[1]NOTE:
As provided in LFC policy, this report is intended only for use by the
standing finance committees of the legislature. The Legislative
Finance Committee does not assume responsibility for the accuracy of the information
in this report when used in any other situation.
Only the most recent
FIR version (in HTML & Adobe PDF formats) is available on the Legislative
Website. The Adobe PDF version includes
all attachments, whereas the HTML version does not. Previously issued FIRs and attachments may be obtained from the
LFC’s office in Suite 101 of the State Capitol Building North.
SPONSOR: |
Beffort |
DATE TYPED: |
01/30/02 |
HB |
|
||
SHORT TITLE: |
Film Production Tax Credit |
SB |
262 |
||||
|
ANALYST: |
Neel |
|||||
REVENUE
Estimated Revenue |
Subsequent Years
Impact |
Recurring or Non-Rec |
Fund Affected |
|
FY02 |
FY03 |
|
|
|
|
($3,203.0) |
|
Recurring |
General Fund |
|
$248.0 |
|
Recurring |
Local Governments |
(Parenthesis ( ) Indicate Revenue Decreases)
Duplicates/Conflicts with/Companion to/Relates
to HB-118, SB-88, and SB-273
LFC files
Taxation and Revenue Department (TRD)
SUMMARY
Synopsis
of Bill
Senate Bill 262 amends statute to create the
“film production tax credit” for up to 15 percent of the direct production expenditures
made in New Mexico attributable to the production of a film. SB 262 defines “direct production
expenditures” to include the cost of the story, wages and salaries for New
Mexico residents, the cost of set construction, the cost of photography and
related services, the cost of editing, rental of facilities and equipment, and
other direct costs of producing the film, among other expenses.
To be eligible the film company must:
·
Submit to the New Mexico film division (NMFD) of
the Economic Development Department information required by the division to
demonstrate that the film company has met all NMFD’s requirements; and
·
Apply to TRD on a prescribed application the
amount of direct production expenditures made in New Mexico.
The Film company may apply the film production
tax credit against personal income tax liability or corporate income tax
liability.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS
TRD’s assumptions for the fiscal impact are
as follows:
From FY 94 to 01 filmmakers
average annual expenditures related to production in New Mexico was
approximately $30.0 million. TRD
assumes that $15.0 million of the production costs will qualify under current
statute (Section 7-9-86 NMSA).
Provision included in SB 262 expand qualifying expenditures by an
additional $12.0 million
Current Statute (Section
7-9-86 NMSA) allows film production companies to deduct gross receipts tax
deduction, which TRD estimates is worth approximately 6% (average combined
state and local option gross receipts tax rate) of qualified production
costs. The proposed credit, under SB
262, is worth 15% of “direct production expenditures”. The proposed credit cannot be claimed on
expenditures for which the filmmaker has delivered a nontaxable transaction
certificate (NTTC) pursuant to 7-9-86. The definition of “direct production
expenditures” contained in the bill for the most part includes all qualified
“production costs” in 7-9-86. However,
provisions in this bill allow many ancillary costs—which do not qualify for the
gross receipts deduction—to qualify for the credit. As a result, filmmakers can elect to either issue the NTTC for a
6% deduction, or claim the 15% credit for most qualifying expenditures. Logically, filmmakers will choose the
refundable credit.
TRD assumes 87% of
filmmakers’ direct production costs will qualify for the income tax
credit. The remaining 13% will be
eligible for the gross receipts deduction.
This split is based on the fact that definitions in the credit proposal
are, in some regards, slightly more restrictive than corresponding definitions
contained in 7-9-86. However, this
proposal allows several indirect production costs that are not currently
eligible for the existing gross receipts deduction, to qualify for the proposed
credit.
The fiscal impact represents
the net effect of the current gross receipts deduction and the incentives
provided by the proposed credit. The
more economically attractive 15% credit does not adversely affect local
government revenue sources. Therefore,
the expected shift from gross receipts deductions to credit claims will result
in a net positive fiscal impact for local governments.
The estimate assumes
no multiplier effects associated with increased filmmaking. Since the Department
does not have enough information about individual businesses to determine
whether a particular incentive is the key factor influencing the decision to
locate in the state, we assume the level of economic activity is unaffected by
the passage of any individual piece of legislation.
TECHNICAL ISSUES
TRD notes the following technical issues:
1. There are
several differences between the definitions contained in Section 7-9-86 and
this proposal. For the purposes of the gross receipts deduction, 7-9-86 defines
“production company” and this proposal uses the same definition to define “
film production company.” Section
7-9-86 defines “production costs”, and this bill defines “direct production
expenditure.” This bill restricts the
definition of “direct production expenditure” to include wages and salaries
only to New Mexico residents, 7-9-86 includes all wages and salaries. This proposal explicitly includes
photography in the definition of “direct production expenditure”, photography
is excluded from the definition of “production costs” in 7-9-86. This bill defines “film” to include only national advertising messages, 7-9-86
includes all advertising messages.
2. This bill
does make explicit that the tax credit is for “direct production expenditures” made
in New Mexico, (page 1, line 21) but it is not at all clear what that
means. Does it mean the payment
originates in New Mexico or accrues to the benefit of New Mexico residents?
This bill does restrict the definition of “direct production expenditure” to
include wages and salaries paid to New Mexico residents, as well as airfare and
insurance costs purchased through New Mexico-based firms. But this same
restriction is not extended to other types of expenditures that could go to
out-of-state vendors.
3.
The provision that the excess credit claimed over and above
the taxpayer’s liability shall be refunded violates the anti-donation clause
(Article IX, Section 14) of the New Mexico Constitution. The provisions have nothing to do with a refund of taxes, as money that has not
been paid over to the state cannot be refunded. This is nothing less than a direct payment for doing business in
New Mexico.
SN/ar
[1]Begin typing on the * in replace mode. Do not add or delete spaces.