ENDORSED BY THE CALIFORNIA DEMOCRATIC VOTER GUIDE

Our friend Phil in yesterday’s video made a good point about how struggling artists could really use a framework for success when they get to Hollywood. We’ve discussed this in the past, but maybe now’s a good time to explore the funding mechanism for this program:

A public-private partnership which is privately financed but publicly administered doesn’t add the burden of another funding priority for tax dollars while providing the same level of transparency and accountability which only the state can provide with its layers of audits and disclosure requirements.

So that explains the oversight, but whose funds are they overseeing? Funding could be provided by a variety of sources, first vetted by the state to ensure their propriety. Possible sources of funding are those with a vested interest in enlarging the pool of professional talent: studios, production companies, casting departments and talent agencies.

Why would they take on this responsibility? Why not? First of all, it makes sense from a business perspective. Why wouldn’t they want to sponsor a talent corps which knows both their craft and their business, a group of pre-qualified talent from which casting knows they can draw performers to audition who are ready to report to set Day 1 without the complications that often accompany inexperienced talent.

Funding this program could also be structured in such a way that it serves as a tax write-off for the funders, increasing their potential deductions while reducing their tax exposure.

Finally, it’s just good public relations. By supporting a framework for success for the performing arts, they’ll be helping to rebuild Hollywood’s middle class, thereby broadening the tax base which means more money available for public works, infrastructure and, of course…dog parks. You had to see that one coming.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *