What’s good for the goose is good for the gander
While President Trump is pushing to extend his historic 2017 Tax Cuts, the corporate media, the democratic party, and leftists everywhere trot out their usual invectives, slamming the cuts as handouts for the rich, or trickle down, or tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires. Do they really believe there are no benefits to tax cuts for corporations or wealthy individuals? Let’s look to none other than California Governor Gavin Newsom for illumination.
In October of last year, in front of a podium adorned with ‘Lights, Camera, Jobs,’ Newsom touted the benefits of California tax incentives for film and television producers. ‘This is about working folks,’ he said, ‘it’s about the small businesses, businesses that benefit from this kind of investment and this kind of activity.’
Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass and scores of democratic legislators all praised the tax breaks for their ability to bring jobs to “tens of thousands of Angelenos.’ The Los Angeles Economic Development Corporation (LAEDC) said that ‘for every tax credit dollar allocated, the state benefitted from at least $24.40 in economic output, $16.14 in gross domestic product, $8.60 in wages and $1.07 in state and local tax revenues.’ In other words, a resounding win-win-win for production companies, workers, and the state coffers.
But, wait a minute, aren’t these ‘tax incentives’ just tax breaks for millionaires and billionaires? After all, the production companies and individuals who produce these projects are extremely wealthy. One of the latest projects to receive tax credits is a show produced by Matt Damon and Ben Affleck called ‘Killing Gawker.’ Matt Damon’s net worth is around $170 million while Ben Affleck stands at $150 million, hardly the types of working class folks who need a tax break, right? Why then, when Newsom, Bass, and Adam Schiff are talking about tax incentives for TV/Film, do they highlight the benefits to workers, but when Trump wants to extend tax cuts across the board for corporations, those are tax cuts for the rich?
Schiff, on his website, rails against the Trump Tax Cuts saying they are ‘a 4.5 trillion dollar handout.’ He goes on to say that Republicans will ‘tell you this is about spurring investment, or creating jobs, or unleashing the power of the free market.’ Actually Senator Schiff, you said that. In 2014 Schiff was spearheading a delegation of California legislators pushing for tax credits for film and television companies.
Schiff, on his website, rails against the Trump Tax Cuts saying they are ‘a 4.5 trillion dollar handout.’ He goes on to say that Republicans will ‘tell you this is about spurring investment, or creating jobs, or unleashing the power of the free market.’ Actually Senator Schiff, you said that. In 2014 Schiff was spearheading a delegation of California legislators pushing for tax credits for film and television companies. Schiff said that this was a ‘critical moment’ for California and that ‘Hundreds of thousands of jobs hang in the balance.’ He goes on to say ‘If we fail to take decisive action…we run the real risk that many well-paying jobs will be lost for good to states with far more generous credits.’ It sounds like Schiff is saying we must be competitive or we will lose good middle class jobs. In the letter this delegation sent to the California Senate they said collectively ‘A competitive film tax credit is a net win for our state, creating jobs, generating economic activity and increasing tax revenues for the state and municipalities.’ It sounds like he is advocating lowering taxes on the wealthy in order to gain benefits that, gasp!, trickle down.
Of course it’s only ‘trickle down’ if it’s republicans doing it across the board for everyone in the form of, say, a lowered corporate tax rate. If democrats want to carve out goodies for specific rich folks in one type of business then it’s called ‘investing in the future of this industry.’ Got that? An across the board corporate tax decrease in 2017 was a ‘bonanza for Big Oil, big corporations, and the ultra-wealthy,’ but the same decrease in tax rates for the TV/Film industry, according to the State of California ‘has generated tens of billions of dollars in investments while creating nearly 200,000 jobs.’
Lest you think these same actors don’t think this would be a good idea on a national level, they are all in favor of a similar federal tax credit to keep production in the United States. Senator Schiff wants the United States to remain competitive as an entertainment leader and not lose jobs overseas to countries that offer better incentives. ‘We need to prioritize U.S.-based film and television production to create more American jobs,’ said Schiff, without the slightest bit of cognitive dissonance.
Senator Schiff, if lowering taxes for tv and film corporations will ‘create more American jobs,’ then why wouldn’t lowering corporate taxes for all businesses do the same thing? Why must we cherry pick one industry that affects your home state the most? Why are oil and gas companies vilified as ‘big oil’ while wealthy production companies and producers are victims of an uncompetitive landscape that forces them to produce films abroad and out of state?
Senator Schiff, Governor Newsom, and Mayor Bass, you can’t have it both ways. You can’t say, on the one hand, that reducing corporate taxes is ‘trickle down,’ while lowering taxes on production companies creates good paying middle class jobs and spurs economic growth.
We need a competitive tax landscape that incentivizes companies to produce and grow in the United States. We don’t need politicians picking and choosing certain industries to favor with the glow of their tax incentive wand. In addition to being unfair and capricious it breeds corruption. When politicians can pick which industries to endow with tax ‘gifts’ then those corporations will be very nice to those politicians. A fair tax code that treats businesses equally is what we need. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander.
