P oliticians are desperate to film movies and shows in their states. To make it happen, they’re tossing billions of taxpayer dollars to Hollywood producers through so-called film incentive programs. Michigan is the most recent state to consider this strategy, but the price of admission isn’t worth paying. In fact, everywhere taxpayers have been forced to pay it, the reviews are negative from everyone but the Hollywood producers themselves.
Michigan is on the verge of bringing back a film incentive program that died in 2015. Under bills currently before the state legislature, taxpayers would cover up to 30 percent of a film’s expenses. The legislation would authorize paying more than $2 billion to Hollywood. If that sounds especially generous, that’s because it is. Some 35 states already have similar subsidy programs, with film producers typically receiving a credit of between 5 and 40 percent of a production’s total cost. Michigan would be at the upper end, in a sign of how desperately politicians want big-name movies filmed in state.
For the politicians, subsidizing movie producers seems like a no-brainer. They can claim that they’re showing off their state, boosting local pride when the state gets a special nod in the credits. And if a movie star is seen around town, politicians can post pictures on social media, taking credit for giving the people a show.
Most of all, lawmakers want to show that they’re doing something about the economy. Subsidizing movies and television shows is a very visible way to say, “I’m investing in local jobs.” But they’re not. Virtually every analysis concludes that film subsidies are wasteful and ineffective, doing nothing for state economies. Michigan should know this better than most states. From 2008 10 2015, it spent $500 million on film incentives for a minuscule boost in jobs — jobs that disappeared when the state stopped its subsidies.
Meanwhile, Michigan didn’t even see any broader job creation in surrounding industries. As one noted economist put it, “any gains do not spill over into the overall economy.” In other words, film subsidies fail to achieve their most important goal.
It makes sense. When lawmakers throw taxpayer money at movie producers, they’re spending funds that could have gone toward roads, schools, or a thousand and one other pressing local needs. Investing directly in the state — not subsidizing Hollywood producers — is a far better way to boost the economy. So is giving that money back to local citizens and job creators. Tax cuts for all is far more effective than tax credits for a lucky few.
It’s time for taxpayers to start demanding answers from the lawmakers who back film incentives. Are subsidies something that will help the state? No. Should we really take money from working families and give it to big business? No. Why are we giving money to Hollywood instead of spending it close to home? No lawmaker wants to answer that question.
Taxpayers should demand better of red and blue lawmakers alike, because this issue defies partisan narratives. In every state that subsidizes movie producers, including Michigan, members of both parties gladly waste taxpayer dollars. Look at Georgia, where Republicans and Democrats have united to spend more than $1 billion this year on film subsidies — the highest total in the nation. To Georgia’s lawmakers, film subsidies are a bigger funding priority than public parks.
Michigan lawmakers have their priorities wrong, too. But it’s not too late for them — or the leaders in any other state — to put taxpayers ahead of Hollywood producers. Let Hollywood earn its money the old-fashioned way: by making movies people pay to watch, instead of co-opting taxpayers into covering their costs.