Canadian Moving Picture Digest (Jan 31, 1948)

CANADIAN MOVING PICTURE DIGEST Page 3 RAY PRESENTS °} © HERE has been considerable dis cussion about. reported conversations which John J. Fitzgibbons, as chairman of a Central Committee of the National Exhibitors Association, had with the Right Hon. D. C. Abbott, Minister of Finance, in connection with the elimination of the 20% Excise Tax on Motion Picture Admissions. . You will recall, when the 10% Amusement Tax was eliminated, the Canadian Government imposed a tax on admission tickets as a War-time mergency measure, and that the 20% tax was not legally or officially defined as an Amusement Tax. For several years there has been agitation by certain municipalities, which had in mind the ‘ eventual elimination of the 20% tax, and which wished to impose municipal taxes. A few of our provincial governments toyed with this idea, also. In Ontario, the imposition of a Municipal Amusement Tar must first be cleared with our Provincial. Government, which may, or may not impose an Amusement Tax, which may pass along a portion of the tax to municipalities, or which may step aside from the imposition of this most unpopular tax, permitting the municipalities to “pass the buck” to the public. HE, question has been frequently discussed at a con ference of the Mayors of Canada, among whom were some, who strongly urged the tax, stressing its use for hospital and welfare funds. As well as the Federal Tax, in the Province of Quebec, there are, at present several amusement taxes, provincially and in Montreal, earmarked for hospital grants. It ts the opinion of The Digest, that no Indusiry, no Amusement Enterprise, nor any other individual enterprise, should be singled out for special taxation, nor should any one Industry be taxed to support hospitals, or welfares which are a local, provincial and national obligation. There are many national, provincial, local campaigns, during each year, to support Welfare Services and to support Hospitals. Large sums of money are collected for such purposes; in addition there are numerous tay-days designated for specified Charities and Philanthroptes. HE taxes which the Film Trade and its associated enterprises pay, through those actively engaged in Motion Pictures, as individual tax-payers, and those which each enterprise pays as an Operator of a Theatre, a Film Exchange, those which are paid by Provincial and National I‘ilm Companies are numerous, and in certain instances a duplication, particularly. in respect to the operation of a theatre, the latter which pays for a license and in addition pays a separate license for marquees, signs, manholes, etc., which are apparently not included in the license to operate a theatre. Based on the theory that taxes should be aiposed on those who can carry the load, the Motion Picture Industry should not be selected as a symbol of ltlas upholding the world upon his shoulders. ; This Industry does very little, if at all, public crying; most of its weeeping is confined eae the trade. This Industry does not go aroun with a doleful countenance; tt invariably it us patrons business is good, because in Showmen, “The Spieler” complex always Mbeya when the exhibitor is not “dead from the nec up”. N addition to contributing. through taxes, to Hospital maintenance and Welfare Service. the exhibitor, if he belongs to a. Circuit, carries unemployment and hospital insurance, carries individual welfare and hospital insurance through personal ‘contributions, similar to other citizens of our Dominion; and if he is a shareholder of a national film enterprise he contributes through his company toward the unemployment and hospital insurance which the company carries, and which reduces the amount of his dividends. The people, who make up: this Industry of Motion Pictures, and their families, are movie patrons, all do not get into theatres on passes, therefor, treating the question from the patrons’ angle, why should such patrons be taxed for hospitals, for welfare, from which those who are exempt receive equal benefits? The exempt being the “stay-at-homes”. If the Federal Tax is imposed, and the province, or municipality, imposes a tax, for reasons herein implied, the tax will: be passed on.to the public, no doubt, but why should the citizens who make up this public have this tax to pay? [ hospitals and welfare organizations cannot meét their current expenses of operation, in a city, or in a province, it is the business of a nation to see that these institutions of national welfare have adequate financial support. Hospitals and welfare institutions, of a national character, are not restricted, or should not be restricted, for local cases only, therefor, they should nationally be supported. There is not a hospital, nor a welfare institution in Canada, which is not the business and concern of the Federal Government. The people of Canada imove, as free citizens, from one province to another province in Canada. A sick person, from the province. of Manitoba, or Quebec, or British Columbia, or one from Ontario, ill in British Columbia, will receive hospitalization wherever that person maybe. For such national services, no one indusiry, in a municipality, or ina province, should be singled out for taxation with which to support the services mentioned. Should the Federat Government give up the tax, imposed specifically as a War-time Emergency measure, now that it has a surplus of over a half-billion dollars in its treasury, it is not just, nor good business, for any province, or municipality to endeavor to be an opportunist, and impose a tax on Amusements which carried a special tax, because of patriotic reasons, for many years. » T may be argued that the public carried the tax, but this is not true, for the tax was levelled off in many situations to eliminate the nuisance of counting pennies. It may be argued, that prices for Amusements have increased, but again this is not true, in relationship to the scale of inflation, and the general cost of living. .\musement prices, in comparison to the increases in hundreds of other commodities and services, are at the bottom of the scale of increases, by comparison. Is is The Digest’s opinion, that any province, or municipality, which tmposes an Amusement Tax, should the Federal Government eliminate its War-time Emergency tax, reveals a weakness in its business operation, an incapacity to manage, a lack of vision in management, and public service, (Continued on Page 11)