Harrison's Reports (1950)

■ntered as seconU-e'.ass matter January 4, 1921, at the post office at New V rk, New York, under the act of March 3, 1879. Harrison's Reports Yearly Subscription Rates: 1270 AVENUE OF THE AMERICAS Published Weekly by United States $15.00 (Formerly Sixth Avenue) Harrison's Reports, Inc., U. S. Insular Possessions. 16.50 M v , „n M v Publisher Canada 16.50 Wew York *u> w p. S. HARRISON, Editor Mexico, Cuba, Spain 16.50 A Motion Picture Reviewing Service Great Britain 17.50 Devoted Chiefly to the Interests of the Exhibitors Established July 1, 1919 Australia, New Zealand, India, Europe, Asia .... 17.60 Itg Editorial Policy . No pI0biem Too Big for Its Editorial Circle 7-4622 35c a Copy Columns, if It is to Benefit the Exhibitor. A REVIEWING SERVICE FREE FROM THE INFLUENCE OF FILM ADVERTISING Vol. XXXII SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 1950 No. 8 THE TAX CAMPAIGN Appearing before the House Ways and Means Committee on Tuesday of this week, Abram F. Myers, chairman of COMPO's tax committee and General counsel of National Allied, and Gael Sullivan, execu' tive director of Theatre Owners of America, presented the industry's arguments for repeal of the 20 per cent Federal tax on admissions. In a twenty-two page brief filed with the Commit' tee, Myers and Sullivan stressed the fact that the motion picture business is mainly small business, and that the tax is not a tax on Hollywood. "We make this distinction," they said, "because over-enthusiastic reporting has attributed to Hollywood a degree of glamor and opulence which cannot by any possibility be applied to the exhibition branch. In investment and numbers employed, Hollywood represents only a small segment of the industry." The brief presented the following seven-point argument against the tax: 1. The admission tax is an emergency tax and should not become part of the permanent tax structure. 2. Motion pictures are a part of the press and should be accorded equal treatment with books, magazines and newspapers. 3. Moving pictures are an integral part of American life, a necessity, not a luxury. 4. The admission tax as applied to motion picture theatres is primarily a tax on the lower and middle income groups — only a small part of it is paid by the well-to-do. 5. A great majority of the theatre owners, those who are immediately affected by the tax, are small business men, not to be confused with the over-publicized "movie magnates." 6. Due to declining attendance at theatres, the admission tax as applied to theatres is an uncertain revenue source for budget balancing purposes. 7. The admission tax as applied to motion pictures threatens the existence of the country's greatest peacetime entertainment medium, which also is an indispensable part of the Government's communications system in time of war. Both in the brief and in their appearance before the House Committee, Mr. Myers and Mr. Sullivan have done a fine job in presenting the industry's case, and they deserve the sincere thanks of every one in the industry for their tireless efforts, but even their effective arguments are not nearly enough if the industry is to win this battle. The most powerful weapon the industry has in this tax fight is public support, and it is on this that we must concentrate our efforts mainly. We must bear in mind that many other businesses are affected by the excise taxes now in existence, and that each of them, through competent spokesmen, are putting up effective arguments as to why it should be given relief. We must bear in mind also that the country's collosal spending program does not permit the complete ehmination of all the excise taxes, and this means that only certain businesses will be favored either by elimination or reduction of the tax now imposed on their operations. Only Congressmen and Senators have the power to impose or eliminate taxes. Frequently, political considerations motivate their decisions, and you may be sure that in the case of the admissions tax they will be subjected to considerable pressure from the Administration, which has given every indication that it wants to keep this tax intact. But the one thing that invariably will make a Congressman or Senator sit up and take notice, despite political pressure, is a deluge of protests from their constituents — the people who elect them to office. For this reason we must concentrate our efforts on winning the public's support. Unlike most of the other businesses that are seeking relief from the excise taxes, the motion picture business is in the envious position of coming in direct contact with the millions of movie-goers who pay the admissions tax. Consequently, no other business is in as good a position to influence the public's opinion, gain their support, and provide them with facilities to register their protests. Many exhibitors have done an outstanding job thus far in getting their patrons to sign the protest cards provided by COMPO through National Screen Service, but according to several reports a great number of exhibitors have fallen down on the job. For instance, Sidney Samuelson, general manager of Allied Theatre Owners of Eastern Pennsylvania, charges in his current organization bulletin that a vast majority of the exhibitors in his territory "are sitting back, taking it easy and expecting that 'George' will do it." It is this laxity on the part of many exhibitors that no doubt motivated Mr. Myers to issue a statement last week to the effect that there is a considerable fluctuation in the number of petitions signed among theatres of comparable size, location and attendance. "This indicates clearly," he said, "that the enthusiasm, efficiency and showmanship of the exhibitor is an important factor in the results attained. Where the tables are properly placed, the posters prominently displayed and attendants are on duty at the proper times, many more petitions are signed than in the theatres where the effort is made in a perfunctory manner." (Continued on back, page)