19 Comments for this article

Tags: , , ,


RALEIGH, NC (NEWS RELEASE) — Six months into 2014, the North Carolina Film Office reports an estimated production tally of $268 million in direct in-state spending and nearly 19,000 job opportunities for North Carolinians.

As of July 15, more than 40 productions had filed “intent to film” forms indicating that they have filmed or will film in the Tar Heel State. The resulting activity accounts for more than 3,300 production days spread across 35 of the state’s counties. The job opportunities include more than 3,000 crew positions for the North Carolina’s highly skilled film professionals, 500 well-paying talent opportunities and 15,000 background talent positions.

Highlights of the first half of 2014 include the return of production on the television series Under The Dome, Banshee and Sleepy Hollow and the upcoming new series Secrets & Lies as well as the studio feature films Max, The Longest Ride, Max Steel and the Untitled Armored Car project. Work has also been done on the independent films Ashby and Union Bound and national commercials for Biomet, Pepsi, and Xarelto plus lifestyle television shows Love It or List It and the Peabody Award winning A Chef’s Life.

The 2014 mid-year figures are a strong follow-up to 2013, which saw a record-breaking 5,000+ production days from more than 60 productions that created nearly 25,000 job opportunities, including more than 4,000 crew positions. The 2014 mid-year figures eclipse last year’s total direct in-state spending mark of more than $254 million by productions.

During the past six years, productions have had a direct in-state spend of more than $1.3 billion.

The North Carolina Film Office is part of the state Division of Tourism, Film and Sports Development within the North Carolina Department of Commerce. Its primary responsibilities are to recruit productions to North Carolina by marketing the state’s assets, which include the film incentive, the crew base, established infrastructure and locations statewide. The NCFO also assists productions with securing permits and handling other logistics and works hand-in-hand with film commissions in the Wilmington, Research Triangle, Piedmont Triad, Charlotte and Western regions.

Comment on this Story

  • Rusty

    *IF* they can and do will all you film bashers cease and desist?

  • Guesttoo

    Read the article, your comment and then the article again. I just don’t see it. Based on your interpretation, does that mean the Film Commission rates ILM 1st, RTP 2nd, Triad 3rd, Charlotte 4th and the Mountains last?

    Would it be possible that you’re giving the reporters too much credit for consciously putting these in some form hierarchy?

  • SurfCityTom

    it’s no secret I’m opposed to film incentives.

    The quote you refer to was from the NC Film Office. I don’t believe WWAY came to the conclusion incentives are number 1.

    I suppose we shall see. In the absence of an amended budget for the current fiscal year, all incentives will drop from the formula at year’s end.

  • ChefnSurf

    You stated in your news piece that NC markets its assets to the film industry in the following order: The incentive program, crew base, infrastructure and location.

    Are you saying that the incentive program supersedes all of the other reasons to film here? That’s what putting it first on the list most definitely implies. If film productions have been in NC since about 1983 and the 25% incentive program didn’t even start until 2010, how could that even be mathematically possible?

    I would love to see how your news organization came to the conclusion that the incentive program is the primary reason to film here. You wrote it, now back it up.

  • taxpayer

    If one person works one day one time on a film as an extra…1 job “created”.

    Figures lie…and liars figure.

  • Taxwellrundry

    Taxpayers gotta bail out GM, the govt, Wall Street, the entire 3rd world, and now Hollywood film companies who are raking in huge profits.

    Why do these multi billion dollar Hollywood outfits need tax breaks when the working slob isnt getting any tax breaks to fund their frivolity?

    The well has run dry, we are deficit spending the future away, and the emperor fiddles while Rome burns.

  • Machiavel

    Here is what I do not get. Are subsidies possibly not the best way of going about business? Yes. We all know that the company receiving the subsidy in essence “wins”. What I don’t really understand is that in the grand order of things, the film incentives really have no discernible effect on the average person’s life. It does however mean a lot to those who make a living from the industry. So if we all agree incentives or bail outs, or tax breaks, or whatever you choose to call them are not the best idea, but they are indeed a reality in today’s world, then why the film industry? I have said this before, there are many more industries getting bigger tax breaks and screwing people over in the process. I would even go so far to say they are ruining people’s lives. So if film has a negligible impact on the average non-industry citizen, wouldn’t your anti-incentive energy be best served fighting the real abusers?

  • molly

    The film incentive/rebate program is .016% of the state’s budget. There’s a lot of misplaced outrage over film incentives that benefit thousands of working folks and small businesses, yet Duke Energy, tracking, Titan Cement and other polluting, low-paying jobs that costs us FAR more get barely a sniff of indignation.

    I think this fight is far more about politics than money. McCrory and his cronies are getting some sort of financial gain from chasing the film /TV industry out of North Carolina.

  • Court Wheeler

    What other industry sets up shop from out of state bringing barrels of cash?! They hire locals, such as myself. It puts food on my kid’s plates. Its really not complicated. Look at the numbers. Film is vital to our state economy. Who is getting screwed over? Go read the actual numbers! They are available.

  • ChefnSurf

    Last paragraph, second sentence: Not a quotation and not directly attributed to the Film commission so the reporter who wrote it, owns it.

    Is it possible that I’m giving the reporters too much credit for consciously putting these in some form of hierarchy? That’s a possibility. Another possibility is that a reporter unconsciously did that. The third possibility is that there should have been a specific attribution to the Film Commission and there wasn’t. Pick your poison. All three are wrong.

  • Machiavel


    We understand, it is not great. Could you please link us to some other places you have shared your outrage against other industries? If it is not film that you have an issue with, then certainly you should have tons of posts with similar tone against other abusers. Not trying to challenge you here, just curious.

  • Vog46

    There will be some sort of program promoting filming, BUT, there’s a LOT more talk from GOP Senators that revenue projections are not looking so good for the upcoming year and they are clearly nervous that they may have cut to far to fast, or possibly cut the wrong taxes.
    This revenue shortfall could spell disaster for many programs INCLUDING film.

    But one thing film supporters never TALK about is unemployment and it is clearly and deliberately put on the back burner..Lets face it – filming is NOT steady work. If sleepy hollow stopped production tomorrow there’d be no work for that crew until another project comes in – so they’d collect unemployment – that is the HUGE difference between film incentives and incentives to attract manufacturing employers. Manufacturing would be here for quite some time. Look at Verizon – 1400 jobs, been here what, 10 years now? In property taxes alone they’ve repaid the paltry $875,000 they got from city county funds – PPD on the other hand still does not pay property taxes on the brown dirt fields they built on if I’m NOT mistaken but that “incentive” is coming to an end soon as well.
    Incentives for part time work are just plain NOT smart business and film supporters have got to stop making “job opportunity” claims !! Study after study shows that our of state corporations and out of state employees take the lion’s share of wages – and our local crews DO COLLECT unemployment between projects. Those “extras” they talk about when saying they created “X” amount of job opportunities could be 300 workers working for 30 days or 9,000 job opportunities – OR it could be 9000 workers working just one day. But between opportunities these folks do collect unemployment, and that COST has to be subtracted from their overall spending in the state to get a clearer picture of their “net” benefit. BEtween the state paying out MORE than they take in, and the unemployment that is somehow not counted my guess is that the $5 collected in taxes is zero’d out by that unemployment – so the state loses MORE than anticipated.


  • Vog46

    Just go back to the ballpark debate
    a $57M incentive

    That should end your curiosity


  • Machiavel

    Another anti-liberal troll. Good luck with your agenda.

  • ChefnSurf

    So you really think that this whole argument is just about the fact that it’s the film industry? That the film industry is so god-like that some of us just resent them personally? Get over yourself; your starting to believe your own pretentious hype.

    Maybe some day when you grow up, or at least put on some big boy pants, you’ll be able to understand the argument here. It’s about incentive programs, regardless of industry, that pay out more money than they take in. It’s about me, as a taxpayer, having to dig into my own pocket and pay out additional monies to an industry that doesn’t need or deserve it. It’s about me then having to decide to not dig into my pocket and contribute some of my hard-earned cash to someone or something that would actually benefit society, because I already gave that money to you.

    I’m actually in favor of all incentive programs, providing they meet two simple criteria: They take in more than they pay out and they don’t harm another industry or person by giving someone an unfair advantage. The Film Incentive program does not meet that criteria. Regardless of how undeserving a mega successful industry is of receiving extortion money in the first place, this wouldn’t have evolved into the argument you now see if the numbers were positive. Politicians in particular would have been all over this, trying to take credit for the wonderful windfall they had created. They’re not. Why? Because the program loses money. Duh!

  • Rusty

    I have no ties to the film industry or a need to hype it; I just believe it good for our area.

    I’m over 50 and understand the concept of incentives well; I dig into my pocket to pay for social programs that are failed but have no choice in that either. (Let alone the disaster called Obamacare)

    Each side has their own (conflicting) figures; each side will cite the ones supporting their cause..

    My original comment was I admit a bit flippant, but like any other hotly debated topic I should have known better than to think I could change any minds from one side to the other nor did I expect it to.

    Put on your “Big Boy Pants” and realize others might disagree with your viewpoints and needn’t stoop to insulting another to make their point.

  • taxpayer2

    Where did you get your information about the state losing money? We’re not. Business is booming, jobs have been created, money is being spent statewide in big and small communities, local businesses are benefitting. How is that losing money? How is it losing money for a company to come in, spend millions of dollars in the state, and then (and only then – after having qualified expenses audited by the state) receive a percentage of that money (only qualified expenses) spent back? How is this industry harming other industries and/or individuals? You know whats going to have a negative affect on individuals (jobs lost, people leaving the state to find work) and other industries (loss of the lucrative business the film industry provides to all types of other companies) – killing the film incentives.

  • Vog46

    You said:
    “Where did you get your information about the state losing money? We’re not”

    Here let me explain this again Lets keep the numbers small and simple.
    A film company spends $100 in audited approved spending.
    The state taxes that spending at 5% and collects $5.
    The state then pays out 25% of that very same spending, so the film company gets $25. State took in $5 but paid out $25.
    Thats how the state loses money.

    Film supporters then argue that the other $75 stays here. Wrong again.
    A place like Home Depot might make $20 in sales from that film company but $19 of that spending goes back to THEIR SUPPLIERS. Home Depot profits 5% or $1 (and Home depot is an out of state corporation too boot) so the money does NOT stay here.

    Can you follow that now?


  • ChefnSurf

    Where did I get the info? … I actually rolled up my sleeves and looked it up. Have you? Although I looked it up myself, sources for the very same data have been posted right here in this forum for months now. By now you could have availed yourself to that info. Have you? Could be wrong, but it sure doesn’t sound like it, so what would be the point in re-posting that info over and over again?

    How is this industry harming other industries? … It’s not.

    Negative effect of job loss … Your right, there will be some, but the real question is how many. Did you know that (as of 2013) less than 4/100ths of 1% of the state”s population is employed in film? Does that justify losing money on incentives? I think not.


Related News