By MILLIE TAKAKI
Two pieces of proposed legislation that would give a tax break to producers who shoot TV and/or film projects in California have been introduced in the State Assembly. A third bill designed to make coastal locations more accessible to producers is also being unveiled.
Assemblyman Scott Wildman (D-Los Angeles) has authored a measure that would establish a 10% tax credit for labor costs when producers maintain all production operations within California. Acknowledging that this language could prove problematic for projects that require some additional pickup filming elsewhere, Wildman said that the bill would probably be tinkered with further. The important point, he noted, is that the proposal represents a starting point to help address serious concern over runaway production, particularly loss of filming business to Canada which offers an extensive package of financial incentives. Canadas success can also largely be attributed to a favorable exchange rate, translating into significantly increased buying power for the U.S. dollar.
Meanwhile, Assemblywoman Sheila Kuehl (D-Santa Monica) has introed a piece of legislation that too would provide a refundable tax credit for a portion of labor costs on certain jobs produced in California. Full details of this proposal werent available as SHOOT went to press but in broad strokes, the legislation-Assembly Bill 484-will offer the tax credit to productions shot in California with budgets less than $5 million. This could equate to savings for spot producers as well as independent filmmakers and studios.
Kuehl chairs the Assembly Select Committee on Entertainment and the Arts which back in December held a day-long hearing in Hollywood on runaway production (SHOOT, 12/18/98, p. 7). During that hearing, testimony from producers as well as representatives from labor unions and industry support services identified runaway production as a problem which has had a significantly negative financial impact on them. According to testimony, the biggest erosion has come in the lower budgeted productions such as TV movies of the week. Kuehls office cites an estimate that Californias economy lost $1.2 billion due to runaway production between 96 and 97.
Kuehl is also pushing a second, earlier alluded-to bill that eases restrictions on temporary set construction in Californias coastal zones. Some testimony at the runaway hearing contended that its become difficult to shoot along certain portions of the states coast. Kuehl hopes to expedite the permit process-while protecting the appeal rights of residents-for projects seeking to film on coastal locations.
At press time, the Association of Independent Commercial Producers was assessing the three runaway bills. As earlier reported, concern over loss of filming to other countries is not confined to California. Nationally, the runaway production issue has prompted serious discussion about the need to establish a federal film commission in the U.S. (SHOOT, 2/26, p. 1).
Google Opens Its Defense In Antitrust Case Alleging Monopoly Over Online Ad Technology
Google opened its defense against allegations that it holds an illegal monopoly on online advertising technology Friday with witness testimony saying the industry is vastly more complex and competitive than portrayed by the federal government.
"The industry has been exceptionally fluid over the last 18 years," said Scott Sheffer, a vice president for global partnerships at Google, the company's first witness at its antitrust trial in federal court in Alexandria.
The Justice Department and a coalition of states contend that Google built and maintained an illegal monopoly over the technology that facilitates the buying and selling of online ads seen by consumers.
Google counters that the government's case improperly focuses on a narrow type of online ads — essentially the rectangular ones that appear on the top and on the right-hand side of a webpage. In its opening statement, Google's lawyers said the Supreme Court has warned judges against taking action when dealing with rapidly emerging technology like what Sheffer described because of the risk of error or unintended consequences.
Google says defining the market so narrowly ignores the competition it faces from social media companies, Amazon, streaming TV providers and others who offer advertisers the means to reach online consumers.
Justice Department lawyers called witnesses to testify for two weeks before resting their case Friday afternoon, detailing the ways that automated ad exchanges conduct auctions in a matter of milliseconds to determine which ads are placed in front of which consumers and how much they cost.
The department contends the auctions are finessed in subtle ways that benefit Google to the exclusion of would-be competitors and in ways that prevent... Read More