Wednesday, March 30, 2011

Flashback: Massachusetts Governor Signs Film/TV Tax Incentive Bill Into Law

I came across this article, and wanted to share the good news. If Mitt Romney ever decides to proceed with Mitt's Massachusetts, the producer stands to receive a generous tax credit - provided it's filmed in Massachusetts.
On Wednesday, November 23rd, Governor Mitt Romney signed the tax incentive bill that the Boston AFTRA/SAG office, along with numerous other industry members, have been working to enact in Massachusetts. The new law puts the Bay State in the spotlight as a competitive venue for motion picture and commercial production, and not surprisingly is already garnering interest from motion picture studios that would not otherwise have come to the Commonwealth. Upon hearing the news, Mary Ann Hughes, Vice President, Film Production Planning, Walt Disney Company commented "This law makes Massachusetts very competitive in attracting film and TV production. We look forward to doing business in Massachusetts."

The new law will take effect in 90 days but will be retroactive to January 1, 2006. Its principal elements include a 20% tax credit on all Massachusetts source payroll, a 25% tax credit on qualified production expense in Massachusetts, and a sales tax credit for producers who spend a minimum aggregate of $250,000 per year in the commonwealth. The law is in place through the year 2013.

Read More


Doug NYC GOP said...

RWN - I owe you an apology.

I used to think you were so devoted to Sarah Palin, you looked at evrything through a "Palin Prism".

Now I know you secretly have a very strong affection and admiration for Romney, as you can't seem to look at any issue presented, unless it's through a "Romney Prism".

Step out of the shadows and into the light - love your inner Rombot!

BOSMAN said...

As long as Mitt Romney has no personal stake in the "Mitt's Massachusetts; i.e., Producing it and starring in it, I don't think many people would look at his effort in a negative light. He was bringing revenue to the state and there was NO PERSONAL BENEFIT!


Right Wingnut said...

Oh, man. You guys are WEAK!

marK said...

Thank-you for posting this, RWN. It highlights a common practice among government officials from the lowest level to the very highest -- the offering of incentives to convince businesses to operate in their jurisdiction.

It also illustrates the shaky ground those who are "Shocked, Shocked that Sarah Palin would do such a thing in Alaska" are standing upon. I haven't even bothered to open the thread below dealing with it.

To me, the only "scandal" is Sarah Palin benefiting from a law she signed. But if there was anything actually evil in that, then any Governor who signs a tax cut law should not be allowed to enjoy the benefits of it. He should just continue on paying the same level of taxes.

I have a very difficult time believing that when she signed the bill into law, she did it because she was going to do "Sarah Palin's Alaska". I see no evidence of that. So until further evidence surfaces that shows she had SPA in the works at the time whereby creating a conflict of interest, I am not going to worry about it.

marK said...

This actually illustrates a point that I have made repeatedly over the past couple of years -- that Sarah Palin and Mitt Romney have a lot in common. One of them is a mutual respect.

We all know how quick Sarah is at criticizing what she doesn't like, but she has yet to criticize Romney or MassCare. She could easily have done so, but she hasn't. Other 2012 hopefuls have done so, but not Sarah.

Remember when that Time reporters claimed that Romney "insiders" had criticized her? A lot of Palinites (including some of her staff) immediately jumped all over Mitt. Sarah didn't. She could have easily done it, but she didn't.

There have been a number of occasions where Romney could easily criticize her. Other 2012 hopefuls have done so (notably Huckabee), but Mitt has consistently stood up for her. I will never forget how Mitt shut David Letterman up when he tried to get Mitt to fault her. Poor Letterman was left stammering, not knowing what to say.

They both have not been afraid to take positions that go against prevailing ideology. They both have done what they thought was right.

I truly admire and respect the lady. I just don't think she is Oval Office material at the present moment.

Right Wingnut said...

Thanks, MarK.

At least we know we can count on your vote should Palin secure the nomination.

Doug NYC GOP said...

At least we know we can count on your vote should Palin secure the nomination. - RWN

There yo go again.

How cheap and crass a shot to shoot. Again, all about Palin.

Speaking only for myself, I have said many times, I'd have NO HESITATION in voting for GOP Nominee Palin.

It's always the Palin crowd who are threatening to go third party or have doubts about what to do should anybody but Mama G. get the nod.

It's this celeb worship over country which rankles people.

OhioJOE said...

"Again, all about Palin." Yeaaaaah, some of us are Palinites. But I guess we should not blink an eye at those for "It is all about Mr. Romney."

Right Wingnut said...

Doug, what's gotten in to you? I complimented Mark on his thoughtful words, and this is what I'm forced to endure?

I even complimented you on your energy post the other day. What's a guy to do?

ellie said...

Oh RWN, big difference between lining your own pockets and lining the state's coffers! But as always, when it comes to your mussings on all things Palin and Romney, we consider the source ;) !

marK said...

Oh come now, Ellie. What wrong did Sarah Palin do? She took advantage of a tax incentive that Alaska has for film makers. If that's such a terrible thing, why are such incentives common across the USA? Utah has them. So does Arizona. And those are only the first two I can think of off the top of my head. And as RWN points out above, Massachusetts also has them thanks to Mitt.

Sarah Palin, as a private citizen, has every right to take advantage of any and all tax breaks that might available to her.

True, the tax incentive was signed into law by her three years ago, but so what? Unless you can prove a conflict of interest on her part at the time of signing, she has done nothing wrong either legally, morally, or ethically.

The only way you can prove a conflict of interest is to prove that she was actively planning her little reality show at the time the bill was signed. That would have to be actual, concrete planning, not just an occasional musing in the shower, "You know, it would be great to do an Alaskan travel show." For example, if she spoke to industry people about the idea, or was lining up financing for it. That would suggest a conflict of interest.

But as far as I know, the first anyone ever heard about it was a year or two ago when she and Todd began shopping the idea around -- long after she had resigned her job as Governor. So until somebody comes forward to reveal such activities taking place before and/or during the bill's passage, Sarah Palin is free and clear of the COI charge.

Anonymous said...

Ha, Mark. Did you do that on purpose? A year or two ago is pretty darn close to 08~just sayin.

I have a feeling Sarah was thinking reality TV for quite a while, given her penchant for the spotlight.

Would it surprise me if Palin signed it for her own benefit? Not really. But you're right, there's no evidence at all that she did.

RW - you inadvertently made the point that Romney wouldn't be caught dead in reality TV. Thank you.


Ann said...

Good for Mitt.

He put new meaning to, "Making it in Massachusetts" and added welcomed revenue to the state's coffers in the process.

Doug NYC GOP said...

RWN - What's a guy to do?

Just stop with the "Will they vote for Palin if she wins the nomination" lines.

I have no patience for those types of allegations. I believe most of the serious people who are Romney supporters, who frequent this site, are on record as saying they would back Palin against Obama.

To keep inferring otherwise is very wrong, especially when it's the Palin camp that threatens to take theior ball home if Palin is not the nominee.

Aside from that everything is peachy-keen! :)

ConMan said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
ConMan said...

I was thinking of having some Sarah Security Blankets made up and selling them on ebay.

Something to keep her supporters warm, cozy, and secure, while they peruse the reality of many of these political sites.

Something to hold onto during these rough rides.

Right Wingnut said...

Just stop with the "Will they vote for Palin if she wins the nomination" lines.

I have no patience for those types of allegations. I believe most of the serious people who are Romney supporters, who frequent this site, are on record as saying they would back Palin against Obama.

I sensing a little paranoia here. I was merely complimenting Mark on his rational thoughts regarding this lame, month old "controversey." Last night, everyone was jumping on the bandwagon, denouncing these tax credits, without looking in to it a little closer. That's what most of you (not necessarily you all of the time) do. In the thread about blog traffic, There are 5-6 comments. Each one is a drive by snarky comment about Palin.

Mark is the only Rombot that has shown any hint of sanity on the matter. That in itself, is very telling. I simply made the assumption that he wouldn't have a problem supporting Palin if she were the nominee. I stand by that assumption. It has nothing to do with you, or anyone else. I WAS REFERRING TO MARK.

Anonymous said...

Romney/Palin 2012!!!!!!

marK said...


That's a good assumption. I voted for McCain, and I respect Sarah far more than I ever did him.

There is only one of the current crop of 1st and 2nd tier GOP hopefuls that I would have difficulty voting for, and that is a certain person who may not be a bigot himself, but he isn't shy about exploiting the bigotry of others for his personal gain. Couple that with him being the one of the most petty, unforgiving so-and-so's I've seen in a long time, who doesn't think twice about making little nasty, underhanded comments about his opponents (after which his classic reply is nearly always, "Who, me?"), while all the time reminding people what a stellar Christian he is, and you've got a guy whom I simply loathe.

I honestly don't think Sarah is cut out for the White House. Sorry, I just don't. However, I would rather see a hundred Palins in the Oval Office before I watched that weasel assume the Presidency.

Right Wingnut said...


The individual you are referring to is at the bottom of my list as well - for the same exact reasons. I have no doubt that he uses anti-Mormon sentiment to his advantage. I also believe he probably is one to believe woman shouldn't work outside of the home - hence his disdain for Palin. Or, maybe it's jealousy. I don't know, but whatever it is, it hasn't gained him a lot of fans in the Palin camp.

marK said...


Funny you should know exactly whom I'm talking about...

Anonymous said...

I haven't read the other post about Palin receiving a tax credit for her reality show, so I was genuinely puzzled about this one. I read it and said, "So What?" Mitt offered incentives for movies to be made in his state while Governor. It should be applauded. Now, I'm beginning to see why the post was made.

Well, I'm on MarK's side. Unless absolute proof can be presented that she was planning the reality show when she signed the law, there is no reason she shouldn't profit from it. I bet there are other Alaskans who do!

I have said before, I will vote for Palin or any other GOP nominee against Obama, but Mr. "Who Me?" will be the most difficult to vote for. I know I couldn't give him money, make phone calls, or knock doors.


Anonymous said...

P.S. RW, I don't think that Huck's being against women in the workforce makes him snarky like that. He's just made that way. In 2008 I thought he had a great personality....then I got to know him a little better!


Anonymous said...

Although I appreciate the sentiment I wanted it to be clear that Palin, personally, did not receive a tax credit...the producer did...most likely the Discovery Channel.


Anonymous said...

Conservatives take on Palin for government-subsidized reality show, Palin calls criticism ‘ludicrous’