Aussie taxpayer funded American superheroics???

[Drifter]

George (Mad Max) Miller has been signed to direct the latest comic book adaptation Justice League Mortal (based on the DC comic Justice League of America). As Superman Returns was filmed in Sydney studios, it seems appropriate.

However, the film is obviously quintessentially Americana. But, if filmed in Australia it could qualify for the new Aussie govt. producer's rebate, whereby the producer of any Australian film gets back 40% of the budget, paid back by the govt. This is seen as a way of encouraging Aussie film. However, Justice League Mortal has a budget of $240 million: that means if it is filmed here and counts as an Australian film, the government will be paying some $80 million of Aussie taxpayer money to the Hollywood producers before the film is even released. Miller says he wants to film it in Oz to give a high-profile exposure to the film industry here, but if declined the rebate will go to Canada and film there.

What's your take on this?

[MeanDean]

I got this far and saw the potential pitfall

...if filmed in Australia it could qualify for the new Aussie govt. producer's rebate, whereby the producer of any Australian film gets back 40% of the budget, paid back by the govt. ...
I don't know... I actually kind of wonder what your take on this is Drifter. I'm clueless. I know economics of modern film in Australia isn't part of the specialty, but is there any argument about this, like what the two sides are saying? Presumably this is supposed to somehow bring in money, but 40% is a lot of money to even try to break even on. Why was it even done it the first place without putting in specification about who is eligible for the cash back I wonder...

[femme fatale]

Miller says he wants to film it in Oz to give a high-profile exposure to the film industry here, but if declined the rebate will go to Canada and film there.

What's your take on this?

Sounds like blackmail...or coercion of some sort...I mean, how will filming in Canada be of any benefit over filming in Australia, even without the rebate? Bluff and blackmail, that's what I'm thinking from your description of it. pfft.

I also think the government needs to tighten the criteria for this rebate.

[Groggypoo]

how much of that $240 million would go towards paying for australian things and services? like, anything at all close to 40%?

[Leroy Peterson]

Just cause a movie is filmed in Aus, does that make it an Aus movie??
Heaps of movies have been filmed here but still classified as foreign films. Like The Matrix

[MeanDean]

Yeah like The Fifth Element for example. It's a French Director and Producer I think, but it has American and Brittish actors, but was filmed part in Egypt, part in Outer Space, and the majority of it was filmed in the future.

[Lizard Drinkin]

It's far from cut-and-dried. Sure, the taxpayer helps out a big-budget Hollywood production, but in doing so the local industry remains not only viable, but also highly-skilled. Without highly-skilled practitioners in a viable local industry, there's no way a truly "Australian" film of any enduring quality will be produced any time soon. It's a matter of cross-subsidy: compromising on local content with big-ticket productions so you can fund and, most importantly, resource local productions concurrently. With the Australian dollar so high (negating the benefits of a skilled yet cheap labour force for the US), we would lose this work without the government subsidy, which could only hurt the local industry and, accordingly, local product.

In effect, it's much the same as any other manufacturing sector. For example, the government offers millions in recurrent subsidies in an attempt to keep car manufacturing viable in this country. The benefits are a working population exercising and expanding their knowledge base and business links with companies and investors from countries much larger than us and accordingly able to exercise far greater economies of scale than Australia ever could with its meagre population.

[femme fatale]

I can see your point, Lizard, but it just seems like an opportunity ripe for exploitation by those who don't give a toot about our local industry but are more concerned with saving big dollars and increasing their profit margin. "If we don't get the rebate we're gonna do it in Canada" Why? Does Canada offer a rebate? No, it's self-serving manipulation.

[Lizard Drinkin]

I can see your point, Lizard, but it just seems like an opportunity ripe for exploitation by those who don't give a toot about our local industry but are more concerned with saving big dollars and increasing their profit margin. "If we don't get the rebate we're gonna do it in Canada" Why? Does Canada offer a rebate? No, it's self-serving manipulation.
But that's the point - all business is basically just exploitation (a term used derisively, but can also be pretty neutral). If you want to attract business, then you offer something to exploit, such as a cheap labour force, or a subsidy. Nobody's asking the US companies to consider supporting our industry - we're asking the US companies to do business here for their own benefit, which has the fortunate flow-on of supporting our industry. Why else would they even consider it? The goodness of their hearts?

[femme fatale]

Why else would they even consider it? The goodness of their hearts?

Of course not, that's my point. I guess it boils down to just how much any flow on effect in this particular instance, if it exists, is worth, and whether we'd be getting value for our money.

[Lizard Drinkin]

Of course not, that's my point. I guess it boils down to just how much any flow on effect in this particular instance, if it exists, is worth, and whether we'd be getting value for our money.
That's a balancing act the government has to get right, with the white noise of information made available to them through the various departments supporting the ministers. As I said, it's not cut-and-dried, so making any judgement on the scant information available to us thus far is basically a knee-jerk reaction on our part.

Flow-on benefit definitely exists, it's a question of exactly how much return on the investment can be expected.

[femme fatale]

Okay.

What are the eligibility criteria? For example, labour - local over cheap imported, and skilled technicians - ours or theirs...things like that?

[Lizard Drinkin]

Okay.

What are the eligibility criteria? For example, labour - local over cheap imported, and skilled technicians - ours or theirs...things like that?
I really don't know - sounds reasonable. Ministries have ways of expediting matters, but I'm sure any public servant worth their salt would wrap the whole thing up in as much red tape as they can get their salty little hands on.

The hard bit would be the 'unquantifiables' - like total workforce skill acquisition, mitigation of the 'brain drain' to the US of our best workers, etc etc. All really important, and almost impossible to measure in terms of actual value.