FilmIndia (May-Dec 1938)

i Foreign Entertainment » Taxed Heavily ! AR AS NETT PROFITS in expensive restaurants and clubs, you will be convinced of the remark that Dame Fortune is Blind — Stone Blind. Add to this guaranteed income another 25 per cent by way of bribes from exhibitors, presents from the staff and income from stealthy exhibitions of special shows to our "native" state princes and you will get correctly the life and income of some of the foreign "bosses" of the foreign distribution offices. All this when the "damned natives" slave to keep the Union Jack and the Stars and Stripes flying aloft. THEY BLEED THE EXHIBITORS! These foreign companies spend over Rs. 13 lakhs a year in publicity— to be correct: cause to be spent, for, in their agreement with the local exhibitor — which agreement, by the way, is called a license granted by the Distributor to the Exhibitor — a pertinent clause reads as follows: "The Exhibitor, in order to ensure the Distributor proper exposition and advertisement of the programmes to be delivered hereinunder for Exhibition in the Exhitor's theatre agrees to spend a minimum average per programme for newspaper, bill board, handbills, special display advertisements in relation to each separate programme and in instances of Super Road Show Productions to spend a minimum average of at least twice the usual sum for each picture for the said purpose. If no sum has been specified in this clause at the time of signing of this agreement it is understood that the Exhibitor shall spend for the first-named aforesaid purpose for each programme the highest sum which he has spent and/or caused to be spent for any picture shown in his theatre during the past 12 months, and in instances of Road Show Attractions a sum equal to double that amount". And once again the "damned natives" spend their hard earned money to float the foreign pictures and very often a part of this Indian money contributes to the publicity of pictures like "The Drum," "Bengal Lancers" and "Clive of India" which pictures do nothing better than slander our country. That is a misfortune of being an Exhibitor of foreign films. GIVE US THIS "LOSING" GAME According to the "Motion Picture Magazine" the foreign distributors are playing a "losing" game, perhaps for the benefit of India. And yet these charitable people have not restricted their activities from year to year. Here is a table showing their imports into our country for the last 5 years and the duty paid by them Number of Foreign Films Imported into India and Import Duty Paid: Shorls Import Duly Year. Features. a n (1 paid on these news reels. in rupees. 1933 449 1491 9,16,571 1934 417 1470 8,80,843 1935 397 1416 9,65,926 1936 399 1425 9,24,498 1937 395 1181 10,22,931 These figures show a firm and steady tone, and prove beyond doubt that these people are doing well, indeed too well. NET PROFITS OF 70 LAKHS PER YEAR! And after meeting all this huge expenditure in office maintenance, publicity, taxation, etc., these nine companies still remit over 70 lakhs Baburao Patel nett per year to their principals in America and England. The following table shows a nearest estimate of remittances sent within a single year by the different companies: — In Lakhs of Rs. per year. 1. 20th Century Fox 14 2. Metro-Goldwyn-Meyer 12 3. Paramount 8 4. R.K.O. Radio 9 5. Warner Brothers 6 6. United Artists 10 7. Columbia 4 8. Humayun 4 9. Universal 3 Total 70 These figures may be wrong as annas and pies are not quoted in the usual fashion of an auditor's report, but if the foreign distributors think that these figures are misleading, all that they have to do is to get the Government Auditor to certify their books and publish the correct figures. Perhaps the audited figures might exceed the figures quoted above. There never was a better case of a more flourishing business for fresh taxation. The Government of India must not only increase the Import Duty on these foreign films but must also increase the assessment value. REVISE THE ASSESSMENT VALUE! The present assessment value Is 7 annas per foot for the purposes of levying the import duty. Does (Continued on page 48)