Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
Seven Ft / Special to the Sun
Crews film a scene from the foreign film “The Gambler” at the Plaza in downtown Las Vegas.
Thursday, Feb. 21, 2013 | 6:10 p.m.
Senator Aaron Ford of the 11th (2013) Nevada Senatorial District.
Sen. Ben Kieckhefer
Sun archives
- Anger left in wake of film tax bill’s demise (6-11-2011)
- Assembly movie bill in danger of hitting cutting room floor (5-12-2011)
- What would lure Hollywood to Las Vegas? (4-20-2011)
- Successful Hollywood movies continue to sell Las Vegas (9-3-2010)
- No lingering 'Hangover' headache (12-19-2009)
- 'Hangover' brings new customers, campaign to Caesars (6-27-2009)
- Commission gives blessing for 80-acre movie compound (6-4-2009)
- Film industry gets top billing at economy planning summit (3-28-2002)
- Hollywood crews are busy filming at old LV cold storage warehouse (2-4-2000)
- Film industry strategy for LV questioned (8-1-1999)
A Senate Democratic bill to give tax credits to lure the film industry to Nevada has raised questions from Republicans that it might result in less revenue for public schools and local governments.
Sen. Aaron Ford's bill drew wide support from labor and economic development agencies, as he testified it would bring new jobs to the state from the movie and television industries.
But Sen. Ben Kieckhefer, R-Reno, said he was worried that it would affect the property taxes going to local government and “create a liability for local governments.”
SB165 would allow the state to offer up to $50 million a year in tax credits to movie and television producers who bring their units to Nevada for filming. Ford, D-Las Vegas, said the television program “Vegas” was filmed in New Mexico, which offers such a tax incentive.
He testified to the Senate Taxation Committee on Thursday that Louisiana was also attracting filmmakers with its tax credits.
Supporters of the bill said it would create new jobs, car rentals, food purchases and motel and hotel occupancy. The additional tax revenue would more than offset the money lost through tax credits.
If a production company did not use all of its tax credits, it could sell them to a Nevada firm. And that raised the concern of Senate Minority Leader Michael Roberson, R-Las Vegas, who questioned the transfer to another Nevada business such as a casino. Roberson, a co-sponsor of the bill, said he supports the concept but wanted more details.
He also referred to prior testimony of Steve Hill, director of the state Office of Economic Development who favored putting money in other development efforts.
Roberson said his impression from the Hill testimony is that states gave away too much for what they received in return.
Ford said he had talked with Hill who favored the concept, but Hill was concerned about the financial consequences. Ford said that states that offered a tax credit of 20 percent or below were not successful in their programs
Carole Villardo of the Nevada Taxpayers Association urged the committee to examine all the tax exemption bills that are being considered before acting on one for the movie industry.
The tax credit would not be available for filming a sporting event, political advertisement or pornography.
A second bill by the Democratic leadership to provide tax incentives to businesses that hire unemployed workers got a more favorable reaction.
Sen. Debbie Smith, D-Sparks, said the basic concept is to give employers a break on their payroll tax if they hire a worker who has been jobless for six months or more.
“We need to be innovative to bring down the 10.2 percent unemployment,” she told the committee.
SB172 would allow a business to avoid paying the modified business tax on the salary of the unemployed worker for a year and then pay only 50 percent of the tax for another three years.
In his message to the Legislature, Gov. Brian Sandoval proposed a $25 million tax break on the payroll tax.
Smith said the bill does not allow an employer to fire a worker and then hire a replacement to avoid the tax. Under questioning, she said she would have to look at how seasonal workers would be treated.
The bill gained support from builders, labor and other employer groups.
The committee did not take action on the bills.
Tax incentives like this don't work regardless if it for motion pictures, television or sports. Tax payers will take in the shorts again. Nevada has a great tax policy, where costs are half of what California charges. If you want the Strip and everything it brings come here if not go to New Mexico and have a good time. Taxpayers can find something else to spend their hard earned $50 million on.
mar100 wrong.
How much does Las Vegas alone spend on advertising the city? A lot.
Since the State relies on tourism as the prime form of bringing people into the State, any promotion of the State is... key to bringing people into the State.
50 million isn't that much money. Well, maybe it is to you and me. But most major films cost over 50 million to make. Tax breaks bring production companies in, which in turn, spend money, which in turn in put back into the State.
"You have to spend money to make money."
"A second bill by the Democratic leadership to provide tax incentives to businesses that hire unemployed workers got a more favorable reaction."
Hire unemployed workers? That's weird. So, if someone switches jobs, and the person would have to be honest about it, then no tax break I'm guessing?
@jimmyk is totally right! And how come the vaulted Chamber of Commerce isn't backing this all the way to promote the place?? Too much conflict of interest and we're seeing where a politician's bread is buttered. This is an incentive IN THE CITY LIMITS of Las Vegas, NOT strictly Clark County. Watch those in the pocket of the casinos vote against it.
That Steve Hill favors putting the money somewhere else tells me that this is not about the value of tax incentives for the film industry.
Ben Kieckhefer is right to be concerned about the affect of tax incentives on local governments. His own hometown and county are knee-deep in local government liabilities resulting from the failure of tax incentives for the private sector.
Carole Villardo makes an important point. An overview of all the exemptions being considered is vital, not only for sound fiscal scrutiny, but for the sake of transparency. Further, to accurately reflect the value of various incentives and abatements, the numbers must be grossed up.
There is NO REASON to give incentives to the film industry in Nevada. With no income tax, directors and starts like to claim Nevada residency. Filming here helps them with that. The film industry pays negligible taxes to start with. Does anyone believe that Dpt of Tax has access to accurate records of the equipment, supplies, costumes purchased for filming here--to see if correct tax treatment was paid? Even so, the most they'd be paying doesn't come near to covering the additional costs to Metro for closing streets.
This shows just how schizophrenic Dumbocrats really are. On the one hand, they say raising taxes on the "rich," businesses or increasing the minimum wage will not affect job growth. On the other, they say tax "incentives" are needed to grow jobs. They are all as screwy as Broooks. The main difference is his craziness is open for all to see. With Dumbocrats such as Ford, one must read between the lines. No tax breaks; no subsidies; no picking winners and losers.
@Roslenda - Arrr. Claim NV residency just to make a film here? That is kind of drastic. Even if they choose to make Nevada there place or residency, they would have to get a Drivers License, pay the incredible about of money to register a vehicle, live here, etc. Do you have stats that back up the statement: "The film industry pays negligible taxes to start with."? AND I ASK YOU... does the Dpt of Tax have access to ANY BUSINESSES records to make sure they are paying the right tax? So, the shoe store down the block provides the Dpt of Tax records of all the shoes they have in inventory to they can be taxed correctly? If you are talking sales tax, then that is paid when the movie is seen at the theater.
@lvfacts101 - Hey, FYI... Las Vegas is a tourist town. Tourist towns rely on a think called PUBLICITY which in turn brings more people into town. Film making is a HUGE form of publicity which in turn, brings more people into town. It's a pretty basic concept. Pawn Stars? American Restoration? The Hangover? These productions had nothing to do with people wanting to come to LV. All the shows on the strip are technically 'productions'. In your logic they have nothing to do with bringing more people into town?
"No tax breaks; no subsidies; no picking winners and losers." - Obviously, you've hit your head on the toilet and think you are in Utopia where everyone is the same and no one is favored, wait isn't that Socialism... where everyone is the same. You sound like a Dumbocrat yourself.
I nominate this as the Oscar Bonehead Bill of this session.
There is something really upside down when a state as poor and broke as this one is gives away untold amounts of money to "industries" which are already rich.
How many teachers, peace officers, or firefighters can we get for the $50,000,000 price of what is proposed?
The number one reason for tax credit incentives is to create local jobs. Fact is film producers already bring 75% if not 100% of their own production crew from LA.