California has already had a 20% Scoring Tax Incentive for years.
It failed to bring in new recording.
Why would adding a measly additional 5% break yield a different result?
Switching a film to AFM recording typically adds HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS to MILLIONS OF DOLLARS of Secondary Market Residuals Obligations.
Why would anyone take on HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS/MILLIONS OF DOLLARS to save a lousy $5k-$37.k of additional tax credits on an upfront music costs?
There is no need to record locally to receive California Tax Credits for production under this bill.
The Scoring Credits are ONLY FOR SCORING!
The "full tax credits" are ONLY ABOUT getting the additional 5% Scoring Credit which would be valued at between $5k-$37.5k on recording budgets $100k-$750k.
Why would anyone think "sweetening the pot" by 5% (5k-$37.5 for music budgets $100k-$750k) would lead to a more successful California Tax Incentive program than the one that has already failed for years?
