Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
We have yet to write the regulations or consolidate and eliminate conflicts in the two main pieces of legislation passed in the 2010 session. To date there has been no opportunity for public comment and no rules have been adopted. We have been operating on opinion letters issued by NM Taxation and Revenue in response to requests from interested parties. This leads to confusion and the perception that certain clients are treated differently from others. While some have told me that the studios are not concerned with such matters as the payout, that is not what were hearing on the ground. There is still intense speculation on how much money a company can expect to receive and when the final payout will happen. It is possible to read into the law that, for a major motion picture, it could take almost 6 years for the final check, with a best case scenario of at least 4 years. On TV series, our most important clients, there could be a lag of 8 or more years if a pilot was picked up and did a run of 60 or more episodes. This policy is not practical and will be a major deterrent for television production. There are also questions about when the clock would start, what constitutes a taxable year or a tax year, and when the approval process is complete. There remain concerns about such mundane matters as an audit or what constitutes an employee and a vendor. We still have not addressed the definition of a local business and if that business needs at least one local employee (as SB44 requires). We (Local 480) have spent a considerable amount of time, effort, and money on consolidating SB44 and the two House bills that were put together in what has been called the compromise. There are surprisingly few conflicts and the amalgamated bill makes a great deal of sense. It gives us a really good jumping off point for a regulatory discussion. Since these bills were passed and signed, we have learned of the challenges they present and the loopholes that were opened. The loophole big enough to drive a grip truck through allows a vendors employees regardless of their domicile - to be considered New Mexicans for rebate purposes. This is contrary to both the spirit and, in our view, the letter of the law. We expect this to be addressed as a priority. While we are creating cleanup language, we should look to the confusing definitions of an LLC, actors withholding, and what exactly qualifies for the rebate. As long as these things are not clear, we risk losing business (and in fact probably have already). We also believe that, to honor the original legislative intent, a cost of living increase to the $50 million target needs to be incorporated; we would ask that it be back-dated to July 1, 2011. We also believe that strong projects for possible lenders would encourage a secondary market in advances against the rebate and we are urging that the cleanup bill include assignability language.
PAGE 1
PAGE 2
PAGE 3
EXPERIENCE MATTERS
Over the years we have built an inventory of not only crew and vendors, but of experience. It is no longer a surprise to see a movie crew in downtown Albuquerque or Santa Fe. Everyone from local businesses to law enforcement and government officials has become not just proficient but expert in dealing with everything from the permitting process to street closures and night shoots. This should be included in an overall inventory of what we offer that others cant. Such an inventory should also in some subtle way point out that we do not have the extremes of weather that states like Alaska and Louisiana have. Equipment doesnt need to be shipped in as it would in Mississippi or Oklahoma. Its easier to shoot here than in downtown Atlanta, Philadelphia, or Boston. If we eliminate shows that require large ships or oceans, its hard to think of a state that has a rebate such as ours that can double for so many other places. We have successfully shot everything from Afghanistan to Africa, New York to Nebraska. These are all part of our inventory and this is a good time for us to put that inventory together. I am happy to put our crew roster and experience against any other state. In fact, on any given day New Mexicans are crewing and keying multiple pictures nationwide. As I write this, a 480 gaffer is handling a major motion picture in Pittsburgh and there are dozens of NM members in NY, NJ, CT, and PA. Our members are becoming familiar faces to the flight crews between New Orleans and Albuquerque. Several have taken great offers and moved to CA, OR, and even Kuwait we hope they will come home should we experience a surge, as its hard to get the New Mexico sky out of your system. I believe that our soundstages and equipment packages are as good as any outside of CA or NY. Im not sure that this hasnt been forgotten, particularly by some of the large pictures who attempt to shoot in other locales just to find out its a lot more expensive and difficult -- no matter how much due diligence they believe they have done its still not comparable with real world experience on the ground. Getting the word out is a task for those of us in the industry, with the assistance of the state film office. We should embark on it immediately.
PAGE 4
PAGE 5
WE NEED TO BE SEEN
We must give regular and predictable opportunities for New Mexico film makers to display what they have and monetize their content. There are many platforms where independents can post their product these days. To my knowledge none of them are based in NM. We need one supersite where NM-made content can be either rented or purchased. This would include webisodes, shorts, full length motion pictures, music, documentaries, everything. Perhaps a site that could be administered by a third party such as Amazon or ITunes might be practical in the future, but for now I would suggest one of the schools take it as its task. Once the site is established we can talk about the fact that we will vigorously enforce copyright, etc., to increase participation. I would suggest we support monthly film festivals spread across the state. This would give film makers predictability in knowing when they could show their films and could provide support to some of the existing festivals by guaranteeing them at least some regular income (by the way this is not a new idea; Grubb Graebner has been working on this for a while). Each festival can play off others with shared publicity, shared ticketing and passes. State and local lodgers tax funding could be sought to help build a sustainable cottage industry. It would also revive the festival business in places like Taos and create a new industry in places like Silver City or Carlsbad. Festivals would be encouraged to have a theme -- perhaps a labor festival in Silver (one that I would happily support) -- and guarantee a certain number of spots for NM filmmakers. One large overall sponsor like a foundation or national company could be sought. I could see this being a project that the Gas Co of NM or PNM could get behind. Getting into your first festival is often the hardest; we can make sure there are opportunities to do so. We need to create a digital platform for a regional theatrical release model. There are many independent theaters all over the state. If we go into West Texas, Colorado, Utah and Arizona, we can put together a substantial number of theaters where a movie could secure a theatrical release and the benefits that come with it such as a lower priced union contract. We could take this one step further by having a made in NM slot at every Red Box in the state and at least move some DVDs out there to kick start sales. There is a great deal of legitimacy to a picture released in multiple platforms; this would be a way to create opportunities for those platforms.
PAGE 6
PAGE 7
KNOWLEDGE IS POWER
In addition to my previous discussion of training, I believe that we need to make a strong statement as an industry that we support the continuation of film training in our high schools and in our two and four year colleges. As an industry we can integrate ourselves more thoroughly into the process by expanding the opportunities for these students to receive meaningful opportunities on sets. Im not a big believer in using interns, especially when they displace a paid position. I think its very unfortunate when a picture company can afford to pay someone and they choose not to simply because there is an intern available. That does not mean that we shouldnt put interns on projects but we should look to tailoring opportunities to fit both production and educational needs. Alan Trever and Roswell have done very well at providing paid internships on commercial projects, both motion picture and television. That template could work and if modifications have to be made we should be prepared to work with the schools to provide the legal and practical advice on how to do so. In the high schools I find that competitions with cash or product prizes work very well. Colorado ran a contest for videos to promote that state with cash prizes; I see no reason why we couldnt do the same. Municipalities and other governmental entities could do so on a smaller scale. This is really just a matter of sitting down and working out logistics. A well-trained crew base is a huge asset. CNMs push to establish a repository of all our collected works will be an invaluable tool to highlight that experience. If we are to continue to provide meaningful incentives to out of state hires we should not only put severe restrictions on the practice but there should be a requirement that a New Mexican is hired to shadow or train for that position. The highly successful FCAP program provides 50% of wages for that trainee plus a 25% rebate so a picture company seeking reimbursement for an out of state hire because there is no local hire available should not find it a burden to pay for that additional trainee position. Its a compromise that allows us to keep some of the existing practice and eliminates the rationale of no local availability in the long run.
PAGE 8
PAGE 9
PAGE 10
DONT PANIC
Coming back to the incentives, which kick-started what was a moribund industry in the early years of this century, we need another big incentive and I believe it should be tied to infrastructure. As Lone Ranger clearly showed, we need an all weather western set in the south, and I think that if we want to continually attract large pictures we need to give them what they most want ( in addition to the incentives) and that is cheap or free infrastructure. It is not practical to assume that we can go back and ask for any enhancement that costs money from the legislature. The corollary of this is that the legislature is inclined to leave us alone (with the possible exception of a couple of outliers) if we can live within our $50 million floating with the cost of living increase and -- I would argue -- a strong exemption for television. There are numerous resources including municipal bonding and IRBs available and NM has some innovative initiatives we can draft to fit with our business. We will miss the opportunity to enhance our instate infrastructure using SB44 if the language is not strengthened and clarified. If it is, it will be our own fault if we do not take advantage of the opportunities presented. We also need to look at non incentive opportunities like a PBS license for the northern part of the state to help create long term jobs and fund native film makers. Internet and crowd source funding based around new federal regulations are about to kick in. NM should be a leader and not left behind. After all, we reinvented this business in the late 90s and early 00s; we need to do it again now. To sum up..DONT PANIC! We have a lot of things that are right, and what is wrong can be fixed. New Mexico will continue to be a film center as it has for over a hundred years.
PAGE 11
PAGE 12