Motion Picture Herald (Jan-Mar 1954)

MOTION PICTURE HERALD MARTIN QUIGLEY, Editor-in-Chief and Publisher V ol. 194, No. 6 MARTIN QUIGLEY, JR., Editor February 6, 1954 Tax Work for All COMPO’s tax repeal campaign committee warned this week that there is no assurance that relief from the admissions levy will be granted this year unless the industry’s case is energetically and persistently presented to Congressmen in their home areas and in Washington. Although there are no grounds at present for discouragement or pessimism, victory will not be attained without much more work. This year the industry’s prospects are linked inevitably with the general tax legislation program of the Congress. Currently the House Ways and Means Committee has been studying certain forms of special revisions of the tax laws including relief for working mothers, deductions for some medical expenses and other measures. Soon the Administration’s proposal for extending excise taxes scheduled to expire or automatically be cut on April 1st will be considered. Then the House committee will take up legislation granting relief to industries which need it. At that point the motion picture theatres’ case will be studied once more. In view of the Government’s budget (which continues in the red on account of the required heavy expenditures for defense), there is no certainty that complete elimination of the twenty per cent tax may be voted at this session of Congress. No matter what happens this year complete repeal will remain a basic goal. The COMPO tax committee is anxious to insure that the relief granted this year will be of maximum benefit to the smaller theatres, if full relief is found to be impossible. On this point there appears to be misunderstanding. Some small exhibitors have expressed concern that their interests may be neglected. The COMPO committee and the managements of the larger circuits alike realize that the greatest burden of the admission tax has been on the theatres of limited grossing capacity. This, of course, does not mean that the survival of many large theatres does not also depend on tax relief. COMPO intends to protect the interests of all exhibitors to the fullest extent possible. If a compromise should be indicated ultimately — and the COMPO tax committee has been given full authority to act — efforts will be made to insure that the small theatre operators derive the larger proportional benefit. The final decision, of course, rests with Congress and the President. It is fitting and proper for COMPO to seek first the welfare of all the industry and then the welfare of those elements that most need help. No other course of action would be just. One thing is true — the tax campaign will fail if work is relaxed at this point. The COMPO committee has reminded all state and congressional district chairmen that Representatives and Senators must be regularly contacted. They will not continue to support tax relief for theatres unless they are asked to do so and unless the merits of this relief are demonstrated. Members of Congress are always busy. The current session promises to be busier than usual and this is an election year. Causes that are not kept constantly in mind are going to be forgotten. There is campaign work to be done by everyone in the industry until the bill granting relief from the discriminatory tax is finally passed by Congress, signed by the President and becomes the law of the land. ■ ■ ■ Foreign Film-making IN Hollywood recently Eric Johnston, president of the Motion Picture Association, presented cogent arguments for maintaining and even increasing the amount of foreign filming of pictures to be released by the American companies. Admittedly, a Hollywood studio worker whose employment has been restricted on account of a decrease in the number of pictures in production views with alarm reports of overseas film crews making American pictures. The present situation is difficult for many in Hollywood but the well-being of the industry as a whole requires a considerable amount of foreign location filming. There are two basic reasons for shooting abroad : 1) the locales of the story are foreign, and 2) foreign countries encourage such production within their national boundaries. No serious objection has been raised by any responsible union spokesmen in Hollywood to the production abroad of stories set in foreign places. The unions are understandably concerned that foreign economic pressure not be exerted to such an extent that harm may be done to Hollywood. Mr. Johnston pointed out that the American motion picture industry lives on international revenues. “Since three out of every four American films do not earn back their costs in the American market alone, we must have foreign markets.” He said that in 1953 between fortythree and forty-four per cent of the total gross was earned and remitted from abroad. Although there are restrictions against American motion pictures in almost every foreign market, this industry opposes any restrictions on foreign pictures in the U.S.A. Furthermore, the industry must retain its freedom to film pictures in Hollywood or abroad, as circumstances indicate. ■ ■ ■ CJ Department of Utter Confusion: The silliest 3-D story to date is the press report of one new system said to be ready for the market shortly which not only does away with special polarizing viewers but does away with prescription glasses ordinarily worn ! — Martin Quigley, Jr.