Absence of conflict of interest.
Citation
Highlights
-
The study’s objective was to examine the impact of the motion picture incentive (MPI) program on employment in the motion picture industry. The authors investigated similar research questions for four other states, the profiles of which can be found here:
-
The study used an interrupted time series design to compare changes in employment before and after the MPI program was implemented. Data came from the Quarterly Census of Economics and Wages (QCEW) and Georgia’s Department of Audits and Accounts.
-
The study suggested there was no relationship between the MPI program and changes in employment in the motion picture industry in Georgia.
-
The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is low because other time-varying factors could have influenced the outcome. This means we could not be confident that any estimated effects would be attributable to the MPI program; other factors are likely to have contributed. However, the study did not find statistically significant effects
Intervention Examined
Motion Picture Incentive (MPI) program
Features of the Intervention
Tax incentives specific to the motion picture industry began in the late-1990s and early-2000s but are part of a broader context of location-specific economic development incentives that began over a century ago. More than 30 states have an MPI program that offers corporate tax incentives and other services to encourage film and television production in their state. MPI programs target employment tied to the production of motion pictures, television programs and commercials, and videos. This study focused on MPI programs in states that offer particularly large MPI tax expenditures. Georgia enacted an MPI program in 2005 and, between 2006 and 2017, devoted $1.54 billion to this incentive program.
Features of the Study
The study used an interrupted time series design to compare changes in employment before and after the MPI program was implemented. The intervention time period is 2006–2017, the 12 years following the enactment of Georgia’s MPI program. The comparison time period is the 12 years prior to MPI enactment: 1994–2005.
Data comes from the Quarterly Census of Economics and Wages (QCEW) and Georgia’s Department of Audits and Accounts. The author used a statistical model to compare the annual motion picture industry employment change before and after MPI program implementation, focusing on the immediate change and the average change over time. The statistical model controlled for some changes in state-specific factors like the average wages in the motion picture industry in Georgia and some competitive factors like changes in other states’ MPI tax expenditures.
Findings
Employment
- The study suggested that there was no relationship between the MPI program and the annual percentage point change in employment in the motion picture industry either the first year after MPI program implementation or over time.
Considerations for Interpreting the Findings
The annual change in employment in the motion picture industry in Georgia did not follow a stable trend prior to implementation of the MPI program. Additionally, since the MPI program was only introduced at one point in time, we cannot be certain that the timing of the MPI program was unrelated to other contextual factors that might also have affected employment in the motion picture industry.
Causal Evidence Rating
The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is low because other time-varying factors could have influenced the outcome. This means we could not be confident that any estimated effects would be attributable to the MPI program; other factors are likely to have contributed. However, the study did not find statistically significant effects.