introduced aggressive tax incentive and credit programs, California is still the number one place overall for filming and production in the country. Last year saw 284 movies fully or partially shot here and 276 TV series, according to the state film commission. That was a slight decline in film production from 2010 but a increase of 10 TV series. New York remains second domestically for production with 115
movies and 113 TV series made there in 2011. Pulling production away from LA and NYC, two southern states have lept up the production chain in the last decade. Louisiana and Georgia now take the third and fourth spots nationwide due to their hefty incentive programs, established infrastructure and heavy crew bases. Louisiana, who introduced its tax credit program in 2003, had 44 movies and 9 series shoot there in 2011 including most of Quentin Tarantino’s Django Unchained. While the number of TV shows stayed the same, last year was a drop from the 63 movies made across Louisiana in 2010. Georgia’s 2008 Entertainment Industry Investment Act offers a 20% tax credit of all production costs in the state on films or shows that spend more than $500,000. It offers another 10% on top of that productions that put the state’s entertainment logo in their credits. With Atlanta as its hub, Georgia had 24 films and 25 series in 2011. Teen Wolf was one of those shows but it will now be shooting in California thanks to getting a relocating TV series tax credit earlier this summer. One example that California’s program is having some success. The Peach state saw a decline of 5 TV series from the 30 shot there in 2010 such as the cancelled Past Life. Connecticut had 26 movies and 6 TV series filming in the state last year. Michigan, whose program went through some uncertainty due to a change in Governors in 2010, still had 24 movies and 5 TV series partially or fully shoot in the state last year.
However as the Association of Film Commissioners International locations show earlier this year revealed, other states and countries are working hard to get their hands on Hollywood work too. North Carolina, where The Hunger Games and season one of Showtime’s Homeland were shot, had 24 movies and 5 TV series made there over the course of 2010 and 2011 according to their film office. The state’s new incentive, introduced in January 2011, provides a refundable credit that’s equal to 25% of in-state production expenses for films and shows that spend at least $250,000. There is a cap on that of $20 million per feature. Incentive observers say that Colorado, Washington and Oregon could become big players over the next few years in the location game too. ”It could take up to five years but with their proximity to LA, their topography that can be made to look like anywhere and the right political commitment, those states could start attracting some serious production,” said one insider. Oregon had 22 movies and 5 TV series, including Grimm and Portlandia,shot there in 2010 and 2011.
Deadline's Dominic Patten - tip him here.


a finger in the dike…
If films where actually an investment with a consistent profitable ROI you would not need to bribe producers with with free money from taxpayers pockets.
Yeah right, films don’t make money. That’s why so few are made. No money is given to producers from taxpayers pockets. Less money is charged to producers, thereby giving producers an incentive to produce within the state. States that have done this have consistently benefited in several ways and have made hundreds of millions of dollars. The only losses are in the minds of fools who say “Duh…wait a minute, if we had charged more, we would have made more, so therefore we lost money.” No, if you had charged more, you would have lost the business and made NO money. The film is made in another state, the fools who stopped offering the incentive get absolutely nothing, and then wonder why their economies are tanking. Imagine if the CEO of Ford Motors said: “I’m going to stop selling cars for $20,000 because I could have charged $200,000, therefore my employees are losing $180,000 with every sale; So I’m going to charge $200,000 per car and and avoid losing that $180,000.” Although in that example, the Ford CEO wouldn’t be nearly as incompetent as the state Governors because they’re losing more than just sales of a product.
They’ve already built lots with sound stages in the S.E. Is this too little too late?
“Lots with sound stages”?? Too late? Yeah, no. I recently did a stage assessment and there is more soundstage square footage in greater LA than Louisiana, New Mexico, Georgia, Toronto & Vancouver COMBINED. I shit you not. None of the major studios have built a SINGLE stage in another state and Disney, Paramount & Universal are in the middle of massive expansions in Southern California. Long term, California is the home of the industry and the studios know it. As long as the other places are stupid enough to pay for a large chunk of the budget, they will send them productions.
But let’s be clear, there is a MAJOR difference between luring productions and luring the studios. Other states are doing the former, not the latter.
Oh yea, Studio’s don’t build anymore. They use the EMPTY AVAILABLE space.
Your assessment is badly flawed. You use weasel words like “major,” “massive expansions” (which you don’t explain or quantify), and “lure away,” to make it appear that California is winning. It’s NOT.
What matters is where the movies are being made, and that is NOT California.
Where the “major” studios are, is NOT important.
Fewer big movies get made in California, that is true. Bit for a single location, no one comes close to the amount of production they have. Yo use “weasel” ways to dismiss a pretty accurate assessment. If you want the $3 billion number for Universal, or for Paramount or for Disney, do your own homework. The information is out there, or do you prefer to troll Deadline?
Disney and Universal built stages in Orlando. They are active soundtages. Yes they’re part of a larger theme park, but they are legit soundstages.
-RnsW
hate to tell ya this but the switch from the “good old” way sound stages are built and used happened about 20 years ago
they don’t build-em any more. they convert old unused warehouse space (and this space is available in MEGA sq feet- since the fiscal collapse ) they install sound padding –a real big sound resistant door– cut holes for AC plants in the walls — cut in some holes for power if needed –rent a few trailers –and DONE!!!! a studio is born
from start to finish –maybe 3 weeks if they take their time
out problem here is not tax incentives Its TAXES ARE TOO HIGH—JUST LIKE THE RENT IS TOO HIGH–LOL
cut taxes and workmans comp costs and they might come back ??
but
one thing from a guy who has done payroll for a studio
the main reason I see why they left town is the health and welfare benefit they have to pay in the south western states –its not a coincidence that the producers moved out of the SW states because outside of the agreement area if you use union labor you have to pay health and welfare of about 10$ an hour.
They still use union labor but they don’t pay the health and welfare –add the bad California taxes and tax incentives from other states an poof off they go!!!!!
With the lottery status and the low amount ($100m) offered it seems like it’s just extending the runaway production problem.
If L.A. considers itself the movie making capital, which, it’s easy to argue, is slipping away daily, maybe there should be a new plan that doesn’t require a 3 year study.
If allowing the industry to stay in Los Angeles makes it easier for industry members to live and work there while paying taxes and contributing to the economy, doesn’t THAT make for a better argument in regard to keeping the industry local?
I’m not an accountant or math expert, so forgive the question-
But if right now a state makes $1m in taxes generated by payroll, shopping, etc, (easy, round number to use for example) isn’t that better than losing the whole industry and earning $100k (another easy number) in spending instead?
When you’re the Hub of an industry, it’s easier to hold your ground. But when you lose a large part of your “Hubness” due to cheaper alternatives elsewhere, it seems some rethought is in order.
No?
The lottery system is a complete joke. Films that never get made win out over series that are on the air. For example USA’s Graceland which was ordered to series and wouldve created hundreds of longterm jobs doesn’t get a tax rebate, so they move to Florida for production. This is a complete joke, and needs to be fixed. Otherwise productions will continue to leave the state.
California, here is your solution:
Spend the $100 million to get governors elected in those rival states who have the mindset of Michigan governor Rick Snyder.
Michigan’s film incentive used to be California’s number one rival.
Then Snyder got elected.
Overnight, Gov. Snyder KILLED the Michigan Film Industry, because “it doesn’t make sense.” He’d rather have people collecting unemployment or living on welfare than understanding the concept of paying somebody one dollar to spend ten dollars. The idea of getting the one dollar back plus nine additional dollars did not compute into the “tough nerd’s” thinking(?).
Get a guy like that elected governor in those rival states, and they will not have a film industry to for you to worry about.
Why support the 1% movie companies with free taxpayer money? And if you argue that it’s okay because they employ so many people, then you must also be in favour of tax cuts for ‘the rich’. Because that’s what this is; nobody is employed by a poor person.
You answered your own question with your last sentence: because the 99% are employed by the 1%. They are going to make their productions regardless, and it would be nice if they’d stay in California and employ Californians. If you’re fine with them taking their money elsewhere, then by all means, keep peddling your 1% nonsense.
I don’t live in California so I don’t care where they make their films. Just acknowledge that the left is wrong about tax cuts and the 1%. You clearly support them when it suits you.
Apples and oranges. Tax breaks to rich people does not equal jobs unless those people choose to create jobs with that extra cash. Tax breaks for a production shooting in California does equal jobs and a lot of them. You cannot make a film or TV show without a crew.
You had me at “hubness”…Too Little Too Late?
Great! That lottery system is working out excellently. Studios are so excited to invest in infrastructure not knowing if their films will win the lottery and will be shot here… Idiots.
Disney, Universal & Paramount ARE in the middle of multibillion infrastructure expansions in California.
The lottery system is nuts. You can’t plan your production if you MIGHT get your money back, and you MIGHT not. Most movies are green-lit after their budget is locked down. the money you get back in Louisiana makes a lot of movies possible. CA’s money back system should be first come, first serve — like Louisiana and Georgia.
I’ve moved two movies this year to Louisiana and Florida because we couldn’t afford to do them here in CA. The New Orleans film industry is THRIVING, it’s brought a LOT of money and employment to the region. A lot of our crew there were people who’d moved from CA to New Orleans within the past five years, for the work. Especially department heads.
and as for the ‘money our of tax payers’ pockets’ — the money that the film industry is NOT spending here because of the tax-break plans in others state is HUGE. billions. CA is missing out on lots of tax money, because of the productions we’re losing — employment tax, sales tax, etc etc.
This is too little, governor — but it’s not too late.
Sorry, but a paltry 100 mil over the next several years doesn’t mean much when compared to the skyrocketing cost of filming in this state. Yeah it’s difficult to find a similar pool of skilled workers in other locations, but those drastically lower production costs provide plenty incentive.
Why don’t they just give out scratch off tickets. Prizes start at 2 million and your crew gets a cruise to scenic Fresno.
Some of the examples of runaway productions are justifiable for creative reasons. Grimm makes good use of its Portland locale to give it a unique character. How could Django Unchained have been filmed anywhere but the Deep South?
But then there are the annoying idiocies, such as attempts to make Vancouver stand in for San Francisco or Toronto for NYC. And it cuts both ways. I love Justified, but Southern California is never going to look like Kentucky.
For a billion dollar industry, $100million is ridiculously little. There’s a reason other states and countries are luring production away…it makes money and provides high wage jobs. CA needs to be more aggressive in protecting one of the few large industries that still produces a product in the state rather than designing it and then subcontracting or outsourcing in another region. Film/TV production won’t stay in CA or Los Angeles out of pure loyalty. Just like other dominate industries that have left the state before it, cost of production is a driving factor. There’s a reason several new primetime series are being shot in NYC rather than LA. It wasn’t that long ago that aerospace was a leading employer in Burbank, Santa Monica and other cities throughout the Southland. Sure there are many reasons it faded away, but one major component was other states such as GA, TX, CO luring away those jobs that still exist. Far too many other industries have also left the state; it’s time to stop being arrogant, apathetic or even ignorant and protect against run away production. Don’t bother putting propositions on our ballot for school funding and other budgetary matters. If there aren’t any jobs, we can’t pay the taxes to support these measures anyways. Sorry for the long comment…Nikki I hope I didn’t bore you.
As someone who is involved in the decision making process of where large budget features wind up, I look at this as a joke. $100M would not even cover the rebate on 4 large tentpole features in a city like London. If CA is to have any chance of luring back large budget features, they need to remove the $75M project cap and expand the program massively. The economic impact of these productions is completely unaddressed and hugely undervalued by the program.
While some in Sacramento may look at a tax credit like this as poorly executed corporate welfare, they are missing the forrest for the trees. I watch hundreds of millions of production dollars exit CA headed for cities who understand that trickle down economics really do work in our business and it makes me truly sad. I grew up in this business and watched it nurture a thriving middle class throughout the LA area. It is now dying a slow and unnecessarily painful death because our state government can’t pull it’s head out of it’s ass.