Bipartisan bill offers a 20% federal credit on US film labor for shooting 75% of days at home

The credit is calculated on US labor, including post-production and visual effects work ^[2], so its value to a producer grows with payroll, whatever the size of the total budget. On a production carrying $10 million of qualified US compensation, the 20% base returns $2 million and the 30% ceiling returns $3 million ^[4]. Going from base to ceiling lifts the credit by half ^[1].

The 75% test is looser than it sounds. A feature or series can shoot up to a quarter of its principal photography days outside the country and still qualify, but past that share the federal credit is gone entirely ^[2]. Supporters point to the United Kingdom, Ireland and Canada as the places productions have gone ^[15]. A study commissioned by the Motion Picture Assn. counts at least 65 nations offering film and TV credits ^[10].

The bonuses show where Congress wants the rest of the money to land. Independents get 5 points, as do productions that put at least 30% of principal days in a rural qualified opportunity zone or a federally declared disaster area ^[3]. A further uplift goes to productions that film at least half their days and spend at least $10 million in qualified compensation in 10 or more states ^[4]. According to the Los Angeles Times, it is unclear how much of the new spending would reach California, since New York, New Jersey and Georgia already have crews and studios competing for the same work ^[12]. The paper also reported, attributing the view to unnamed industry experts, that stacking the federal credit on California's newly bolstered state incentives could give the state an edge ^[13].

The sponsors come from California, Texas, Georgia and South Carolina ^[7]. "It tells every country that has been outbidding us for American work that we are done losing," Rep. Laura Friedman said in a statement ^[14].

Then there is who pays. The eligibility test is a cost floor of more than $1 million and a share of shooting days ^[5], so a production already filming in Georgia qualifies on the same terms as one coming back from Canada ^[5]. The Treasury would pay on both. The article does not include a cost estimate for the credit.

The MPA study puts the gain at $125 billion of added US production spending and more than 143,000 jobs by 2035 ^[11], or at most about $874,000 of spending per job ^[3]. A trade group backing the incentive commissioned it ^[10].

It can go three ways. If the bill passes in this form, the productions sitting just under the 75% line are the cheapest to move, since a handful of rescheduled days decides whether any of their US payroll earns 20%. If the countries supporters name raise their own rates, the federal base buys less. If the bill stalls, the lift from President Trump's signal of support last month, after he met Jon Voight ^[9], will have been spent. "Now, we have the best opportunity in decades to get it done," Sen. Adam Schiff said ^[8].

I think the first budgets to change will be schedules and state choices inside productions already near the threshold. The MPA's case is larger: that 20% to 30% brings whole shows back. If, a year after passage, the flow of productions to the UK, Ireland and Canada that supporters cite has not slowed, the credit will mostly have paid for work that was already in the US ^[5].