senate Bill S880A

2011-2012 Legislative Session

Authorizes additional tax credits for certain costs incurred in film and television productions in N.Y. city

download bill text pdf

Sponsored By

Archive: Last Bill Status - In Committee


  • Introduced
  • In Committee
  • On Floor Calendar
    • Passed Senate
    • Passed Assembly
  • Delivered to Governor
  • Signed/Vetoed by Governor

do you support this bill?

Actions

view actions (4)
Assembly Actions - Lowercase
Senate Actions - UPPERCASE
Jan 09, 2012 print number 880a
amend and recommit to investigations and government operations
Jan 04, 2012 referred to investigations and government operations
Jan 05, 2011 referred to investigations and government operations

Bill Amendments

Original
A (Active)
Original
A (Active)

S880 - Bill Details

See Assembly Version of this Bill:
A1377A
Current Committee:
Law Section:
Tax Law
Laws Affected:
Amd §1201-a, Tax L; amd Part P §7, Chap 60 of 2004
Versions Introduced in 2009-2010 Legislative Session:
A8805, S5842

S880 - Bill Texts

view summary

Authorizes additional tax credits for certain costs incurred in film and television productions in a city having a population of one million or more.

view sponsor memo
BILL NUMBER:S880 REVISED 01/04/13

TITLE OF BILL:
An act
to amend the insurance law, in relation to the definition of serious
injury and determining the sufficiency of the evidence with respect
thereto

PURPOSE OF BILL:
To provide fairness, guidance, clarity and consistency in the
application of the law. determining "serious injury", to more
accurately and equitably administer the original intent of the
No-Fault law.

SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS: OF BILL:

Section 1:
Amends section 5102(d) of the Insurance Law to adjust the
definition of "serious injury" to read as follows "...a personal
injury which results in death; dismemberment; significant
disfigurement; a fracture; a partial or complete tear or impingement
of a nerve, tendon, ligament, muscle or cartilage; injury to any part
of the spinal column that results in injury to an intervertebral
disc; impingement of the spinal cord, spinal canal, nerve, tendon or
muscle; loss of a fetus; permanent total or partial loss of use of a
body organ, member, function or system; any injury resulting in the
need for a surgical procedure; any permanent consequential limitation
of use of a body organ, member, function or system; any significant
limitation of use of a body organ, member, function or system; or any
medically determined injury or impairment of a permanent or
non-permanent nature which prevents the injured person from
performing substantially all of the material acts which constitute
such person's usual and customary daily activities for not less than
ninety days during the one hundred eighty days immediately following
the occurrence of the injury or impairment. A finding of serious
injury under any of the above enumerated categories
in this definition shall be a sufficient basis for an award for past
and/or future damages."

Section 2:
Amends the Insurance Law by creating a new section, § 5102-a,
as follows "Issues of fact and sufficiency of the evidence. Whether
an injury qualifies as a serious injury pursuant to subdivision (d)
of section five thousand one hundred two of this article shall be a
question of fact. Where evidence is offered as to (a) whether an
injury qualifies as a serious injury pursuant to subsection (d) of
section five thousand one hundred two of this article, or (b) the
causation of such an injury, the sufficiency and weight of evidence
offered, including but not limited to that pertaining to qualitative
and/or quantitative assessment of injury, shall be reserved for the
trier of fact."

Section 3: Effective date.

JUSTIFICATION:
When the Legislature originally passed N.Y.S. Ins. Law § 5102, it
never intended that New York's citizens would be deprived of their
constitutional right to a trial by jury where they actually sustained
a serious injury. The judicial transformation and interpretation of
this statute has produced overwhelming obstacles never intended by
the legislature and has clogged the courts with boilerplate
"threshold motions" which monopolize judicial resources.

Over the past twenty years developments in technology have enabled
medical practitioners to identify injuries to ligaments, tendons,
tissue, nerves and other non-bony structures through the use of CT
Scans, MRIs, EMGs and other methods. Prior to these advances in
technology significant injuries would not have been revealed or
adequately appreciated, but they are now readily identifiable, and
the seriousness of their effects are understood far better than ever
before.

Unfortunately, current law has not kept pace with modern medicine. As
a result numerous cases where a serious injury was clearly present
have been dismissed because the existing law does not clearly and
specifically list and identify such injuries as actionable,
regardless of how the injury affected the accident victims' lives.

The proposed amendments would curtail summary dismissal of legitimate
cases involving significant injuries not objectively verifiable when
the law was originally enacted in 1977. The Courts have been flooded
with countless motions and extensive appellate practice on the issue
of whether a serious injury was sustained, resulting in unfair and
contradictory decisions and the dismissal of meritorious claims.
Injured parties in one
Judicial Department may have their case dismissed as "non-serious"
while in another Judicial Department a case with similar facts is
permitted to proceed.

In all of the following New York Cases, the courts ruled that based on
the current definition and interpretation of "serious injury" that a
jury was precluded from determining whether a serious injury was
sustained and therefore the case was dismissed:

* MATRA V. RAZA - a
person suffered injuries requiring surgery to both
knees as a result of an automobile accident (Matra v. Raze -AD3d-2008
NY Slip Op. 06289 [2"d Dept. 2009]);

* TAYLOR V. AMERICAN RADIO DISPATCHER. INC. - an
accident victim
sustained a tear of the anterior talo-fibular ligament of her ankle
and a tear of the meniscus of her right knee confirmed by MRI

requiring surgery (Taylor v. American Radio Dispatcher-AD3d-2009 NY
Slip Op. 0427 [1" Dept. 2009]);

* BYRD V. LIMO - a
person suffered a tear to the musculature of their
shoulder requiring surgery (Byrd v. Limo-AD3d-2009 NY Slip Op. 09637
[2"d Dept. 2009]);

* DANVERS V. NEW YORK CITY TRANSIT AUTHORITY, - a
victim of a motor
vehicle accident sustained a torn ligament to the ankle that required
surgery (Danvers v. New York City Transit Authority AD3d-2008 NY Slip
Op. 09637 [2"d Dept. 2009]);

* CARTHA V. QUIN - a
person sustained injuries to their elbow requiring
invasive surgery (Cartha v. Quin-AD3d-2008 Slip Op. 03714 [151 Dept.
2008]);

* VALENTIN V. POMILLA - a
person suffered herniated discs to their
spinal column with consequential nerve damage, which were confirmed
by objective and positive EMGs, and sustained injury to their right
knee, which required surgery (Valentin v. Pomilla. 59 AD3d 184 [1'
Dept. 2009]).

These and countless other cases like them have all been dismissed by
our courts for the same reason: despite clearly evident and
debilitating injuries being present, these types of injuries have all
been denominated as "non-serious" by current judicial interpretations
of 5102(d) of the Insurance Law.

Moreover, the judiciary has seemingly usurped the authority of the
Legislature by unilaterally imposing "requirements" for proof of a
serious injury. While the existing statute does not require proof of
contemporaneous quantitative testing or require non-stop medical
treatment for all victims of vehicular negligence the judiciary has
created these as additional hurdles for an injured person to leap
over to prove that they are seriously injured.

Decisional law has repeatedly provoked courts to dictate medical
practices to physicians by imposing these requirements in to the
vagaries of treatment every time a "threshold" motion is interposed.
However, not all judges have approved of this judicial expansion into
usurping the roles of the Legislature, physicians, and juries. The
judiciary has repeatedly asked the Legislature for clarification of
the statute and firm guidance as to its application, to ensure
fairness and consistency in applying the "serious injury threshold"
and ease the enormous burden the current law inflicts on the bench
and upon citizens that have suffered serious injuries.

The amendments proposed by this bill would remedy these problems by
clarifying what qualifies as a "serious injury" and promote fairness
and consistency in its application, taking into account modern
medicine and technology which have enabled medical practitioners to
identify with more specificity and clarity those injuries having real
and serious consequences. These amendments would further call for
jury determinations on factual issues surrounding the nature and
extent of the claims, rather than continuing to hamstring an already
overburdened judiciary with myriad "threshold" motions. Most
importantly, these amendments would promote fair, swift, consistent,
rational, just and easily comprehensible results, in keeping with the
intent of the original law.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY:

S.3790 of 2012: Died in Senate Insurance, Died in Assembly Insurance
S.3790 of 2011: Died in Senate Insurance, Died in Assembly Insurance
A.10739 of 2010: Died in Assembly Insurance

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS FOR STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:
None.

EFFECTIVE DATE:
This act shall take effect immediately and shall be applicable to: (i)
all actions and proceedings commenced on or after the effective date
of this act; and (ii) all actions and proceedings commenced prior to
the effective date of this act and pending on the effective date of
this act, where as of such date a trial of the issues thereon has not
yet commenced and a dispositive motion has not yet been filed.

view full text
download pdf
                    S T A T E   O F   N E W   Y O R K
________________________________________________________________________

                                   880

                       2011-2012 Regular Sessions

                            I N  S E N A T E

                               (PREFILED)

                             January 5, 2011
                               ___________

Introduced  by  Sen.  GOLDEN -- read twice and ordered printed, and when
  printed to be committed to the Committee on Investigations and Govern-
  ment Operations

AN ACT to amend the tax law and part P of chapter  60  of  the  laws  of
  2004,  amending  the  tax  law  relating  to  the  empire  state  film
  production credit, in relation to authorizing additional  tax  credits
  for  certain  costs  incurred  in film and television productions in a
  city having a population of one million or more

  THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, REPRESENTED IN SENATE AND  ASSEM-
BLY, DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:

  Section  1.  Subdivision  (b)  of  section  1201-a  of the tax law, as
amended by section 5 of part Y of chapter 62 of the  laws  of  2006,  is
amended to read as follows:
  (b) Empire state film production credit. Any city in this state having
a  population  of one million or more, acting through its local legisla-
tive body, is hereby authorized to adopt and amend local laws to allow a
credit against the general corporation tax and the unincorporated  busi-
ness  tax  imposed  pursuant  to  the authority of chapter seven hundred
seventy-two of the laws of nineteen hundred  sixty-six  which  shall  be
substantially  identical to the credit allowed under section twenty-four
of this chapter, except that (A) the percentage of qualified  production
costs  used to calculate such credit shall be five percent, (B) whenever
such section twenty-four references the state, such words shall be  read
as  referencing  the  city,  (C)  such credit shall be allowed only to a
taxpayer which is a qualified film production company OR QUALIFIED INDE-
PENDENT FILM PRODUCTION COMPANY, and (D)  the  effective  date  of  such
credit  shall  be  July  first,  two  thousand six. Such credit shall be
applied in a manner consistent with the credit allowed under subdivision
thirty-six of section two hundred ten of this chapter except as  may  be
necessary  to  take  into account differences between the general corpo-

 EXPLANATION--Matter in ITALICS (underscored) is new; matter in brackets
                      [ ] is old law to be omitted.
                                                           LBD03856-01-1

S. 880                              2

ration tax and the unincorporated business tax.  A "QUALIFIED  INDEPEND-
ENT FILM PRODUCTION COMPANY" IS AN INDIVIDUAL OR A CORPORATION, PARTNER-
SHIP,  LIMITED  PARTNERSHIP OR OTHER ENTITY THAT IS NOT PUBLICLY TRADED,
AND  PUBLICLY  TRADED COMPANIES THAT DO NOT OWN, DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY,
MORE THAN FIVE PERCENT OF  THE  QUALIFIED  INDEPENDENT  FILM  PRODUCTION
COMPANY,  AND  THE  INDIVIDUAL  OR  ENTITY IS PRINCIPALLY ENGAGED IN THE
PRODUCTION OF A QUALIFIED FILM AND CONTROLS THE  QUALIFIED  FILM  DURING
PRODUCTION.
  S  2. Subdivision (b) of section 7 of part P of chapter 60 of the laws
of 2004, amending  the  tax  law  relating  to  the  empire  state  film
production  credit,  as  amended by section 2 of part Y of chapter 62 of
the laws of 2006, is amended to read as follows:
  (b) (1) The aggregate amount of tax credits allowed  pursuant  to  the
authority  of  subdivision  (b)  of section 1201-a of the tax law in any
calendar year shall be $12.5 million in 2004 and 2005 and $30 million in
2006 through 2011.  Such aggregate amount of credits shall be  allocated
by  the mayor's office of film, theater and broadcasting among taxpayers
in order of priority based upon the date of filing  an  application  for
allocation  of  film  production  credit  with such office. If the total
amount of allocated credits applied for in any particular  year  exceeds
the  aggregate  amount  of  tax credits allowed for such year under this
section, such excess shall be treated as having been applied for on  the
first day of the subsequent year.
  (2)  NOTWITHSTANDING  PARAGRAPH (1) OF THIS SUBDIVISION, THE AGGREGATE
AMOUNT OF TAX CREDITS ALLOWED PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY  OF  SUBDIVISION
(B) OF SECTION 1201-A OF THE TAX LAW SHALL BE INCREASED BY AN ADDITIONAL
$24  MILLION  IN  2011. THIS ADDITIONAL AMOUNT SHALL BE ALLOCATED BY THE
MAYOR'S OFFICE OF FILM, THEATER  AND  BROADCASTING  IN  ACCORDANCE  WITH
PARAGRAPH (1) OF THIS SUBDIVISION. A TAXPAYER ALLOCATED CREDITS FROM THE
AMOUNTS  AUTHORIZED  UNDER  THIS  PARAGRAPH SHALL NOT CLAIM SUCH CREDITS
BEFORE TAXABLE YEARS BEGINNING ON OR AFTER  JANUARY  1,  2011.  NOTWITH-
STANDING  THE  YEAR TO WHICH CREDITS AUTHORIZED UNDER THIS PARAGRAPH ARE
ALLOCATED BY THE MAYOR'S OFFICE OF FILM, THEATER AND BROADCASTING,  SUCH
CREDITS  SHALL  NOT BE CLAIMED IN EXCESS OF $24 MILLION IN A GIVEN YEAR.
CREDITS AUTHORIZED UNDER THIS PARAGRAPH AND ALLOCATED IN EXCESS  OF  $24
MILLION  IN  A  GIVEN  YEAR  SHALL  BE  CLAIMED  IN THE SUBSEQUENT YEAR.
NOTWITHSTANDING THE FOREGOING, A TAXPAYER WHICH IS A QUALIFIED INDEPEND-
ENT FILM PRODUCTION COMPANY WHO IS ALLOCATED CREDITS UP TO $250,000  PER
QUALIFIED  FILM  FROM  THE AMOUNTS AUTHORIZED UNDER THIS PARAGRAPH SHALL
CLAIM SUCH CREDITS FOR THE TAXABLE YEAR IN WHICH THE PRODUCTION OF  SUCH
QUALIFIED FILM IS COMPLETED.
  S 3. This act shall take effect immediately and shall apply to taxable
years beginning on or after January 1, 2011.

S880A (ACTIVE) - Bill Details

See Assembly Version of this Bill:
A1377A
Current Committee:
Law Section:
Tax Law
Laws Affected:
Amd §1201-a, Tax L; amd Part P §7, Chap 60 of 2004
Versions Introduced in 2009-2010 Legislative Session:
A8805, S5842

S880A (ACTIVE) - Bill Texts

view summary

Authorizes additional tax credits for certain costs incurred in film and television productions in a city having a population of one million or more.

view sponsor memo
BILL NUMBER:S880A

TITLE OF BILL:
An act
to amend the tax law and part P of chapter 60 of the laws of 2004,
amending the tax law relating to the empire state film production
credit, in relation to authorizing additional tax credits for certain
costs incurred in film and television productions in a city having a
population of one million or more

PURPOSE:
This legislation would ensure the continued growth of the film
production industry in New York City through 2014.

SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS:
Section 1 amends adds a new definition of "qualified independent film
production company" to tax law 51201-a(b). This section authorizes
New York City to amend its General Corporation Tax ("GCT") and its
Unincorporated Business Tax ("UBT").

Section 2 amends section 7(b)of part P of Chapter 60 of the Laws of
2004, to increase the aggregate amount of the tax credits allowed
by the City of New York by an additional $24 million a year in 2011,
2012 and 2013. These new credits may not be claimed before taxable
years beginning January 1, 2011, and payout in any year is capped
at $24 million, with any amount in excess to be claimed in the
subsequent year. There is an exception for qualified independent film
production companies, which may claim credits up to $250,000 per
qualified film in the taxable year in which film production is
completed.

JUSTIFICATION:
In the 2009-2010 State budget, the Empire State Film Production Credit
program was provided an additional $350 million in State funding.
That legislation did not apply to the New York City program, which
has been enacted through the City's GCT and the UBT.
This bill will secure funding for the New York City film production
credit through 2013.
Given the fiscal constraints facing the City, this legislation
contains measures to enhance the effectiveness of the incentive and to
better target the tax credit, and also defers the cost to the City of
providing the additional credits to tax years beginning on or
after January 1, 2012.

The City and State have taken important steps to provide incentives to
the film and television industry, because it is an important
contributor to the City's economy. The New York City's Mayor's Office
of Film, Theatre & Broadcasting dramatically enhanced the range
of services that it offers to the industry. Combined with the State
credit, the New York City "Made in NY" film production tax credit,
enacted in January 2005, has been a major success in attracting film
and television production to New York City. Production spending
or qualifying film and television projects increased significantly
since 2004, accounting for an additional $5 billion in direct spending
while providing thousands of additional jobs. These increases


were evident in all production areas: feature films, independent
films, television series and pilots.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY:
S.5842 of 2009-10, Referred to Investigations & Government Operations

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
No new fiscal implications to the State.

EFFECTIVE DATE:
This act shall take effect immediately and shall apply to taxable
years beginning on or after January 1, 2012.

view full text
download pdf
                    S T A T E   O F   N E W   Y O R K
________________________________________________________________________

                                 880--A

                       2011-2012 Regular Sessions

                            I N  S E N A T E

                               (PREFILED)

                             January 5, 2011
                               ___________

Introduced  by  Sen.  GOLDEN -- read twice and ordered printed, and when
  printed to be committed to the Committee on Investigations and Govern-
  ment Operations -- recommitted to the Committee on Investigations  and
  Government  Operations  in  accordance  with  Senate Rule 6, sec. 8 --
  committee discharged, bill amended, ordered reprinted as  amended  and
  recommitted to said committee

AN  ACT  to  amend  the  tax law and part P of chapter 60 of the laws of
  2004,  amending  the  tax  law  relating  to  the  empire  state  film
  production  credit,  in relation to authorizing additional tax credits
  for certain costs incurred in film and  television  productions  in  a
  city having a population of one million or more

  THE  PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, REPRESENTED IN SENATE AND ASSEM-
BLY, DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:

  Section 1. Subdivision (b) of  section  1201-a  of  the  tax  law,  as
amended  by  section  5  of part Y of chapter 62 of the laws of 2006, is
amended to read as follows:
  (b) Empire state film production credit. Any city in this state having
a population of one million or more, acting through its  local  legisla-
tive body, is hereby authorized to adopt and amend local laws to allow a
credit  against the general corporation tax and the unincorporated busi-
ness tax imposed pursuant to the  authority  of  chapter  seven  hundred
seventy-two  of  the  laws  of nineteen hundred sixty-six which shall be
substantially identical to the credit allowed under section  twenty-four
of  this chapter, except that (A) the percentage of qualified production
costs used to calculate such credit shall be five percent, (B)  whenever
such  section twenty-four references the state, such words shall be read
as referencing the city, (C) such credit shall  be  allowed  only  to  a
taxpayer which is a qualified film production company OR QUALIFIED INDE-
PENDENT  FILM  PRODUCTION  COMPANY,  and  (D) the effective date of such
credit shall be July first, two  thousand  six.  Such  credit  shall  be

 EXPLANATION--Matter in ITALICS (underscored) is new; matter in brackets
                      [ ] is old law to be omitted.
                                                           LBD03856-02-2

S. 880--A                           2

applied in a manner consistent with the credit allowed under subdivision
thirty-six  of  section two hundred ten of this chapter except as may be
necessary to take into account differences between  the  general  corpo-
ration  tax and the unincorporated business tax.  A "QUALIFIED INDEPEND-
ENT FILM PRODUCTION COMPANY" IS AN INDIVIDUAL OR A CORPORATION, PARTNER-
SHIP, LIMITED PARTNERSHIP OR OTHER ENTITY THAT IS NOT  PUBLICLY  TRADED,
AND  PUBLICLY  TRADED COMPANIES THAT DO NOT OWN, DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY,
MORE THAN FIVE PERCENT OF  THE  QUALIFIED  INDEPENDENT  FILM  PRODUCTION
COMPANY,  AND  THE  INDIVIDUAL  OR  ENTITY IS PRINCIPALLY ENGAGED IN THE
PRODUCTION OF A QUALIFIED FILM AND CONTROLS THE  QUALIFIED  FILM  DURING
PRODUCTION.
  S  2. Subdivision (b) of section 7 of part P of chapter 60 of the laws
of 2004, amending  the  tax  law  relating  to  the  empire  state  film
production  credit,  as  amended by section 2 of part Y of chapter 62 of
the laws of 2006, is amended to read as follows:
  (b) (1) The aggregate amount of tax credits allowed  pursuant  to  the
authority  of  subdivision  (b)  of section 1201-a of the tax law in any
calendar year shall be $12.5 million in 2004 and 2005 and $30 million in
2006 through [2011] 2012. Such aggregate  amount  of  credits  shall  be
allocated  by the mayor's office of film, theater and broadcasting among
taxpayers in order of priority based upon the date of filing an applica-
tion for allocation of film production credit with such office.  If  the
total  amount  of  allocated  credits applied for in any particular year
exceeds the aggregate amount of tax credits allowed for such year  under
this section, such excess shall be treated as having been applied for on
the first day of the subsequent year.
  (2)  NOTWITHSTANDING  PARAGRAPH (1) OF THIS SUBDIVISION, THE AGGREGATE
AMOUNT OF TAX CREDITS ALLOWED PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY  OF  SUBDIVISION
(B) OF SECTION 1201-A OF THE TAX LAW SHALL BE INCREASED BY AN ADDITIONAL
$24  MILLION  IN  2012. THIS ADDITIONAL AMOUNT SHALL BE ALLOCATED BY THE
MAYOR'S OFFICE OF FILM, THEATER  AND  BROADCASTING  IN  ACCORDANCE  WITH
PARAGRAPH (1) OF THIS SUBDIVISION. A TAXPAYER ALLOCATED CREDITS FROM THE
AMOUNTS  AUTHORIZED  UNDER  THIS  PARAGRAPH SHALL NOT CLAIM SUCH CREDITS
BEFORE TAXABLE YEARS BEGINNING ON OR AFTER  JANUARY  1,  2012.  NOTWITH-
STANDING  THE  YEAR TO WHICH CREDITS AUTHORIZED UNDER THIS PARAGRAPH ARE
ALLOCATED BY THE MAYOR'S OFFICE OF FILM, THEATER AND BROADCASTING,  SUCH
CREDITS  SHALL  NOT BE CLAIMED IN EXCESS OF $24 MILLION IN A GIVEN YEAR.
CREDITS AUTHORIZED UNDER THIS PARAGRAPH AND ALLOCATED IN EXCESS  OF  $24
MILLION  IN  A  GIVEN  YEAR  SHALL  BE  CLAIMED  IN THE SUBSEQUENT YEAR.
NOTWITHSTANDING THE FOREGOING, A TAXPAYER WHICH IS A QUALIFIED INDEPEND-
ENT FILM PRODUCTION COMPANY WHO IS ALLOCATED CREDITS UP TO $250,000  PER
QUALIFIED  FILM  FROM  THE AMOUNTS AUTHORIZED UNDER THIS PARAGRAPH SHALL
CLAIM SUCH CREDITS FOR THE TAXABLE YEAR IN WHICH THE PRODUCTION OF  SUCH
QUALIFIED FILM IS COMPLETED.
  S 3. This act shall take effect immediately and shall apply to taxable
years beginning on or after January 1, 2012.

Comments

Open Legislation comments facilitate discussion of New York State legislation. All comments are subject to moderation. Comments deemed off-topic, commercial, campaign-related, self-promotional; or that contain profanity or hate speech; or that link to sites outside of the nysenate.gov domain are not permitted, and will not be published. Comment moderation is generally performed Monday through Friday.

By contributing or voting you agree to the Terms of Participation and verify you are over 13.