Notifications
Clear all

STARS Act

 
Petra
(@Petra)
Advanced Member

I am very interested in what all of you think about the possibility of the Senate revamping the STARS Act to make film/TV/still production packages more attractive to production companies stateside. Obviously the original bill is not working and just curious if anyone has any insight on the matter….

VI Daily News Article - Senate to consider revamped STARS Act

St Thomas Source Article - Senate Changing the STARS Act

Quote
Topic starter Posted : November 15, 2014 6:40 am
ms411
(@ms411)
Expert

Waste of time.

ReplyQuote
Posted : November 15, 2014 8:35 am
STXBob
(@STXBob)
Trusted Member

Because...?

ReplyQuote
Posted : November 15, 2014 10:57 am
OldTart
(@the-oldtart)
Expert

If the bill as originally enacted in 2011 isn't as attractive to filmmakers as those in comparable jurisdictions and has resulted in the territory missing out on revenue, then it makes sense to rework the bill to make us more competitive. Why is that "a waste of time"?

ReplyQuote
Posted : November 15, 2014 12:50 pm
Spartygrad95
(@Spartygrad95)
Trusted Member

If the bill as originally enacted in 2011 isn't as attractive to filmmakers as those in comparable jurisdictions and has resulted in the territory missing out on revenue, then it makes sense to rework the bill to make us more competitive. Why is that "a waste of time"?

Because she said so?

ReplyQuote
Posted : November 15, 2014 12:54 pm
ms411
(@ms411)
Expert

One reason.

http://touch.latimes.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-81222206/

ReplyQuote
Posted : November 15, 2014 2:55 pm
OldTart
(@the-oldtart)
Expert

Really not a viable argument to compare full-scale movie productions with what we have to offer here and the counter-argument in this article is compelling. The current bill was only enacted in 2011, a few year's experience has apparently demonstrated that we can maybe be more competitive to attract more such business and I see no reason to dismiss it out of hand without even looking at the figures.

It's clear from outside sources that the recent filming of even one small section of, "The Amazing Race" prompted many to take a closer look at the USVI as a vacation destination.

ReplyQuote
Posted : November 15, 2014 3:31 pm
Petra
(@Petra)
Advanced Member

This type of legislation really helped Louisiana in the Katrina aftermath. I was just wondering that if the Senate approves a bill to provide attractive tax breaks coupled with the fact that the territory is very versatile and can offer more than just beach backdrops, it could bring in more great projects in film & TV. Looks like there have been some lucrative projects recently in both film & reality TV.

Plus, if the bill requires 20% of the crew to be residents, there can be a building process for local production companies and attractive to stateside professionals to relocate here as well. The proposed bill also would require talking to local students which can add to the study of arts and business in the territory. Anyway, hoping this is something the Senate will still consider but looks like there hasn't been much talk of this since August.

ReplyQuote
Topic starter Posted : November 15, 2014 3:40 pm
ms411
(@ms411)
Expert

The VI is more expensive than Louisiana. The southern states are attracting film biz because of economy and tax incentives.

I would rather see time spent on attracting year round permanent jobs.

ReplyQuote
Posted : November 15, 2014 4:30 pm
Spartygrad95
(@Spartygrad95)
Trusted Member

The VI is more expensive than Louisiana. The southern states are attracting film biz because of economy and tax incentives.

I would rather see time spent on attracting year round permanent jobs.

Maybe General Motors will build an assembly plant here? Or Samsung will start production here? I guess I haven't been here long enough to have an opinion but 18 sq miles of uneven rock in a beautiful environment doesn't lend itself to a manufacturing base do I don't see why attracting something other than tourists is a bad idea. Worked in Detroit fairly well

ReplyQuote
Posted : November 15, 2014 6:53 pm
LiquidFluoride
(@LiquidFluoride)
Trusted Member

Waste of time.

Alaska made it it basically free to film, Alaskan tourism saw a 28% increase from this.

If you think it's a waste of time you're not considering all t he angles.

ReplyQuote
Posted : November 16, 2014 11:03 pm
ms411
(@ms411)
Expert

Tourism doesn't support the same type of jobs as filming so please post links that say how much revenue after tax breaks was generated in Alaska. In the meantime I'll Google specific to Alaska, because that state was not mentioned when I did a Google search on filming tax incentives.

Most tax incentives cost governments a hefty surcharge for the jobs they create and are used to play one location against another. The Diageo deal is a local example, and an article I referenced earlier said states with huge filming subsidies end up paying huge premiums for the jobs created.

Did we offer incentives to the recent film projects like "Amazing Race?" I don't remember seeing a mention of any, but if we did, the numbers should have been disclosed.

Tourism is a very poor economic engine unless you're an exclusive, expensive, luxury destination that willingly pays living wages. Most tourism jobs are a dollar or 2 above minimum wage.

It's expensive to live in the VI and we need better jobs.

ReplyQuote
Posted : November 17, 2014 1:43 am
OldTart
(@the-oldtart)
Expert

Did we offer incentives to the recent film projects like "Amazing Race?" I don't remember seeing a mention of any, but if we did, the numbers should have been disclosed.

Maybe you should check out this very informative website which explains how it works - and if you need specifics you could contact them directly:

http://www.filmusvi.com/

ReplyQuote
Posted : November 18, 2014 10:15 am
Close Menu