INTHEBLACK March 2025 - Magazine - Page 36
F E AT U R E
“With streaming businesses, the streamer [i.e. Netflix] might
fund 70 per cent of the production, but the streamer will
demand all of the rights. So, for the producer, the project
isn’t theirs anymore. They lose the intellectual property.”
MATTHEW CARTER, ABOVE THE LINE ACCOUNTING
THE ROLE OF TAX INCENTIVES
Several countries, including Australia, New Zealand,
Canada and India, take steps to encourage film
and TV companies to bring their productions — and
the jobs required around those productions — into
their territory.
In Australia, for example, Natalie Ducki CPA, BAS agent
and principal of Collective Works, explains these steps
include tax incentives such as:
• Producer Offset: Screen Australia’s tax rebate
on qualifying Australia spend, which helps attract local
and international productions to Australia by returning
up to 40 per cent of the budget spent.
• Enterprise Program: Provides funding to develop
production-company capabilities.
• Post, digital and visual effects (PDV) Offset:
A 30 per cent rebate on post, digital and visual effects
costs incurred in Australia, regardless of where the film
was filmed.
• Location Offset: An offset of 30 per cent on qualifying
Australian production expenditure, intended to attract
big-budget productions to Australia.
• Development Programs: Funds and awards to support
writers and producers to develop projects.
International co-production agreements, while relatively
uncommon, also allow producers to access tax benefits
across a few countries, such as India and Australia.
“India will have certain tax benefits for filmmakers,
and [in Australia] we have the Producer Offset and things
like that,” Matthew Carter says. “So, if you’re an official
co-production — which is difficult to qualify for —
both governments allow you to access both sets of
government refunds, rebates and support.”
36 INTHEBLACK March 2025
“Let’s say your film did A$10 million
at the box office, which would make it
an extremely successful Australian film,”
Carter says. “Two million might come back
to the producer, who then has to repay
investors. That money is gone, and the
producer isn’t left with a cent.”
“Now, with streaming businesses, the
streamer [such as Netflix] might fund
70 per cent of the production, but the
streamer will demand all of the rights. So, for
the producer, the project isn’t theirs anymore.
They lose the intellectual property.”
FUNDING IN THE STREAMING ERA
The entertainment industry has undergone
a significant shift since the rise of streaming
platforms such as Netflix.
Natalie Ducki CPA is a BAS agent
and principal of Collective Works, which
specialises in accounting and bookkeeping
for creative businesses, with a particular
focus on production accounting. Prior to
establishing Collective Works eight years
ago, Ducki worked as the financial controller
and operations manager for film industry
heavyweights Baz Luhrmann and
Catherine Martin’s group of companies.
When Ducki started with that group,
Luhrmann had just finished directing the
film Australia. Since then, Ducki has been
involved with the group’s productions of
The Great Gatsby, Strictly Ballroom the Musical,
Moulin Rouge the Musical, Elvis and more.
The streaming revolution she has witnessed
over that time has resulted in several shifts.
“For Collective Works, the most notable
change is the increase in the number
of small- to medium-sized production
companies having their projects funded
and distributed,” she says.
The streamers have introduced significantly
greater funding opportunities for productions,
