Touted Benefits of the Film Tax Credit Program Are Misleading

On Wednesday, March 18, the House Committee on Economic Development and Business Attraction and Retention held a hearing on House Bill 803 (HB 803), which would reinstate the film tax credit program. This is the same program that granted a $2.36 million tax credit to the producers of Gone Girl. Michael Rathbone and I submitted testimony against the reauthorization of the film tax credit program. Luckily, Michael was able to testify before the committee. He was the only person to testify against this wasteful policy proposal.

Since news articles reporting on the hearing only highlighted the arguments of those in support of HB 803, I’ll reiterate what analysts at the Show-Me Institute have written so many times before: Film tax credits are bad public policy!

filmcrewSupporters of the program argue that the film tax credits bring immense economic benefits to the state. However, the problem with this argument is that it doesn’t look at the costs of the program along with its benefits. While supporters spout claims that “Gone Girl brought in $7 million into the economy,” the reality is the program’s return on investment (tax dollars generated versus tax dollars spent) is merely cents on the dollar. In other words, the program does not pay for itself.

Furthermore, the argument that the film tax credit helps create permanent jobs is a fallacy. Film production jobs, by their very nature, are short-lived. To add insult to injury, the highest paying jobs often go to non-Missouri residents, since production jobs require specific and highly skilled professionals. However, perhaps the most shocking fact is that Missouri has had a film tax credit program since 1999, and yet, according to data gathered by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, jobs related to film production decreased during the time the film tax credit program was in place.

It is bewildering that lawmakers can ignore important economic indicators, and the advice of the state’s own Tax Credit Review Commission, just so Missouri can play hostess to Hollywood for a few weeks. I hope legislators and political spectators will take a look at our testimony and exercise some common sense.

Still Coughing Up More for Education

In an era where we shield more and more people from being offended, never mind hurt, it appears that it is still okay to pick on smokers. So it’s no surprise that some policymakers want to use them to fund goodies for the rest of us.

The latest anti-smoker proposal aims to raise the cigarette taxes to around 90 cents a pack (cigarette taxes in Missouri currently are 17 cents a pack) in order to fund scholarships for students. On the surface, this proposal sounds appealing, but raising excise taxes in order to fund education is not good policy. There are a couple reasons why this is the case: First, cigarette taxes are regressive. Poor people smoke more than higher-income individuals, and smoking takes up a higher percentage of their income.

Second, an increase in cigarette taxes can harm Missouri businesses. More people commute into Missouri than out of it. Our low excise taxes serve as an inducement for out-of-state visitors to purchase alcohol, gasoline, and cigarettes in Missouri instead of Kansas and Illinois. The chart below from  showmedata.org shows just how low Missouri’s taxes are in comparison to Kansas and Illinois (Missouri is in yellow).

3862

If this proposal becomes law, Missouri’s cigarette tax rate will be higher than in Kansas. It isn’t hard to imagine commuters on State Line Road choosing a Kansas convenience store over a Missouri one if products are cheaper.

Now, some might argue that raising cigarette taxes is good in and of itself because doing so will reduce cigarette usage and improve public health. That’s partially true, but the effect is small. If the increased tax revenue would be spent on treating smoking-related illnesses, then the conversation would be worth having. However, even if we agreed that a tax hike should go to increased health spending, if taxes go up too much, people would simply resort to smuggling.

Personally, I’m not a fan of smoking. My grandfather suffered from emphysema due to his smoking. However, just because I don’t like an activity doesn’t mean I believe the government should treat it as a piggy bank for more spending. Let’s find ways to cut spending, not increase it.

Is the Metropolitan Taxicab Commission Acting Illegally?

At a hearing on SB 351, which would create state regulations on ridesharing companies, the bill’s sponsor warned that existing taxicab regulatory bodies in the state, especially the St. Louis Metropolitan Taxicab Commission (MTC), may be violating federal law. The source of this trouble is a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling.

In the case, North Carolina Board of Dental Examiners v. Federal Trade Commission, the FTC claimed the North Carolina dental board violated federal antitrust laws in its attempt to eliminate market competitors, even though the board was empowered by the state to regulate dentistry.

Prior to this case, it was assumed that state-created professional boards and regulatory bodies were immune from antitrust law. But in their decision, the Supreme Court held that this is not always the case. The majority opinion stated that active state supervision is required for bodies that act as regulatory agents of the state but are controlled by market participants. In the case of the North Carolina dental board, the supervision was found lacking.

This brings us to the MTC. While the commission was created by the state, many of its members represent taxicab companies. There is no meaningful state oversight of what the MTC actions. It is possible that, if a court holds that the commission is effectively controlled by taxi market participants, the MTC would not be immune from antitrust legislation.

This would be a serious legal problem for the MTC, which fixes pricing, limits the number of taxi permits, and blocks the entry of ridesharing companies like Uber and Lyft. To preempt this type of legislation, the state could either make sure taxicab companies do not control the commission or more closely supervise the MTC’s actions. Given the anti-competitive behavior of the MTC as it exists today, either outcome would be an improvement for Saint Louis residents.

Increased Fire Tax in Kirkwood? Why Now Indeed!

A leaflet arguing for a tax increase surprised some Kirkwood residents this month when they found it tucked into their city-issued electricity bills. The tax advertised in the leaflet would up the sales tax rate by 0.25 percent in order to add new cross-trained firefighter/paramedics to Kirkwood’s Fire Department. With the need for municipal fire services in decline and only an increase in EMS cited as justification for the tax increase, I can’t help but wonder if this tax hike would unnecessarily nickel and dime people choosing to spend their money in Kirkwood.

Let’s break this down. Since the 1970s and 1980s, when fire alarms, new technologies, and improved building standards decreased the number and severity of fires in the country, there has been a steady increase in the number of people employed as firefighters. You might think the number of people employed to fight fires would decrease as the need for fire response decreased. You’d be wrong.

To compensate for this decrease in the demand for their services, fire departments began taking on the broader role of providing emergency medical services—that is, driving ambulances and providing on-the-scene support to people involved in accidents. Fire departments might have saved money if they then decreased the number of people employed as firefighters and invested more heavily in paramedics and EMS equipment, which typically cost less, but that didn’t happen.

Here we have a textbook case of mission creep, the tendency of government organizations to gradually shift their goals and expand their purpose. Society no longer needs as many people fighting fires, yet because government lacks an efficient mechanism for linking supply and demand, we continue to spend an increasing amount of tax revenue on fire protection. Government has a tendency to grow, even as needs shrink.

If the city of Kirkwood wants more paramedics, then they should hire more paramedics, not firefighters. Shifting resources to pay for more EMS and less fire services, or even privatizing certain functions, could help pay for this. It’s simply a waste of money to raise taxes to hire workers for an unneeded and more expensive job.

New Video on Public Financing for NFL Stadiums

Recently, Reason released a video on public financing for stadiums. In it, they show how sports stadiums are bad public investments from an economic standpoint, which we have reported here many times. Check out the video and see the answer to the question: “Even though study after study has shown little to no economic benefit, why do cities continue to be so stupid when comes do building stadiums?”

Mark Your Calendars, Kansas City and St. Louis: Michael Cannon is Coming to Town

Michael Cannon is the director of health policy studies at the Cato Institute and is one of the most prominent figures in the free market movement today. Cannon’s national influence extends to a wide swath of health care issues, but lately it’s his work focusing on the health insurance subsidies of Obamacare that has been most prominent. With Case Western Reserve law professor Jonathan Adler, in 2013 Cannon co-wrote “Taxation Without Representation: The Illegal IRS Rule to Expand Tax Credits under the PPACA.”

If that topic sounds strangely familiar to you, fear not; it is indeed the topic at the center of the King v. Burwell case, which is currently before the Supreme Court. Cannon has been instrumental in not only providing the research that undergirds the plaintiffs’ case, but he has also been instrumental in delivering clear, concise and compelling explanations of what the government did with these subsidies (and why it matters) to audiences across the country. Michael’s Washington Journal segment below, recorded for C-Span earlier this month, provides a good preview of what he’ll be talking about next week.

I hope you’ll be able to join us, either in Kansas City on March 25 at 5:30 pm at the Kansas City Club, or in St. Louis on March 26 at 5:30 pm at Saint Louis University. Both promise to be excellent events.

Happy Sunshine Week!

cloud-143152_640

This week marks the 10th Anniversary of Sunshine Week. It’s a time to celebrate freedom of information, but also serves as a reminder that there are still some dark corners of government in need of transparency. In a recent study, the non-profit organization, Better Together, tried to obtain financial and operational information from municipalities using the state’s Sunshine Law.

The report found that some cities responded quickly and at low cost, while others did not. Deputy director of community based studies Marius Johnson-Malon was quoted by Saint Louis Public Radio:

“Sometimes we were met with different requests for money up to $2,000 to provide the information we were looking for. Sometimes people would say it was going to take up to six months, and that is in contrast to some municipalities that got us the information on the same day they received the request and provided it for free.”

Johnson-Malon’s experience with varying transparency is not rare. I encountered a similar issue while requesting information regarding public school collective bargaining agreements. Some districts emailed the information within minutes at no cost. Others referred me to the district attorney or offered to retrieve the information at costs of up to $100.

Collective bargaining in public schools should be transparent, but as SMI Policy Researcher John Wright has pointed out, a legal loophole allows collective negotiations between school districts and teachers’ unions to remain behind closed doors.

Last month, a bill was introduced that will open collective negotiations to the public. Parents and taxpayers have the right to know what demands unions are making, especially if those demands affect the education of children.

The Missouri Sunshine Law may be nothing like a subscription to the Jelly of the Month Club, but as Eddie in Christmas Vacation famously said, it’s “the gift that keeps on giving all year round.” Happy Sunshine Week!

 

Righting the Wrongs of the Power & Light District

PowerLight_KCPLOne of the reasons Kansas City is on the hook financially for so much on the Power & Light District is its low assessment value. Back in 2009, Cordish, the project developer argued that the project’s value should be $12.3 million. Jackson County disagreed, and Cordish sued. According to Steve Vockrodt, then of the Kansas City Business Journal:

That [Cordish] valuation, which equates to an average of about $24 a square foot, is a far cry from Jackson County’s appraised value of $160 million, roughly $270 a square foot, which is what county officials say the district is worth for 2009, including Cosentino’s Downtown Gourmet Market.

“They said that $12 million was their number for 500,000 square feet when everything is completed,” said Jeph BurroughsScanlon, a Jackson County spokesman.

“We want to make sure we’re right on it,” said Curtis Koons, director of the county’s assessment department. “We just don’t feel $24 on a brand-new commercial venture is realistic.”

Vockrodt’s story went on to include a this statement on the City’s exposure to debt:

Kansas City Councilman Ed Ford said he was told by city attorneys that the Power & Light District’s dispute would not put the city on the hook financially.

“It looks like the city is not going to have a dog in the hunt on that,” Ford said.

Ford may have been talking about the lawsuit, but of course the city did have a dog in the hunt on the valuation. A low property tax assessment meant there would be less money required of Cordish (as taxes are not voluntary) to keep and apply toward their bond payments. And while, in a normal world, any bond shortfalls would be made up by the people making money off the project, Cordish is not a normal company and Kansas City is not a normal world.

In May 2015, Jackson County will again assess the value of the Power & Light District. Now that the facilities have been improved, will their value jump? After all, according to The Kansas City Star, things are booming:

[Cordish’s executive director of the Power & Light District Nick] Benjamin thinks district revenues are likely to continue growing, as the district has finally reached 94 percent occupancy. More than 50 tenants, including 22 locally owned tenants, have 450,000 square feet of retail space leased.

If Jackson County argued in 2009 that the Power & Light District should be valued at $160 million, the valuation should be much higher now, given the high occupancy rates. A higher assessment will mean more taxes paid by Cordish. And while Cordish will get to keep these taxes, they will in effect be paying more toward their own bond debt, meaning a lower taxpayer subsidy from City Hall. Even a large increase in the valuation for Power & Light won’t result in a big savings for Kansas City, but it would be something.

It’s too late for city planners, political leaders or their attorneys to be considered geniuses for the disastrous Power & Light deal. But an aggressive effort to make sure Cordish is paying it’s fair share of property taxes to Jackson County would at least suggest that Kansas City leaders truly have learned a lesson.

Support Us

The work of the Show-Me Institute would not be possible without the generous support of people who are inspired by the vision of liberty and free enterprise. We hope you will join our efforts and become a Show-Me Institute sponsor.

Donate
Man on Horse Charging