Film subsidy advocates should stop exaggerating
Unfortunately, they continue to do so by overstating the amount of money being spent in Alaska and exaggerating the economic impact of the subsidy program.
There is a column in the Anchorage Daily News by the head of the Anchorage Economic Development Corp. that continues this trend.
In it, he says: "Only money that film companies spend in Alaska is eligible for the tax credit and that spending has jumped from about $745,000 in 2010 to more than $54 million to date in 2012."
Most of the spending that qualifies for the tax credit takes the form of wages paid to movie stars, directors, producers and executives who live Outside. Most of the $54 million was not actually spent in Alaska, but paid to people who live Outside. It passed over the Alaska economy without a trace.
I think the program should continue, but it needs to be modified to increase the economic benefits to Alaska.
I think the program should continue, but it needs to be modified to increase the economic benefits to Alaska.
The only difference is they will finish the year with a profit instead of a deficit!
"I think the program should continue, but it needs to be modified to increase the economic benefits to Alaska."
And HOW do you think it should be modified?