Felhasználónév
Jelszó
Emlékezzen rám
http://www.cineuropa.org/Parliament supports tax reliefhttp://www.communicationsbill.gov.uk/
http://www.ofcom.org.uk/
A group of MPs have urged the UK government to maintain attractive tax incentives and to encourage UK broadcasters to increase their investment in the local film industry. The proposals have been outlined in a 90-page report called ‘Is There a British Film Industry?’, which was published yesterday.According to the key recommendations identified by the all-party House of Commons Culture, Media and Sport committee, the current Section 48 tax relief should be continued but also ‘evolve’ by applying to national and international distribution as well as production.In reviewing the tax regime for film production (supposed to end in its current form by 2005), the Government should also “assess whether there is a case for the introduction of a new terminology to assist the classification of films according to country of origin distinguishing cultural content and financial provenance”, says the report. The recommendations state that the second key priority for the Government is to consider the role of public service broadcasters in relation to investment in British films, using perhaps the Statements of Programme Policy required from the broadcasters and the newly reconstituted Ofcom (the media regulating body) to improve relationships between the UK TV channels and the local film industry. Finally, the report praised the actions of the UK Film Council in “providing assistance and strategic leadership to the industry” and it was stressed that this work should be supported by the Government “so that impetus is not lost”. However, the Film Council was also advised to “balance carefully the need to make progress in each area with the risk of spreading its limited funding too thinly”, and to engage actively with the British Film Institute (the BFI) to clarify the most effective working relationship for meeting their objectives, both shared and complementary”. Annika Pham (19th September 2003) Funding – Holland Tax shelter stoppedThe world of Dutch cinema is perplexed. Filmmakers and professional associations have stressed their disappointment about the decision to cancel the tax measures supporting national cinema.The funding plans were introduced in 1999 and were valid for a five year period. According to an announcement by the Secretaries of State for Economy, Van Gennip, Finance Wijn and Culture, Van der Laan, the tax shelter system will be stopped from January 1, 2004. It seems like a rather unusual decision, especially given that it has been decided at a time when Dutch cinema is going through a strong period of development and has gained a lot of public and critical acclaim both at home and abroad. Marie-France Dupagne (19th September 2003)
Productions – Germany FFA distributes funding At its latest meeting in Berlin on September 16, the FFA – Filmförderungsanstalt has awarded financing worth €115,000 for three treatments and three screenplays. The money is being distributed in the following way: Treatments: Paris gehört uns by Winifred Bonengelproduced by Next Film Filmproduktion GmbH&Co KG€25,000 Cafe by Bence Gyöngyössi produced by Macropulos Film€20,000 Upgrade by Martin Rauhausproduced by Studio Berlin Produktion GmbH€25,000 Screenplays:Russendisco by Oliver Schmitz/ Thomas Wendrichproduced by CMW Film Company GmbH€15,000 Die Totenwäscherin by Klaus Giffhornproduced by Next Film Filmproduktion GmbH & CO KG€15,000 Radu by Andrea Hellerproduced by Colonia Media Filmproduktions GmbH€15,000 The next closing date for new film projects to be sent into the FFA is September 30, 2003. Giovannella Rendi (19th September 2003)
the full text: http://www.sport-amateur.gc.ca/progs/ac-ca/progs/bcpac-cavco/pubs/2001-02/ra-ar/activ_01-02_e.pdf
CAVCO:http://www.sport-amateur.gc.ca/progs/ac-ca/progs/bcpac-cavco/index_e.cfm
CAVCO
Canadian Audio-Visual Certification Office
2001–02
ACTIVITY REPORT
2001-02 CAVCO ACTIVITY REPORT
Activities and programs administered by
CAVCO for the period April 1, 2001, to
March 31, 2002
100 Sparks Street, 4th Floor
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0M5
Phone 1-888-433-2200 • 613-946-7600
Fax 613-946-7602
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION 4
1.1 What is CAVCO? 4
1.1.1 History 4
1.1.2 Mandate 5
1.2 CAVCO activity report analysis 6
1.2.1 Definitions 6
ADMINISTRATION 8
2.1 New initiatives at CAVCO 8
2.2 Administrative process 10
2.3 Workload 10
2.3.1 Applications received 10
2.3.2 Applications granted 12
PROGRAMS 13
3.1 Canadian Film or Video Production Tax Credit (CPTC) 13
3.1.1 Canadian content points 15
3.1.2 Production type 16
3.1.3 Region 18
3.1.4 Official treaty co-productions 19
3.2 Film or Video Production Services Tax Credit (PSTC) 20
3.3 Capital Cost Allowance (CCA) 21
3.4 Beirut Agreement (UNESCO) 22
3
Section 1
INTRODUCTION
T his report provides a review and analysis conducted by the Canadian Audio-VisualCertification Office (CAVCO) of productions certified under its programs up to the yearending March 31, 2002, as well as cumulative data and comparisons over the five-yearperiod from April 1, 1997, to March 31, 2002. Although this report covers all aspects ofthe activities of CAVCO, it is not exhaustive in scope. Its intent is to give the reader a generaloverview of the administration of CAVCO and Canadian certified productions.
Certification Office (CAVCO) of productions certified under its programs up to the year
ending March 31, 2002, as well as cumulative data and comparisons over the five-year
period from April 1, 1997, to March 31, 2002. Although this report covers all aspects of
the activities of CAVCO, it is not exhaustive in scope. Its intent is to give the reader a general
overview of the administration of CAVCO and Canadian certified productions.
1.1 WHAT IS CAVCO?
On behalf of the Department of Canadian Heritage CAVCO administers four federal
government programs. CAVCO lies within the Cultural Affairs sector and is the immediate
responsibility of the Film, Video and Sound Recording Branch. The four programs administered
by CAVCO are the Canadian Film or Video Production Tax Credit (CPTC), the Film or Video
Production Services Tax Credit, the Capital Cost Allowance (CCA) program and the Beirut
Agreement, a UNESCO program.
1.1.1 HISTORY
The Canadian government has long recognized the importance of film and video as a cultural
resource, a vehicle of artistic expression, and a mechanism for reaching vast audiences. Through
the creation of the National Film Board, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation television
networks and production facilities, Telefilm Canada (Telefilm), and the Canada Council’s film
program, the government has moved to provide an artistic, technical, and economic climate in
which Canada’s creative talents could be translated onto the screen to be seen by audiences in the
country and abroad.
CAVCO was created in 1974, along with the introduction of the CCA program for Canadian
feature films, which was designed to increase private sector support of the Canadian feature film
industry. In 1980 and 1982, amendments were made to the program to encourage greater
Canadian participation in the important creative positions of a production, resulting in the
adoption of the current Canadian content point system (see Exhibit 7).On December 12, 1995, the federal government introduced the CPTC replacing the CCAprogram. It provides a refundable tax credit of 25% of qualified labour expenditures, up to amaximum of 48% of the total eligible costs of production, net of assistance, thus providing up to
On December 12, 1995, the federal government introduced the CPTC replacing the CCA
program. It provides a refundable tax credit of 25% of qualified labour expenditures, up to a
maximum of 48% of the total eligible costs of production, net of assistance, thus providing up to
4
12% of the total production expenditures. CAVCO co-administers the program with the Canada
Customs and Revenue Agency (CCRA).
The credit was designed to encourage a more stable financing environment and longer-term
corporate development for production companies, rather than focus simply on single project
financing. Canadian ownership and control requirements ensure that the incentive is available only
to de facto Canadian-controlled companies, while also providing sufficient flexibility to encourageforeign investment. Through this program, the federal government continues to support thecreation of Canadian programming and the development of an active domestic independentproduction sector. In order to make the tax credit more responsive to the needs of the Canadianproduction community, in the Budget 2000, the Government promised to “…review the rulesrespecting the Canadian Film or Video Production Tax Credit…in consultation with industryassociations, to develop criteria for a streamlined mechanism for delivering the incentive.” Theobjective of the consultation was to design criteria that would “…result in a simplified calculationfor the (CPTC), based more closely on labour content; reflect the original objectives of theexisting eligibility requirements for film and video productions that were announced in the 1995budget; and are revenue-neutral in terms of the level of support to be given by the Government.”After a period of consultation, efforts are now underway to achieve this objective.On October 29, 1997, the Department of Finance announced the creation of the new Film orVideo Production Services Tax Credit (PSTC) to replace tax shelter benefits that were previouslyavailable. The Department of Canadian Heritage, through CAVCO, was asked to provideadministrative support for the program, jointly administered by the CCRA.Generally, the PSTC is available at a rate of 11% of the “qualified Canadian labour expenditures”,incurred by an “eligible production corporation” for services provided in Canada by Canadianresidents or taxable Canadian corporations for the production of an “accredited production.” Aslabour expenditures generally account for approximately 50% of a production’s budget, the taxcredit may provide up to 5.5% of total production expenditures.
foreign investment. Through this program, the federal government continues to support the
creation of Canadian programming and the development of an active domestic independent
production sector. In order to make the tax credit more responsive to the needs of the Canadian
production community, in the Budget 2000, the Government promised to “…review the rules
respecting the Canadian Film or Video Production Tax Credit…in consultation with industry
associations, to develop criteria for a streamlined mechanism for delivering the incentive.” The
objective of the consultation was to design criteria that would “…result in a simplified calculation
for the (CPTC), based more closely on labour content; reflect the original objectives of the
existing eligibility requirements for film and video productions that were announced in the 1995
budget; and are revenue-neutral in terms of the level of support to be given by the Government.”
After a period of consultation, efforts are now underway to achieve this objective.
On October 29, 1997, the Department of Finance announced the creation of the new Film or
Video Production Services Tax Credit (PSTC) to replace tax shelter benefits that were previously
available. The Department of Canadian Heritage, through CAVCO, was asked to provide
administrative support for the program, jointly administered by the CCRA.
Generally, the PSTC is available at a rate of 11% of the “qualified Canadian labour expenditures”,
incurred by an “eligible production corporation” for services provided in Canada by Canadian
residents or taxable Canadian corporations for the production of an “accredited production.” As
labour expenditures generally account for approximately 50% of a production’s budget, the tax
credit may provide up to 5.5% of total production expenditures.
1.1.2 MANDATE
For the CPTC program, CAVCO is responsible for estimating eligible labour expenditures as
defined under section 125.4 of the Income Tax Act, and determining whether a production meetsCanadian content requirements, and ownership and control requirements under section 1106 ofthe Income Tax Act (draft) Regulations. CAVCO may then recommend that the Minister ofCanadian Heritage issue two mandatory certificates: the Canadian film or video productioncertificate (Part A certificate) and the certificate of completion (Part B certificate).The PSTC program requires that CAVCO confirm the initial eligibility of the production underdraft Regulation 9300 of the Act, and to issue an “accreditation certificate”.CAVCO also has the responsibility of ensuring that proper mechanisms are in place to deliverquality service at an acceptable level of risk. As well, it has the duty to monitor and evaluate theeffect of emerging trends in the cost of the program, changes in ownership and activity levels ofbroadcaster-affiliated and independent production companies, and the role of other public andprivate sources of financing.
Canadian content requirements, and ownership and control requirements under section 1106 of
the Income Tax Act (draft) Regulations. CAVCO may then recommend that the Minister ofCanadian Heritage issue two mandatory certificates: the Canadian film or video productioncertificate (Part A certificate) and the certificate of completion (Part B certificate).The PSTC program requires that CAVCO confirm the initial eligibility of the production underdraft Regulation 9300 of the Act, and to issue an “accreditation certificate”.CAVCO also has the responsibility of ensuring that proper mechanisms are in place to deliverquality service at an acceptable level of risk. As well, it has the duty to monitor and evaluate theeffect of emerging trends in the cost of the program, changes in ownership and activity levels ofbroadcaster-affiliated and independent production companies, and the role of other public andprivate sources of financing.
Canadian Heritage issue two mandatory certificates: the Canadian film or video production
certificate (Part A certificate) and the certificate of completion (Part B certificate).
The PSTC program requires that CAVCO confirm the initial eligibility of the production under
draft Regulation 9300 of the Act, and to issue an “accreditation certificate”.
CAVCO also has the responsibility of ensuring that proper mechanisms are in place to deliver
quality service at an acceptable level of risk. As well, it has the duty to monitor and evaluate the
effect of emerging trends in the cost of the program, changes in ownership and activity levels of
broadcaster-affiliated and independent production companies, and the role of other public and
private sources of financing.
5
1.2 CAVCO ACTIVITY REPORT ANALYSIS
This report provides an overview of production activity for the five-year period beginning
April 1, 1997, and ending March 31, 2002. Some productions in which principal photography
occurred during that time have not yet applied to CAVCO for certification. This makes complete
data impossible to collect for up to two years after the production commenced principal
photography. In these cases, a proportional representation, or percentage, is used in a particular
year in which applications have not yet been processed.
There is an important distinction to be made between the different types of data used in this
report. Data used in section 2.3, Workload, comes from the volume, or number, of applications
that CAVCO receives or grants in any given year. This may have no relation to the production
activity that occurs in the same year.
CAVCO must issue a “certificate of completion” within 30 months after the end of the fiscal year
end in which principal photography started for each production that applies for certification. As
the production company has the right to apply at any time during this period, this could mean that
CAVCO’s data would be incomplete until all production companies have applied for, and
received a “certificate of completion”.
All “Workload” data is obtained from the Canadian Film or Video Production Tax Credit
(CPTC) and the Film or Video Production Services Tax Credit (PSTC) programs combined.
1.2.1 DEFINITIONS
A, or Part A, or Part A certificate: Having to do with the application for, or the granting of, a“Canadian film or video production certificate”, as defined in section 125.4(1) of the Income TaxAct, for the CPTC program.
“Canadian film or video production certificate”, as defined in section 125.4(1) of the Income TaxAct, for the CPTC program.
Act, for the CPTC program.
B, or Part B, or Part B certificate: Having to do with the application for, or the granting of, a“certificate of completion”, as defined in the Income Tax Act (draft) Regulation 1106, for theCPTC program.
“certificate of completion”, as defined in the Income Tax Act (draft) Regulation 1106, for theCPTC program.
CPTC program.
A/B, or Part A/B: Having to do with the application for, or the granting of, both a “Part Acertificate” and a “Part B certificate” simultaneously.
certificate” and a “Part B certificate” simultaneously.
AC, or accredited production, or accreditation certificate: Having to do with the applicationfor, or the granting of, an “accreditation certificate” for the PSTC program.
for, or the granting of, an “accreditation certificate” for the PSTC program.
* * *
Application granted: An “application granted” may be either a “Part A certificate” or a “Part Bcertificate” that has been issued for the CPTC program, or an “accreditation certificate” that hasbeen issued for the PSTC program. This should not be confused with a “certified production”,defined below.
certificate” that has been issued for the CPTC program, or an “accreditation certificate” that has
been issued for the PSTC program. This should not be confused with a “certified production”,
defined below.
Application received: An “application received” may be an application by a company for eithera “Part A certificate” or “Part B certificate” for the CPTC program, or an “accreditationcertificate” for the PSTC program.
a “Part A certificate” or “Part B certificate” for the CPTC program, or an “accreditation
certificate” for the PSTC program.
6
Certified production: A “certified production” is one for which a production company applies,and receives, a “certificate of completion”.
and receives, a “certificate of completion”.
Cost of production: The sum of all budgets, or costs of production, for productions used in astatistical manner for a specified period.
statistical manner for a specified period.
Aggregate cost of production: The sum of all budgets, or costs of production, for allproductions used in a statistical manner for the period April 1, 1997, to March 31, 2002.
productions used in a statistical manner for the period April 1, 1997, to March 31, 2002.
Incomplete year: An “incomplete year” is a year for which not all data is available for statisticalor reporting use. In some cases, a year is not complete for up to two years.
or reporting use. In some cases, a year is not complete for up to two years.
Volume: The total number of productions in a sample, or population, for statistical use.
7
Section 2
ADMINISTRATION
O ver the past two years, CAVCO has undergone several administrative changes inresponse to reviews of its management practices. In February 2000, the Minister ofCanadian Heritage, Sheila Copps, announced the findings of a report on the review ofmanagement practices of federal support programs to the Canadian film and televisionproduction industry. This initial examination of the administration of programs, roles andresponsibilities, compliance and control measures, and risk assessment for CAVCO, the CanadaCustoms and Revenue Agency (CCRA), the Canadian Television Fund and Telefilm Canada wasconducted by the Strategic Review Group and concluded that, in general, the managementpractices related to support programs for the film and television industry are sound.As a follow up to this report, CCRA conducted a separate audit of CAVCO’s managementpractices to ensure that the Canadian content and citizenship requirements under section 1106 ofthe Income Tax Act (draft) Regulations are met. It was noted that, while basically sound, therewas room for minor improvements. PricewaterhouseCoopers also conducted a follow-up reportentitled Risk Assessment and Proposed Enhanced Management Control Framework for theFederal Support System for Television and Film. And finally, under CAVCO’s initiative, anindependent consultant was hired to make a diagnostic assessment of key management issues andinitiatives, build a results-based business model and management framework, examine the internaladministrative structure of the organization, and make suggestions for improvement of fileanalysis and administration.
response to reviews of its management practices. In February 2000, the Minister of
Canadian Heritage, Sheila Copps, announced the findings of a report on the review of
management practices of federal support programs to the Canadian film and television
production industry. This initial examination of the administration of programs, roles and
responsibilities, compliance and control measures, and risk assessment for CAVCO, the Canada
Customs and Revenue Agency (CCRA), the Canadian Television Fund and Telefilm Canada was
conducted by the Strategic Review Group and concluded that, in general, the management
practices related to support programs for the film and television industry are sound.
As a follow up to this report, CCRA conducted a separate audit of CAVCO’s management
practices to ensure that the Canadian content and citizenship requirements under section 1106 of
the Income Tax Act (draft) Regulations are met. It was noted that, while basically sound, therewas room for minor improvements. PricewaterhouseCoopers also conducted a follow-up reportentitled Risk Assessment and Proposed Enhanced Management Control Framework for theFederal Support System for Television and Film. And finally, under CAVCO’s initiative, anindependent consultant was hired to make a diagnostic assessment of key management issues andinitiatives, build a results-based business model and management framework, examine the internaladministrative structure of the organization, and make suggestions for improvement of fileanalysis and administration.
was room for minor improvements. PricewaterhouseCoopers also conducted a follow-up report
entitled Risk Assessment and Proposed Enhanced Management Control Framework for theFederal Support System for Television and Film. And finally, under CAVCO’s initiative, anindependent consultant was hired to make a diagnostic assessment of key management issues andinitiatives, build a results-based business model and management framework, examine the internaladministrative structure of the organization, and make suggestions for improvement of fileanalysis and administration.
Federal Support System for Television and Film. And finally, under CAVCO’s initiative, anindependent consultant was hired to make a diagnostic assessment of key management issues andinitiatives, build a results-based business model and management framework, examine the internaladministrative structure of the organization, and make suggestions for improvement of fileanalysis and administration.
independent consultant was hired to make a diagnostic assessment of key management issues and
initiatives, build a results-based business model and management framework, examine the internal
administrative structure of the organization, and make suggestions for improvement of file
analysis and administration.
2.1 NEW INITIATIVES AT CAVCO
As a response to the industry call for simplification of the tax credit program, and the reviews
mentioned above, CAVCO implemented several administrative initiatives to speed up the
certification process, irrespective of any future changes to the legislation and regulations of the
Income Tax Act. Following is a list of some of these initiatives.
Integrated automatic templates: Previously, a tax credit officer (TCO) had to analyze a file andmanually type the required information in the recommendation and certificate templates. A newsystem has been developed to automatically enter the proper information directly from thedatabase into the templates. This has resulted in increased time for TCOs to analyse new files, anda reduction in human errors.
manually type the required information in the recommendation and certificate templates. A new
system has been developed to automatically enter the proper information directly from the
database into the templates. This has resulted in increased time for TCOs to analyse new files, and
a reduction in human errors.
8
Reduced documentation: CAVCO has recently developed a new checklist for documentationthat must be submitted by the production company with their application. For “Clearly Canadian”productions, which have little or no foreign involvement and have attained a high proportion ofCanadian content points, production companies need not submit some of the informationpreviously asked for.
that must be submitted by the production company with their application. For “Clearly Canadian”
productions, which have little or no foreign involvement and have attained a high proportion of
Canadian content points, production companies need not submit some of the information
previously asked for.
Production company declaration: In the past, production companies were required to submitto CAVCO all certificates and objects of incorporation for the company so that CAVCO couldverify whether a production company was an eligible “Canadian” film or video productioncompany. With the help of the Department of Justice, a more simplified method of verification ofthe corporation has been implemented with an affidavit-like, two-page form detailing informationfor private corporations with less than fifty shareholders.
to CAVCO all certificates and objects of incorporation for the company so that CAVCO could
verify whether a production company was an eligible “Canadian” film or video production
company. With the help of the Department of Justice, a more simplified method of verification of
the corporation has been implemented with an affidavit-like, two-page form detailing information
for private corporations with less than fifty shareholders.
Restructuring: CAVCO has recently undergone structural changes in order to accommodateincreased workloads and to make the organization more efficient and responsive to clients needs.New specialized positions have been created in two main sections: Business and Legal Affairs, andOperations and Client Relations. Within the realm of the Business and Legal Affairs section is themanager, the senior policy officer, and the tax credit officer, Legal. Within the Operations section,the manager oversees the senior tax credit officer, French Market, the senior tax credit officer,English Market, tax credit officers, and administrative support positions. At the head of thisstructure is the director.
increased workloads and to make the organization more efficient and responsive to clients needs.
New specialized positions have been created in two main sections: Business and Legal Affairs, and
Operations and Client Relations. Within the realm of the Business and Legal Affairs section is the
manager, the senior policy officer, and the tax credit officer, Legal. Within the Operations section,
the manager oversees the senior tax credit officer, French Market, the senior tax credit officer,
English Market, tax credit officers, and administrative support positions. At the head of this
structure is the director.
Increase in tax credit officers: To respond to the continuing increase in tax credit applicationsreceived by CAVCO, the number of tax credit officers has nearly doubled in the last two years toseventeen. This has led to a dramatic increase in the file output, virtually eliminating a backlog ofapplications, and establishing a file turnaround time of approximately eight to ten weeks.
received by CAVCO, the number of tax credit officers has nearly doubled in the last two years to
seventeen. This has led to a dramatic increase in the file output, virtually eliminating a backlog of
applications, and establishing a file turnaround time of approximately eight to ten weeks.
Canadian Content Audit Program: The Canadian Content Audit Program (CCAP) wascreated to reduce risks attached to the certification of Canadian film or video productions byCAVCO.To minimize these risks the Department of Canadian Heritage, with the aid of the CanadaCustoms and Revenue Agency (CCRA), implemented an audit program that strives to ensurepublic confidence in issuing Canadian film or video production certificates. In order for this tosucceed, CAVCO developed various audit procedures and provided full training sessions inregard to Canadian content issues to help CCRA auditors in their fieldwork.The CCAP pilot project was launched in the autumn of 2001. To inaugurate the program, thirtyfiles from each of the three major centres (Montreal, Toronto, Vancouver) were chosen. CCRAauditors will have completed ninety audits by November 2002.
created to reduce risks attached to the certification of Canadian film or video productions by
CAVCO.
To minimize these risks the Department of Canadian Heritage, with the aid of the Canada
Customs and Revenue Agency (CCRA), implemented an audit program that strives to ensure
public confidence in issuing Canadian film or video production certificates. In order for this to
succeed, CAVCO developed various audit procedures and provided full training sessions in
regard to Canadian content issues to help CCRA auditors in their fieldwork.
The CCAP pilot project was launched in the autumn of 2001. To inaugurate the program, thirty
files from each of the three major centres (Montreal, Toronto, Vancouver) were chosen. CCRA
auditors will have completed ninety audits by November 2002.
9
2.2 ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESS
When an application is received at CAVCO, a file is created with all the
information the producer submitted, and date stamped on the day of
arrival. A certification clerk then enters all relevant information into the
computer database, and a receipt for the payment of the application fee
is sent to the production company.
The file is then sent to the registrar who conducts a preliminary analysis
to ensure that all documents on the checklist have been submitted with the application. If there
are missing documents, the registrar will fax the producer immediately asking for the basic
information, and the file will stay with the registrar until the producer submits the missing
information. If a production company sends an incomplete application, the file cannot be
analysed by a tax credit officer. The file will be placed in the CAVCO Bank for analysis once all
documents have been received from the production company.
H I G H L I G H T
CAVCO granted a record
1605
certificates in 2001-02.
On a first-come, first-served basis, a tax credit officer will retrieve a file from the Bank and
conduct a full analysis. If there are issues to be resolved or further information missing, the officer
will ask the producer for the appropriate documents. The time that the file remains with the
officer normally depends on how quickly the producer responds to the request. Once the officer
determines the file is ready for approval, he or she will print the recommendation and certificate
and send it to the director for approval.
The official certificate is routed to the director general, Film, Video and Sound Recording, and
then sent to the Assistant Deputy Minister’s Office for signature. Once signed, the file is returned
to the certification clerk who forwards it to the production company. Presently, this process takes
approximately 8 to 10 weeks, if there are no issues with the production, and if the production
company promptly sends in all appropriate documents.
2.3 WORKLOAD
Workload is represented by the total number of applications received and the total number of
applications granted at CAVCO in any given year. The majority of the workload is made up of
analyzing and processing Canadian Film or Video Production Tax Credit (CPTC) applications.
2.3.1 APPLICATIONS RECEIVED
The graphs in this section represent the total number of applications received by CAVCO for the
CPTC and the Film or Video Production Services Tax Credit in the specified time period. The
data includes applications for “Part A certificates”, “Part B certificates”, simultaneous A and B
certificates, or Part A/Bs, and “accreditation certificates”, or ACs. It should be noted that an
“application received” (see section 1.2.1) by CAVCO does not represent the amount of
production activity taking place in that particular year. Theoretically, a single production could be
represented as two “applications received” if that production were to have applied for a “Part A
certificate” and a “Part B certificate” separately within the same year.
10
Exhibit 1 shows a steady increase in thenumber of applications received by CAVCOover the five-year period from April 1, 1997,to March 31, 2002. This rise has been causedby an increase in activity of the film andtelevision industry, more “Part A” certifiedproductions applying for “Part B”certification, and the introduction of the Filmor Video Production Services Tax Creditprogram. Most notably, the number of “PartA” applications received, or newproductions, continued to increase in eachsuccessive year. In each of the five yearsfrom 1997-98 to 2001-02, the volume of“Part A” applications are 397, 514, 625, 664and 793, respectively.
number of applications received by CAVCO
over the five-year period from April 1, 1997,
to March 31, 2002. This rise has been caused
by an increase in activity of the film and
television industry, more “Part A” certified
productions applying for “Part B”
certification, and the introduction of the Film
or Video Production Services Tax Credit
program. Most notably, the number of “Part
A” applications received, or new
productions, continued to increase in each
successive year. In each of the five years
from 1997-98 to 2001-02, the volume of
“Part A” applications are 397, 514, 625, 664
and 793, respectively.
Exhibit 1. Applications received, by year
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
97/98 98/99 99/00 00/01 01/02
A B A/B AC
Exhibit 1 shows the total number of “applications received” byCAVCO in each type of application (A, B, A/B, AC) over thefive-year period from April 1, 1997, to March 31, 2002.
CAVCO in each type of application (A, B, A/B, AC) over the
five-year period from April 1, 1997, to March 31, 2002.
This activity is also reflected in Exhibit 2 showing the sum of all applications received byCAVCO, in the same time period. And in Exhibit 3, the graph shows the monthly average of“applications received” for the five-year period from April 1, 1997, to March 31, 2002.
CAVCO, in the same time period. And in Exhibit 3, the graph shows the monthly average of“applications received” for the five-year period from April 1, 1997, to March 31, 2002.
“applications received” for the five-year period from April 1, 1997, to March 31, 2002.
Exhibit 2. Total applications received, by
year
879
1199
1468
1637
1890
1000
1500
2000
Exhibit 3. Average applications received,
by month
110 111 114
137
121
107
127 120 118 120
110119
20
40
60
80
120
140
160
APR
MAY
JUNJUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
NOV
DEC
JAN
FEB
MAR
Exhibit 2 shows the total number of “applications received”over the five-year period from April 1, 1997, to March 31, 2002.
over the five-year period from April 1, 1997, to March 31, 2002.
Exhibit 3 shows the average number of “applicationsreceived” (A, B, A/B, AC combined), per month, for thefive-year period from April 1, 1997, to March 31, 2002.
received” (A, B, A/B, AC combined), per month, for the
11
2.3.2 APPLICATIONS GRANTED
As shown here in Exhibit 4, the output of“applications granted” has been increasingsteadily since 1997, with the exception of2000-01, where the tandem effect of anincrease in the number, or volume ofapplications, and the loss of several taxcredit officers created a “backlog.” Thisanomaly has since been remedied with thehiring of new employees and theimplementation of measures to alleviatethe problem (see section 2.1).As mentioned above, the number ofapplications granted does not necessarilyrepresent the amount of productionactivity taking place in the industry in anygiven year.
“applications granted” has been increasing
steadily since 1997, with the exception of
2000-01, where the tandem effect of an
increase in the number, or volume of
applications, and the loss of several tax
credit officers created a “backlog.” This
anomaly has since been remedied with the
hiring of new employees and the
implementation of measures to alleviate
the problem (see section 2.1).
As mentioned above, the number of
applications granted does not necessarily
represent the amount of production
activity taking place in the industry in any
given year.
Exhibit 4. Breakdown of applications granted,
by year
A 364 437 574 404 683
B 85 295 343 303 400
A/B 202 242 222 165 257
AC 0 45 198 132 265
In Exhibit 5, the total volume of“applications granted” in the five-year period from April 1, 1997, to March 31, 2002, is shown. Inthe fiscal year 2001-02, it is shown that CAVCO issued 1605 certificates, a 60% increase from theprevious year, which reflects the effectiveness of the new, more efficient certification process.
“applications granted” in the five-year period from April 1, 1997, to March 31, 2002, is shown. In
the fiscal year 2001-02, it is shown that CAVCO issued 1605 certificates, a 60% increase from the
previous year, which reflects the effectiveness of the new, more efficient certification process.
Exhibit 4 shows the total number of “applications granted” by CAVCOin each type of application (A, B, A/B, AC) over the five-year periodfrom April 1, 1997, to March 31, 2002.
in each type of application (A, B, A/B, AC) over the five-year period
from April 1, 1997, to March 31, 2002.
Exhibit 6, derived from data used in the same five-year time period as the previous exhibit,shows the average number of “applications granted” in any given month. Fluctuations may occurfor several reasons, including staffing issues, application volume, level of difficulty of theapplication.Because of these variables, there does not appear to be any relation to the average number of“applications received” per month, as in Exhibit 3.
shows the average number of “applications granted” in any given month. Fluctuations may occur
for several reasons, including staffing issues, application volume, level of difficulty of the
application.
Because of these variables, there does not appear to be any relation to the average number of
“applications received” per month, as in Exhibit 3.
Exhibit 5. Total applications granted, by
651
1019
1337
1004
1200
1400
1600
1800
Exhibit 6. Average applications granted by
month
72
94 95 91
