this post was submitted on 11 Nov 2023
68 points (95.9% liked)
[Dormant, please move to [email protected]] Movies and TV Shows
2720 readers
1 users here now
Please move to
This is a community for entertainment industry news and general discussion about movies and TV shows.
Rules:
- Keep discussion civil and on topic.
- Please do not link to pirated content.
- No spoilers in the title of submissions. And please use spoiler MarkDown in the body of discussions. This is a courtesy to other users.
- Comments solely criticizing headlines and/or journalism will be removed for being off-topic.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
You’re saying the same thing. But it’s stupid to think like this either way.
Everyone pretends that write offs/loss carry-forwards are some dark magical thing that’s good for business.
It’s not, they’re terrible, it’s just less terrible than not being able to do it.
No one wants to write things down or take losses when they don’t have to.
No… people get paid unlike the original comment that I was correcting, and it’s not zero percent like the response to me. They will get the tax rate for their state and federal level and that amount say 30% of that 200 million would go against their profit.
It’s a shitty loophole, but people are getting paid and it’s not 0%
There are people paid on the net/gross performance of a film that I think they’re referring to- often in addition to a lower salary/wage. They don’t get paid any of that, but also doesn’t contribute to the loss.
It’s not a shitty loophole. And what actually happens if they post a $200M loss, is that when they make a $340M gain the following year it’ll only appear as a $140M gain on their taxes.
In reality it’s almost certainly netting out in the same year and nothing is carrying forward. Their $5B in profit will just be $4.8B instead because they lost $200M.