Staff Reports
The unions just released a new Ernst & Young (EY) study and, surprise, it shows Hollywood is spending less of its big production dollars in the United States. The numbers are stark and they are being handed straight to Capitol Hill as a reason to create a federal film tax credit. That sounds reasonable until you look at who’s asking, what they want, and what it will really cost taxpayers.
What the new EY report actually found
The EY analysis, commissioned by a coalition of Hollywood unions, says the U.S. share of major‑studio film production spending fell from about 74 percent to roughly 42 percent over the study period. For television episodes, the U.S. share dropped from around 94 percent to about 64 percent. EY looked at big productions from 1999 through 2024 using budget cutoffs to focus on major projects. In short: more shoots, crews and paychecks are happening overseas than they did a generation ago.
Why unions and lawmakers are pushing a federal film tax credit
Unions — including the DGA, SAG‑AFTRA, IATSE, WGA, Teamsters and LiUNA — are using the EY numbers to press for the Motion Picture, Television, and Entertainment Revitalization Act. The bill is bipartisan and bicameral, backed publicly by Senator Tim Scott and Senator Adam Schiff and several House members. Their pitch: foreign and state incentives are luring work away, and only a federal tax credit can bring production back and save jobs. That is a tidy narrative and a powerful lobby tool when you add scary job‑loss headlines.
A conservative take: we want jobs, not a blank check
Conservatives should want American jobs and thriving industries. But we should also be skeptical when big unions and Hollywood studios ask Washington to write a national check to fix what looks like global competition and changing business models. A federal credit could help — if it is tightly targeted, temporary, and paired with real accountability. Otherwise, it risks becoming another permanent subsidy that rewards lobbyists, encourages gaming of the rules, and shifts costs to taxpayers. Better first steps: streamline permitting, cut red tape, make state credits more transparent, and push for clawbacks and strict domestic‑spending rules in any federal program.
Conclusion — keep the jobs, not the gravy train
The EY study is a useful wake‑up call: production is shifting and American workers are affected. But lawmakers should not rush into a one‑size‑fits‑all federal subsidy just because Hollywood brought a glossy report and a strong PR team. If Congress acts, it should craft a smart, tightly drawn incentive that rewards real domestic spending and creates real, lasting jobs — not another open invitation for political theater. In the meantime, let’s be for American workers without being suckers for a star‑studded fundraising pitch.
