National film incentive legislation introduced with Georgia lawmaker as cosponsor
For more than a year, industry stakeholders in Georgia and the rest of the country have pondered how public policy could help jolt the film industry in the United States.
Production is down domestically, with many of the larger-budgeted projects going overseas in search of lower costs and more attractive incentive programs, leaving thousands out of work.
Tariffs aren’t a likely solution. Bolstering state incentive programs, maybe. But a national tax incentive that could stack on top of existing state-run programs? That seemed the likely pathway forward.
The contours of this idea have finally taken shape. The Senate and House of Representatives have jointly introduced legislation calling for the creation of a national film tax credit.
The Motion Picture, Television, and Entertainment Revitalization Act calls for creating a 20% transferable credit for labor, which would stack on top of existing state-run incentives. An additional 10% can be added if productions meet certain criteria, including shooting in opportunity zones or being an independent production.
The proposed credit would account for both “above the line” labor, which accounts for actors, writers and directors, as well as “below the line” labor, which accounts for crew roles such as costume designers, gaffers and script supervisors, among others.
Productions would have to meet a minimum spend of $1 million, and shoot 75% of their scenes in the U.S.
Commercials, news programming, daytime dramas and game shows are excluded, among other types of productions.
U.S. Rep. Brian Jack, R-Peachtree City, whose congressional district includes Trilith Studios, is a cosponsor on the House bill. In a statement, he said the direct and indirect jobs created by the incentive are “enormously important.”
“With the support of the White House, our bill will create an overdue federal program to bring the movie magic back to America while creating thousands of jobs and spurring local economic growth across the nation. This legislation has bipartisan, bicameral support, and it’s time we get this passed,” Jack said.
Supporters, who span crew members, talent, soundstage operators and other vendors, have anticipated this filing, hoping it will lure production back to the United States. Actor Jon Voight, who President Donald Trump appointed as one of his so-called “Hollywood envoys” last year, has helped lead the charge, alongside other lobbying organizations such as Film USA and the Coalition for American Production. Trump already offered his support, posting on Truth Social that the amount of money spent on tax incentives “will be made up tenfold by the money pouring into the Treasury’s coffers.”
Critics, on the other hand, argue the national incentive is merely a salve in solving a broken revenue model within the industry. Tax expert Michael Thom, who teaches at the University of Southern California, doesn’t believe bringing production back to the U.S. should be a matter of public policy.
“The industry can ‘heal thyself’ by changing their own labor costs,” Thom said in an email. “It’s no coincidence that the recent employment declines coincided with a new union contract. And, hey, maybe folks like Tom Holland can take a pay cut!”
As of August 2026, 39 states maintain film and television incentive programs. Georgia has one of the country’s most generous, offering a 30% transferable, uncapped credit, with Savannah offering an additional uplift of 10%. The 30% credit has remained unchanged since it was supersized in 2008, and remains one of the largest tax breaks lawmakers have approved.
So, in theory, if a production were to shoot in Savannah and meet all the minimum thresholds for the state, regional and national film incentives, it could receive back a significant amount of the money it spent on labor and other qualified production expenses. Thom said he doesn’t know of any industry receiving that level of “corporate welfare.”
Last week, creative industries consultancy Olsberg SPI released a report detailing the proposed economic impact of the national film tax incentive, assuming it was a 20% transferable tax credit that would stack on top of state incentives. About 143,500 full-time jobs are expected to be created between 2027 and 2035 with the incentive, and productions are predicted to spend an additional $125.3 billion in the U.S. during that time period.
Economists have long thrown cold water on impact numbers tied to state tax incentives. In 2023, an audit prepared by the Georgia State University Fiscal Research Center found Georgia’s industry creates fewer direct and indirect jobs than it purports to generate. Critics say the taxpayer money can be used for other budget priorities: education, healthcare, infrastructure.
Production spend in Georgia this past fiscal year was $2 billion, less than half what it was at its peak in 2022, and a 10-year low.
Still, $2 billion is a lot of money. Production isn’t dead, per se, but it has reset after the streaming boom inflated the number of film and television projects in active production. And now Georgia is facing stiff competition from other states and countries that have upgraded their incentive programs, looking to take advantage of the same investment that has brought business to the Peach State.
Many people in the industry are out of work. This summer, the then-business representative of Georgia-based film crew union IATSE Local 479 reported 2,000 of their 5,400 members are in arrears on their dues because they haven’t been able to find work.
Even before the legislation was introduced, the national incentive was included as a potential sweetener in the antitrust settlement reached between Paramount and a coalition of litigating states. If the national incentive were to pass, and both California and New York were to pass uncapped film tax incentives, Paramount would increase its number of productions filmed domestically from 5% to 40%. The settlement has yet to receive approval by the court. Among the heavyweights in the U.S. for production, Georgia is the only state to offer an uncapped program, which means the annual distributions aren’t limited to a specific number.