Film Incentives: A Sad Case of How Government Hurts Art

I’m a film major. As you might expect, I like to make films. The digital age has allowed for an ease of film making that previous generations couldn’t have imagined. This ease has also been met with lower costs. Feature films are becoming cheaper and cheaper to produce, so that a movie that might have cost in the millions just a decade ago, can be made for $100,000 or less today. With these lower costs in mind, it amazes me that members of my community are still asking the government to help fund their projects.

In particular, I speak of those in favor of Texas’ film incentive program. So what is a film incentive program? Good question. If you’re not involved in politics or the film industry, there’s a good chance you that haven’t heard about this entity. Basically, an incentives program is set up by the government to help filmmakers bear the cost of production. The government supposedly benefits via increased in-state business. Film incentive programs have popped up all over the United States (at least twenty states have them on the books) and the world, and at this point, there doesn’t seem to be an end in sight. Texas has an incentive program of its own, which pays qualifying productions 5% of the production costs (or 6.25%, if an “underused” area of Texas is utilized as a location). In other words, if a production costing $100,000 qualifies, it could receive as much as $6,250 from the state of Texas.

To some, this program might sound costly and absurd. To others, it might sound generous. Yet still, others (most of the film community in Texas) find this incentives program too small and underfunded. Currently, the state spends around 20 million dollars on the program, but most filmmakers would love to see this figure tripled and incentive percentages increased. Why, you might ask? Because these filmmakers have noticed that New Mexico and Louisiana, with their film incentives of 25%, are taking business away from the state of Texas. To be sure, the effects of these incentives programs have been devastating in some respects. Productions that might have otherwise shot in Texas move operations to a state (or country) that offers a bigger rebate. Take, for instance, the case of Ghost Rider, an admittedly awful film, but one that has scenes that take place in Texas. In this case, the filmmakers actually shot their Texas footage in Australia, because Australia has a better incentives program (a whopping 40% rebate for feature production).

Currently, legislation is being considered to increase film incentives. The legislation is receiving bi-partisan support, and is likely to pass. However, even if this legislation does pass, the Texas film industry will still be competing with other states and countries, whose incentives are abnormally large. So what’s the solution to this conundrum? My answer may be rather unpopular with my filmmaker friends, but I believe we must get rid of film incentives altogether (not just in Texas, but everywhere). This will be a difficult, if not impossible, objective to achieve, but it is a necessary objective. The government has no business meddling in the film industry. For that matter, the government has no business meddling in any industry (an obvious notion for any libertarian). Under current conditions, film incentives will only continue to rise, as states seek to one up each other, in order to bring home the supposed bacon. Government intervention can only breed more government intervention.

Until all film incentives are repealed, movies and people will suffer. We’ll be forced to watch movies that take place in Texas, but just happen to be shot in Australia. Additionally, we’ll have to watch local film communities (like Austin’s) diminish under the burden of government. It used to be that a filmmaker shot a film in a location that best suited the story and budget. Now a filmmaker selects a location for the rebate check. Only government could create such a screwy situation.