►
From YouTube: 2/18/2021 - Assembly Committee on Revenue
Description
For agenda and additional meeting information: https://www.leg.state.nv.us/App/Calendar/A/
Videos of archived meetings are made available as a courtesy of the Nevada Legislature.
The videos are part of an ongoing effort to keep the public informed of and involved in the legislative process.
All videos are intended for personal use and are not intended for use in commercial ventures or political campaigns.
Closed Captioning is Auto-Generated and is not an official representation of what is being spoken.
A
Thank
you.
I'd
like
to
call
the
assembly
committee
on
revenue
to
order
will
the
secretary
please
take
roll
assemblywoman.
B
C
A
Thank
you-
and
I
am
here-
we,
everyone
is
present,
so
we
have
a
forum
I'd
like
to
welcome
everyone
watching
or
listening
over
the
internet
to
this
virtual
meeting.
Our
meetings
for
the
time
being
will
be
held
in
this
format
only
and
they're
regularly
scheduled
for
4
pm
on
tuesdays
and
thursdays.
A
A
Due
to
that,
you
may
see
members
looking
around
on
multiple
screens
or
hard
copy
print
outs.
Please
don't
take
that
as
a
sign
of
disrespect
or
inattention
we're
just
trying
to
navigate
in
this
virtual
world
with
these
virtual
committee
meetings
as
a
reminder
and
as
I
stated
on
our
agenda,
we'll
have
public
comment
at
the
end
of
the
meeting
and
may
be
limited
in
duration.
A
Details
on
how
to
participate
during
public
comment
are
available
on
nellis,
which
you
can
get
to
on
the
legislature's
website.
Persons
who
wish
to
provide
testimony
or
attend
the
meeting
virtually
must
pre-register
online
at
the
nellis
website.
Registration
opens
when
an
agenda
is
posted
to
the
legislature's
website
and
upon
successful
registration.
Registrants
will
receive
a
telephone
number
meeting
id
and
instructions
for
joining
the
meeting.
A
Opposition
to
a
biller
resolution
shall
be
is
construed
as
not
supporting
the
measure
as
written
or
opposing
the
mesh
measure,
as
revised
by
an
amendment
that
has
not
been
approved
by
the
sponsor
of
the
measure
and
neutral
is
when
the
person
who's
testifying
is
offering
particular
insight
on
the
measure,
but
expresses
no
opinion
on
the
measure
either
way.
A
So
as
an
example,
you
can
love
a
bill
and
want
it
to
pass
and
think
it's
great
but
think
there's
a
little
slight
thing
that
needs
to
be
changed
and
if
your
amendment
has
not
been
accepted
by
the
sponsor,
you
must
testify
in
opposition,
but
you
can
certainly
share
with
us
that
you
love
the
bill
and
just
want
that.
Little
tweak
to
be
made
so
also,
please
note
that
everyone
on
the
video
is
a
presenter,
a
member
of
the
assembly
or
staff.
A
This
may
change
in
the
future,
but
for
the
sake
of
fairness
for
now,
support,
opposition
and
neutral
testimony
will
be
taken
on
the
phone.
So
with
that
we'll
now
move
on
to
our
presentations
for
the
public,
you
can
exhibits
most
of
the
exhibits
brought
by
the
presenters
on
nellis
and
then
for
the
members.
As
a
reminder,
director
brown
detailed
the
differences
between
abatements
and
tax
credits
in
his
presentation
on
february
9th.
A
If
you'd
like
to
refresh
yourself
on
the
differences
between
those
two
with
that
I
will
start
the
presentation
on
80
20,
which
revises
provisions
relating
to
transferable
tax
credits
for
film
and
other
productions,
and
ask
executive
director
of
goed
michael
brown
to
go
ahead
and
introduce
the
presentation
and
your
team
will
be
presenting.
C
Thank
you,
madam
chair
members
of
the
committee.
When
I
became
go
out
director,
I
didn't
know
a
lot
about
the
film
division
and
have
come
to
learn
more
as
director,
but
one
of
the
first
things
I
also
challenged.
All
of
my
staff
is,
I
said,
you
know,
go
ed
was
was
10
years
old
and
some
of
these
programs
were
even
older.
I
said
I'd
like
you
to
look
at
our
statutes
and
see
what
might
need
updated
so
that
we
could
take
10
years
of
experience
the
legislature.
C
I
also
we
have
placed
a
high
high
standard
of
compliance.
James
hum
who's
handling.
Our
legislative
affairs
is
actually
the
compliance
officer
at
goed
who
came
over
from
attorney
general
ford's
office
at
bryn
gibson's
request
a
month
before
I
arrived
to
go
ahead
to
strengthen
a
variety
of
our
compliance
programs,
the
film
division,
I'm
gonna,
let
eric
walk
through
the
bill.
I'll
tell
you.
C
The
main
issue
here,
though,
is
that
you
know
these
are
transferable
tax
credits,
so
these
are
tax
credits
given
to
production
companies
that
then
can
be
sold
to
to
other
parties,
and
when
that
legislation
was
put
together
many
years
ago,
there
was
a
list
of
non-qualified
activities
and
they
included
sports
and,
of
course,
las
vegas
has
changed.
We
now
have
a
sports
economy
there
and
we
have
sports
teams
there,
but
we
we.
C
We
were
starting
to
get
just
numerous
requests
about
projects
that
weren't
the
actual
competition
but
were
related
to
the
sporting
event,
and
I
don't
want
to
color
outside
the
lines
on
these
things.
Transferable
tax
credits
do
not
rise
to
the
level
of
the
go
ed
board
for
final
approval,
so
it
ultimately
rests
with
with
eric
and
myself
to
make
the
decision.
And
frankly,
we
have
just
reached
a
point
where
we
just
don't
know
what
to
do
in
this
space,
because
clearly
the
legislature
sent
a
strong
signal
when
they
wrote
this
bill.
C
Originally,
an
article
will
detail
that
in
more
detail,
the
draft
you
have
in
front
of
you
is
is
a
conservative
version,
but
this
is
not
anything.
We're
wedded
to
we
need
policy
guidance
in
this
area
from
the
revenue
committees
with
respect
to
how
they
wish
these
to
be
treated
and
with
that
I'll
turn
it
to
my
colleague
eric
who's,
also
a
cpa,
and
I'm
really
pleased
to
have
him
on
our
team.
E
Thank
you.
I
appreciate
that
director
brown,
chairwoman
cohen
and
members
of
the
assembly
revenue
committee.
Thank
you
for
this
opportunity
to
testify
in
support
of
ab20
for
the
record,
my
name
is
eric
price
and
I
am
the
director
of
the
nevada
film
office
that
is
housed
in
the
nevada's
governor's
office
of
economic
development.
E
The
content
creation
media
industry
drives
attention
to
nevada
that
has
resulted
in
widespread
economic
development
and
tourism
as
economic
development.
Before
turning
to
the
bill,
I'd
like
to
provide
some
additional
background
on
the
program
itself.
The
transferable
tax
credits
for
film
and
other
productions
program
was
passed
by
the
state
legislative
legislature
in
2013
and
went
into
effect
on
january
1
2014..
E
Having
administered
this
program
for
seven
years,
I
am
bringing
ab20
before
you
today
in
an
effort
to
improve
the
law
to
reflect
the
best
practices
for
the
state
and
to
align
them
with
industry
standards.
Based
on
our
experience,
the
bill
seeks
to
further
clarify
certain
aspects
of
the
program
to
reflect
the
office's
working
and
functional
interpretation.
E
It
is
primarily
a
housekeeping
bill
to
properly
reflect
the
best
practices
for
the
program.
Turning
to
bill
itself,
section
one
addresses
the
types
of
productions
that
can
qualify
for
the
program.
Interstitial
television,
programming
and
interstitial
advertisements
have
been
removed
as
qualified
productions,
as
their
inclusion
is
redundant
and
inconsistent
with
industry
tech
terminology.
E
E
E
It
also
extends
the
allowable
time
to
complete
the
required
audit
from
90
days
to
270
days,
which
is
more
consistent
with
the
actual
time
frame
required
for
an
auditor
to
complete
the
work.
The
requirement
of
a
nevada
business
address
to
be
included
on
the
application
has
been
removed
and,
as
a
production
will
typically
apply
before
they
have
established
that
address.
E
Section
three
of
the
bill
removes
the
requirement
that
the
application
must
be
submitted
before
any
qualified
costs
can
be
incurred
and
instead
allows
qualified
costs
to
be
incurred
during
a
defined
qualification
period
qualified
period.
This
section
also
addresses
the
manner
in
which
a
nevada
business
can
acquire
tangible,
personal
property
for
the
benefit
of
a
qualified
production.
E
This
subsection
was
initially
intended
to
prevent
pass-through
benefits
to
non-nevada
businesses,
but
it
also
unintentionally
prevented
nevada
businesses
from
growing
their
inventory.
This
change
allows
nevada
businesses
to
grow
their
inventories
to
accommodate
bigger
productions,
while
still
preventing
pass-through
benefits
to
non-nevada
businesses.
E
E
E
E
A
Thank
you.
We
do
have
questions
so
far.
I
have
questions
from
assemblywoman
considine,
assemblywoman
anderson
and
assemblywoman
bilbray
axelrod.
So
if
anyone
else
has
questions,
please
go
ahead
and
let
me
know,
and
we'll
start
with
assemblywomen
constantine.
F
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
and
thank
you
for
the
presentation.
I
do
have
a
couple
of
questions.
One
of
them
is
just
to
make
make
sure
that
I'm
clear
so
you
mentioned
the
sporting
event
and
that
on
page
three
of
the
bill,
currently
sporting
events
and
the
additional
language
sports
pre-shows
post
shows
are
not
qualified
productions.
E
It
does
not
the
the
nrs
specifically
states
what
is
not
a
qualified
production,
so
the
the
subsequent
change
from
shall
to
may
would
not
in
any
way
override
productions
that
are
specifically
excluded
from
qualifying.
F
Okay,
thank
you
and
then
sheriff.
I
may
ask
a
second
question:
please
go
ahead
so
on
the
bill.
Explanation
with
the
transferable
tax
credits,
I
was
adding
up
the
tax
credits,
the
15
and
then
the
12,
and
then
the
5
for
above
the
line,
folks,
not
in
nevada
and
the
five
percent
below.
Does
that
mean
that
a
production
can
essentially
add
up
to
30
get
obtained
37
of
the
available
tax,
transferable
tax
credits
like
almost
a
third
of
their
production
tax
credits?
They
can
get
them
in
in
the
aggregate.
E
The
most
that
a
production
can
qualify
for
the
maximum
allowable
tax
credit
is
25,
and
that
is
calculated
as
15
is
the
base
rate
plus
five
percent
bonus.
If
your
crew
are
more
than
50
percent
nevada
residents
and
another
five
percent
bonus,
if
your
production
is
filmed
in
a
more
rural
area
of
nevada
about
approximately
outside
of
clark
county
for
a
total
of
25
percent,
the
12
rate
is
in
lieu
of
the
15
percent.
So
if
you
are
a
nevada
resident,
you
could
qualify
for
15.
E
A
Okay,
with
that,
we
have
a
question
from
assemblywoman
anderson.
F
Thank
you,
chair
cohen,
and
thank
you
all
for
the
presentation
and
also
for
the
meeting
that
you
all
gave
me
so
much
time
today,
because
I
had
a
lot
of
questions,
so
I
really
appreciated
the
education
that
you
all
provided
for
me
earlier.
F
F
That's
a
pretty
lengthy
time
frame,
and
so
my
concern
had
to
do
with
first
of
all
being
three
times
as
much
time
then
also,
how
does
that
impact
the
calendar,
because
it
kind
of
makes
that
wonky
time
frame?
So
if
you
could
walk
us
through
how
that
would
also
impact
the
10
million
max
and
transferable
tax
that
can
be
used
for
a
year
if
possible,.
E
Thank
you
very
much
for
the
question,
so
this
requirement
changes
the
amount
of
time
in
which
the
audit
can
be
completed.
It
was
originally
90.
We
are
changing
it
to
proposing
to
change
it
to
270..
I
happen
to
be
a
cpa
and
have
been
for
20
plus
years
and
in
working
with
the
productions.
E
It
can
take
some
time
the
procedures
themselves
takes
time.
The
cpas
can
be
very
busy
and
there's
a
limited
number
of
cpas
that
are
approved
through
our
program,
also
because
of
the
nature
of
productions.
Sometimes
they
are
complete.
They
go
to
edit
the
footage
to
create
the
the
content
and
they
need
to
come
back
and
do
reshoots
in
nevada
to
make
sure
they
get
that
additional
footage.
E
By
increasing
the
time
frame.
We
are
allowing
all
those
costs
to
accurately
get
captured
so
that
the
audit
is
as
accurate
as
possible.
You
know
when
this
process
is
all
said
and
done.
We
want
to
make
sure
that
the
accuracy
is
there,
that
the
compliance
is
there
and
the
artificial
select
subjective,
90-day
time
frame
was
proving
to
be
too
short.
E
So
we
wanted
to
make
sure
that
these
are
as
accurate
as
possible,
allowing
the
cpas
the
productions,
their
accountants,
their
attorneys,
whoever
is
involved
to
make
sure
that
they
can
be
done
accurately
also
when
a
production
on
the
second
part
of
your
question
when
a
production
applies
for
the
incentive,
we
then
take
the
money
that
that
they
apply
for
and
allocate
it
to
that
production,
so
it
is
in
effect,
set
aside
for
them,
so
the
extension
of
days
available
is
not
going
to
affect
that
calculation
in
any
way
and
lastly,
it
actually
gives
us
a
little
more
time
to
process
that
90
days
was
just
proving
to
be
too
short
of
a
time
frame.
G
Having
issues
with
unmuting
well,
my
colleagues
did
a
good
job
because
I
had
a
couple
of
questions.
But
then
one
of
my
colleagues
brought
up
a
question
that
I
didn't
know
I
had
so
let
me
start
with
I'm
gonna
piggyback
off
something
women
constantine
you
had
when
you
broke
that
up
into
the
15
percent
base,
plus
a
15
bonus
for
using
nevada's
talent,
and
then
you
said,
five,
I'm
sorry,
five
percent
five
percent,
not
15.
and
then
five
percent
for
filming.
G
E
Yes,
definitely
in
reno
they
do
qualify
for
the
five
percent
bonus.
G
Okay
and
then
my
other
question,
and
it's
more
when
you
removed
the
business
address
and
the
production
company,
I
understand
that
a
lot
of
these
applications
would
be
in
first,
but
I
just
wonder
if
that
would
push
them
to
not
actually
set
up
an
office
here
and
try
to
do
sort
of
more
unconventional
things.
So
I
was
just
wondering
if
we
might
want
to
put
in
there
at
some
they
they
don't
have
to
have
the
their
their
physical
address
in
nevada
before.
But
at
some
point
they
might
want
to
update
that.
G
E
They
they
definitely
do
set
up
an
office
here
in
nevada.
All
that
we're
saying
here
is
at
the
time
of
the
application
that
they
don't
need
to
have
that
business
address,
but
that,
when
they
do
film
here
that
they
typically
will
set
up
that
production
office
that
that
they
just
don't
have
to
have
it
at
the
time
of
application.
A
Go
ahead,
however,
let
me
first
I've
been
remiss-
and
I
haven't
reminded
speakers-
please
make
sure
and
reintroduce
yourself.
Your
names
alone
is
fine,
just
for
the
sake
of
the
secretaries
when
they
have
to
transcribe
the
the
meeting
later
on,
but
please
go
ahead.
Assemblywoman.
G
Thank
you,
and
I
I
just
once
again-
I
just
would
hate
for
us
to
lose
any
revenue
on
this,
so
I
I
wish
we
could
get
some
verbiage
in
here
to
say,
but
please
update
once
you
do,
have
the
nevada
address,
so
we
so
they
understand
that
that
is.
We
want
them
to
have
a
production
office
here
and
in
and
that'll
help
drive
revenue
as
well.
E
The
the
law
currently
does
not
require
them
to
have
a
nevada
business
license
or
to
set
up
a
nevada
business
to
produce
content
in
nevada.
For
an
example,
a
sony
motion
pictures
may
come
here
to
film
a
movie.
They
won't
necessarily
set
up
a
business
in
nevada
to
film
that
movie,
but
they
will
set
up
a
production
office
during
the
production
of
the
film.
So
this
this
change
would
not
affect
business
license
revenue
in
any
way.
E
It's
merely
stating
that
when
the
application
is
completed,
they
do
not
have
to
have
that
that
you
know
they
don't
not
have
to
know
that
location
during
the
application
process,
but
when
they
do
come
and
start
filming
at
that
point,
they
will
have
to
know
what
that
address
is.
A
Thank
you
director,
and
just
your
name
is
fine
with
that.
I
have
a
question
from
assemblyman
heathen.
H
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
and,
if
you
indulge
I
do
have
two
questions.
One
is
a
follow-up
to
my
colleague
regarding
the
physical
location
and
actually,
let
me
just
say
it
basically
ditto
to
what
she
said
and
I'll.
I
appreciate
those
comments.
The
first
question
that
I
have
is
in
your
presentation.
You
mentioned
the
economic
impact
and
the
benefits
to
the
state
of
nevada,
for
these
tax
credits.
Do
you?
Is
there
a
quantitative
figure
that
you
have,
that
shows
what
the
benefit
is
in
relation
to
the
tax
credit.
E
Yes,
per
the
nrs,
the
film
office
and
through
goed,
is
required
to
prepare
an
annual
report
regarding
the
film
tax
incentive
program
and
the
productions
that
have
applied.
So
that
is
an
annual
report
that
we
prepare
every
year
and
I
believe
is,
is
due
on
october
17th
annually,
and
we
can
provide
that
report
to
anyone
who
would
like
to
have
it.
H
Yeah,
I
would
I
would
prior
to
having
a
workshop
on
this.
I
would
like
to
see
those
numbers
just
so
we
can
ensure
that
we're
we're
getting.
H
You
know
the
economic
benefit
versus
the
tax
credits
and
then
the
the
the
second
question
and
madam
chair,
I
appreciate
you
indulging
me
on
the
questions,
is
back
to
what
my
colleague
was
saying
regarding
removing
the
physical
address
portion.
Is
there
a?
I
know
you
said?
Typically,
they
they
form
an
office
once
they
after
they
file
the
application
and
are
about
to
produce.
H
Is
there
anything
in
here,
though,
that
requires
that
I
tried
to
quickly
look
after
the
question
was
asked,
but
I
didn't
see
that
that
was
an
actual
requirement
and
the
reason
that
I'm
asking
is,
for
obviously
you
know,
taxes,
property,
taxes,
commerce,
tax,
etc,
once
they
have
a
physical
address.
So
I'm
just
curious.
If
it
was
in
here
and
I'm
just
missing
it.
E
Sure
eric
price
from
the
film
office,
there
is
currently
no
requirement
for
a
company
to
produce
content
in
nevada
to
set
up
a
business
in
nevada.
It
is,
it
is
not
a
requirement
of
the
nrs,
so
that
would
be
something
that
would
have
to
be
added,
because
it
is
currently
not
a
requirement.
H
But
real
brief,
I
thought
that
it
was
and
this
may
be
for
legal.
I
thought
there
was
a
requirement
in
the
state
of
nevada
if
you're
gonna
be
doing
business
to
actually
have
a
business
license
and
an
established
business
in
the
state.
D
Kim
spurgeon
from
the
film
office,
I
can
answer
that
question.
Typically,
when
a
production
comes
to
film,
they
will
apply
for
a
film
permit
and
that
film
permit
allows
them
to
operate
and
and
in
the
state
that
way,
so
some
film
permits
they
do
have
to
pay
for
in
that
way.
But
it's
not
licensed
in
that
same
way
that
a
typical
permanent
business
would
be
due
to
the
nature
of
filming
productions.
D
They're
temporary,
so
they
get
those
temporary
permits
issued
through
the
various
jurisdictions
throughout
the
state,
as
opposed
to
a
permanent
business
license.
A
Time,
thank
you.
Next,
we
have
questions
from
assemblyman
roberts.
I
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
and
two
brief
questions,
just
if
I
may,
and
one
to
follow
up
on
a
question
by
my
colleague,
northern
nevada
and
sparks
regarding
the
extension
of
the
audits
you,
you
basically
talked
about
the
270
days,
but
I
also
see
you
added
language
to
allow
an
extension
to
an
additional
90
days.
E
Eric
price
from
the
film
office,
you
know
we've
had
productions
in
the
past
that
again,
production
is
a
very
unique
business
in
itself.
It
is
not
predictable.
There
are
times
when
reshoots
need
to
be
made
when
a
an
actor
is
actually
pulled
from
a
production
and
all
the
scenes
need
to
be
re-filmed,
so
we
wanted
to
give
ourselves
and
the
productions
themselves
the
ability
to
do
that
effectively
without
restricting
them
to
an
arbitrary
time
frame.
E
You
know
by
creating
day
and
then
giving
ourselves
a
little
leeway
for
extenuating
circumstances.
You
know,
as
they
become
necessary.
I
So
in
essence,
we
could
extend
it
up
to
four
times
what
we're
doing
now,
which
is
to
understand,
and
my
follow-up
question
or
another
question.
Madam
shares
on
on
your
you're
you're,
adding
a
number
of
events
to
clean
up,
and
you
kind
of
explain.
You
know
what
the
sporting
industry
and
some
of
the
driving
forces
behind
that
I'm
just
curious.
I
Why
pageants
were
specifically
added
to
this
list.
E
You
know
the
languages
originally
written
included
a
gala
or
a
words
show.
The
addition
of
pageant
was
simply
to
provide
more
clarity
to
help
us
administer
the
program
more
effectively.
You
know,
as
the
administrators
of
the
program
were
just
trying
to
execute
the
legislative,
intent,
gala
and
award
shows
were
vague
terms.
The
including
of
pageants
was
to
to
merely
just
try
to
be
as
accurate
as
possible,
given
the
questions
that
we've
had
through
our
experience
in
the
past.
E
Eric
price
from
the
film
office,
they
they
were
not,
and
so
we
were.
We
were
just
trying
to
put
that
consistency
into
the
language.
I
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
Just
a
couple.
I
hope
they'll
be
quick.
I
just
in
section
one
I
see
we're
deleting
interstitial
television
programming,
interstitial
advertising
just
wondered
what
interstitial,
what
that.
E
Is
I
just
not
familiar
with
that
term,
and
neither
is
anybody,
that's
why
we're?
That
is
why
we're
removing
it.
These
were
some.
I
think
terms
that
were
used
very
early
on
in
the
past
they're,
not
common
industry
terms.
They
have
never
been
addressed.
No
one
has
ever
tried
to
apply
for
one
and
or
most
people
ask
that
same
exact
question,
so
we
were
trying
to
take
it
out
to
provide
clarity,
as
we
didn't
see
any
benefit
of
it
being
there.
I
Thank
you,
you
know
you're
definitely
going
to
get
an
application
now
in
the
next
month
that
asks
for
an
approval
of
something
interstitial
and
we'll
be
we'll
be
back
here
talking
about
it.
But
thank
you,
madam
chair.
The
other
question
I
had
it
kind
of
is
along
the
lines
of
my
colleague,
assemblyman
roberts.
He
had
asked
about
adding
pageant
to
the
list
of
exclusions,
and
you
know
up
there
in
page
three
sub
e.
It
talks
about
ample
really
amplifying
the
definition
of
sporting
event
to
include
you
know.
E
Thank
you
eric
price
from
the
film
office.
We
had
a
little
bit
of
a
technical
glitch
there,
but
I
do
think
I
understood
your
question.
So
if
I,
if
I
didn't
that,
that
might
be
why
the
additional
language
there
was,
if
we
look
at
the
terms
not
included
or
the
production's,
not
included,
you
know
in
in
2a,
we
say
news
weather
current
events
program
and
then
we
go
on
to
all
the
way
down
to
e,
where
we
say
sporting
event
again.
E
E
You
know
the
show
before
the
show
and
the
show
right
after
the
show
where
they
talked
about
the
event
itself
and
so
those
kind
of
blurred
the
lines
were
they
were
they
current
programs
about
sporting
events,
both
of
which
would
have
been
excluded
so
again
just
to
try
to
clarify
the
legislative
intent
and
to
be
you
know
better
administrators
of
the
program.
We
were
looking
to
to
get
some
more
language
that
clearly
defined
what
what
we
were
seeing
here
in
the
statute
as
non-qualifying
productions,
whether
they
were
sports
events
or
news
events.
C
This
wasn't
written
by
the
finger
of
god,
but
it
does
say
shall
not
or
doesn't
it's
not
and
and
so
you
know,
I
don't
think
we
have
a
strong
position
either
way.
Obviously
you
know
getting
big
production
movies
and
television
series
you
know
are
important
and
as
transferable
tax
credit
there's
a
finite
amount
of
them,
and
so
we
want
to
make
sure
that
you
know
they're
deployed
with
the
greatest
possible
return.
But
this
is
this.
Is
the
revenue
committee
and-
and
we
welcome
your
input
on
this.
A
Thank
you
could
maybe
either
of
you
director,
price
or
director
brown.
Can
you
just
tell
us
why
why
you
would
want
one
show
one
one
show
or
entertainment
event
over
another
like
why
why
a
reality
show,
but
not
a
sports,
show
why
a
yeah,
just?
E
Eric
price
director
of
the
film
office
again,
you
know
the
bill
was
written
in
in
2013.
We
were
not
participating
in
writing
the
bill
at
that
time.
Again
we're
just
trying
to
clarify
what
the
intent
was
as
the
administrators
of
it.
However,
my
assumption
would
be
that
there
is
a
limited
amount
of
tax
credits
in
the
state
of
nevada.
E
Currently
we
have
10
million
available
per
year,
and
you
know
certain
types
of
content
are
going
to
get
a
broader
reach
and
generate
more
attention
to
the
state
of
nevada
over
a
longer
term
period
of
time
than
other
types
of
content,
and
so
certain
television
shows
that
have
a
longer
shelf
life
would
would,
over
the
longer
term,
draw
more
attention
to
vada
and
drive
more
tourism
to
the
nevada.
So
I
believe
that
it
was
you
know
certain
types
of
these
programs.
E
E
A
Thank
you
for
that
director
price.
With
that
we
have
a
question
from
assemblyman
miller.
J
Thank
you.
Chair,
greetings,
good,
to
see
you
again,
director
priest,
you
guys
have
always
been
friendly
to
me
when
I've
come
into
the
film
office
and
helped
me
with
outreach
to
young
people
and
all
of
that
stuff
with
t-shirts
and
everything.
So
thank
you.
J
My
question
here
is
in
section
one
of
the
the
bill
here
and
I
see
where
we
are
pretty
much
expanding.
It
looks
to
me
like
we're
expanding
what
is
included
in
as
a
qualified
as
a
qualified
project.
So
it
looks
like
we're
removing
the
500
000
threshold
per
episode,
so
a
project
can
shoot
one
come
here
and
shoot.
One
episode
without
meeting
that
500
000
threshold,
correct.
E
Eric
price
from
the
film
office,
actually,
what
we've
done
is
the
500
000
threshold
still
remains,
but
we
added
that
it
can
be
one
episode
of
a
show
instead
of
the
whole
series.
For
example,
if
someone
wants
to
film
a
pilot
to
a
new
show
and
that
pilot
meets
all
the
criteria,
we
still
would
like
to
see
if
they
could
film
that
pilot
here,
they
don't
necessarily
need
to
film
the
whole
series
as
long
as
the
pilot
itself
needs
the
existing
criteria,
so
that
criteria
has
not
changed.
J
Okay,
may
I
have
a
follow-up
chair
just
go
ahead.
Thank
you.
Have
we
had
any
conversations
about
that
about
lowering
that
threshold
or
allowing
some
of
the
smaller
guys,
maybe
even
exclusively
to
our
state,
to
be
able
to
collectively
put
projects
together
to
qualify
for
that
threshold
to
meet
that
threshold
and
possibly
benefit
from
the
the
tax
credit.
E
J
Okay,
thank
you.
I
I
as
as
a
independent
filmmaker
who
would
look
to
making
you
know
taking
advantage
of
some
of
our
tax
credits
here
in
the
state
locally.
I
think
it
would
be
advantageous
for
us
to
even
inspiring
the
industry
here
to
look
at
creating
a
situation
where
our
local
producers
can
also
take
advantage
of
this,
and
it's
not
so
focused
on
our
sony's
and
mgms,
and
you
know
major
producers.
So
thank
you.
Thank
you,
chair.
B
Madam
chair,
you
took
my
question
because
I
like
sports
shows
so,
but
I
do
have
one
question:
if
I
may
miss
price,
you
said
in
your
presentation,
if
I
understood
you
correctly,
that
you're
going
to
now
require
shows
that
do
get
tax
credits
at
the
end
to
say
that
the
episode
was
filmed
with
the
assistance
of
the
tax
credit
or
with
the
goed
assistance
from
going.
I
can't
find
it
in
the
bill.
Could
you
tell
me
where
that
is
or
did
I
misunderstand
you.
A
Assemblyman
o'neil:
there
was
an
amendment.
Oh
it's
in
the
amendment.
A
Well
well,
well,
while
we're
here
talking
about
the
amendment
price,
can
you
tell
us
the
term
produced
that's
used
in
the
amendment?
Is
that
what
what
does
that
mean?
Is
that
something
that
anyone
in
the
industry
I
mean?
We
all
know
what
produced
means,
but
is
there
a
specific
definition
for
the
industry.
E
A
Okay,
just
a
second
where
the
the
logo,
you
know
where
the
logo
is
discussed,
so
that
is
in.
I
think
it
was
section
three
of
the
amendment.
E
I
see
it
here
in
in
section
three
subsection
k,
an
agreement
to
include
the
state
logo
provided
by
the
nevada
film
office.
The
end
screen
credits
indicating
the
production
was
filmed
in
nevada.
If
the
production
does
not
include
end
screen
credits,
then
an
alternative
acknowledgement
to
the
state
of
nevada
within
the
final
production
shall
be
made.
A
E
I
don't
know
that
there
was
a
standard
in
the
industry.
I
do
know
that
most
other
programs
that
offer
incentives
to
films
do
have
a
logo
requirement,
so
we
were
adding
that
to
the
end,
which
allows
us
just
to
get
more
of
our
acknowledgement
on
the
screen
and
then
also
potentially
within
you
know,
databases
like
imdb
and
others
by
having
that
in
there
gets
nevada
into
that
for
future
reference.
As
data
gets
collected
around
productions,
you
know
where
you
officially
have
our
logo
go
in
there.
A
Okay,
thank
you.
That's
that's
good
to
know.
I
didn't
even
think
about
imdb
being
something
that
that
the
state
where
the
filming
was
done
would
be
included
in
imdb.
But
okay
with
that
go
to
a
question.
Well,
I
guess
sticking
with
that.
Looking
at
I
just
want
to
go
back
to
that
at
the
end
of
the
last
paragraph
in
section
1
of
section
3
line
27
that
just
just
to
be
clear,
I'm
talking
about
that
word
produced
or
you
know
not
the
logo
so
much
just
that.
E
I
I
don't
know
I
do
not
believe
that
there
is
and
and
kim
spurgeon
our
film
office.
Analyst
may
be
able
to
add
to
this.
If,
if
she
understands
it
differently,.
D
Yes,
kim
spurgeon
here
for
the
record,
I
think
I
know
what
you're
asking
and
yes,
production
is
an
industry
standard
term.
Anyone
who
applies
for
this
program
is
considered
a
production.
D
So
that's
it's
just
kind
of
a
general
term
as
opposed
to
delineating
it
out
to
a
tv
series,
a
feature
film
commercial.
They
are
all
together,
considered
a
production,
and
that
is
an
industry
standard.
A
Okay,
thank
you.
I
appreciate
that
I
just
want
to
have
an
idea
of
how
you're
going
to
administer
the
term
going
with
the
logo,
but
okay.
So
with
that,
I
have
a
question
from
assemblywoman
benitez.
K
Thompson,
thank
you,
madam
chair.
I
appreciate
it.
So
one
of
the
great
things
about
goed
is
that
I
think
in
every
piece
of
legislation
we've
written
over
the
past
decade.
We
require
an
annual
report
or
bi-annual
report,
and
so
I
was
actually
looking
for
a
couple
of
the
reports
and
there's
there's
so
many
of
them
that
I
got
myself
turned
around.
K
So
I'm
going
to
ask
you
questions
about
information,
that's
out
there,
but
my
apologies,
because
I
know
I
can
just
research
it,
but
I
it
might
be
quicker
to
do
it
this
way,
and
so
I
was
wondering
about
the
trend
in
the
usage
of
the
tax,
verbal
trans
credits,
the
transferable
tax
credits
and
so
from.
E
So,
thank
you.
This
is
eric
price
from
the
film
office.
If
I
want
to
make
sure
I
understand
your
question
correctly,
we
are
allocated
approximately
10
million
in
tax
credits
per
year
for
the
program
annually.
We
produce
a
report
through
goed
that
shows
the
amount
of
the
tax
credits
that
were
taken
that
were
awarded
that
year,
the
the
expense
the
production
spend
on
that
for
those
credits
and
other
economic
data
on
those
credits.
E
So
we
I
I
wanna,
say
it's:
it's
been
approximately
five
to
seven
million
per
year
in
in
tax
credits
that
have
been
awarded
annually.
Does
that
answer
your
question.
K
It
does
and
it's
kind
of
been
a
pretty
steady
trend
for
that.
I
I
want
to
recall
that
that
maybe
we
had
more
variations
in
the
usage
of
the
tax
credit,
but
but
I
know
I'm
I
might
not
remember
accurately,
but
it
you
would
say
closer
to
between
five
to
seven
million
is
the
actual.
What
what's
been
awarded.
E
And
yes,
eric
price-
and
I
will
also
ask
kim
to
jump
in
if,
if
she
can,
if
she
can
correct
my
numbers,
but
you
know
the
production
business
is
unlike
most
businesses,
there's
not
a
lot
of
predictability
to
it.
E
K
Okay,
if
I
can
have
a
follow-up
question,
madam
chair,
please
go
so
the
the
thing
about
tax
credits
and
the
way
that
they're
tricky
is.
We
never
know
what
they
say
when
they're
going
to
hit
the
sheets
right.
So
you
know
the
timing
between
when
a
project
starts,
a
project
ends
a
pro
an
audit
happens
and
they
get
the
certificate
of
the
tax
credit.
K
And
typically
the
trend
has
been
that,
though,
the
end
receiver
of
that
tax
credit
immediately
takes
it
to
the
you
know,
puts
it
out
there
to
collect
it
and
redeem
it.
But
it's
always
hard
for
us
on
our
side
to
know
when
that
you
know
five
to
seven
million
dollars
is,
is
gonna
come
due
and
when
it
kind
of,
as
we
say,
comes
off,
the
sheets
is
no
longer
income
that
we
can
count
for
nevada.
So
I
guess
should
I
should.
K
I
have
concerns
about
the
fact
that,
if
we're
increasing
the
amount
of
time
for
the
audit
to
be
done
to
270
days
and
then
there's
90
days
for
the
audit
certificate
to
be
produced,
that
we
get
potentially
a
separate
calendar
year
in
which
those
tax
credits
might
hit.
So
I'm
thinking
of
a
production
that
begins
in
20
the
last
of
this
biennium
year
and
then
that
being
redeemed
in
another
budget
cycle.
E
Eric
price
from
the
film
office,
these
are
excellent
questions.
The
timing
is
always
difficult
to
predict.
Productions
have
different
lengths
of
time.
You
know
we
do
have
from
the
time
they
submit
the
application
to
the
time
they
start
principal
photography
that
they
have
18
months
to
complete
principal
photography
and
then
so
many
months
now
to
complete
the
audit.
So,
typically
because
of
the
length
of
the
productions,
they
will
typically
fall
in
the
following
fiscal
year
or
even
the
next
fiscal,
depending
on
the
size
of
the
production.
E
They
vary
so
greatly
in
in
their
size
and
complexity
that
they
they
typically
definitely
will
most
likely
not
be
redeemed
in
the
same
year
that
they
are
applied
for
and
awarded.
It
is
definitely
a
one
to
two
year
process.
K
E
A
Okay,
I
have
another
question
from
assemblywoman
anderson.
F
Thank
you,
mr
thank
you,
madam
chair,
and
it
kind
of
goes.
I
kind
of
continues
on
with
the
line
of
questioning
that
assembly.
Member
benitez
thompson
was
bringing
up
of
that
the
10
million
in
transferable
tax
credits,
and
again
we
talked
about
this
this
morning,
so
I'm
or
this
afternoon.
Excuse
me:
how
long
do
those
those
tax
credits
carry
over
if
they're
unused
and
how
much
is
there
currently
unused
that
we
might
have
to
be
held
accountable
for
that
time
frame.
E
Thank
you
for
the
question
eric
price
from
the
film
office.
We
so
we
are
allocated
10
million
per
year
in
tax
credits.
If
those
tax
credits
are
not
used,
the
remainder
will
roll
over
for
approx
for
two
years,
a
two-year
rollover
and
then,
after
that
they
will
begin
to
drop
off.
Currently
we
have
approximately
25
million
in
tax
credits
available
because
of
our
annual
allocations,
less
what's
being
used
and
what
has
dropped
off
has
left
us
now,
with
25
million
available.
C
Yes,
michael
brown,
director
go
ahead
for
the
record,
I'm
not
sure
we
have
visibility
as
to
how
that
actually
is
managed
at
the
macro
level
with
the
state.
But
I
know
we
get
periodic
inquiries.
The
legislative
council
bureau
as
they're
getting
ready
for
the
economic
forum
to
factor
those
matters
into
projections.
E
G
F
E
There's
eric
price
from
the
film
office
excellent
question
and
a
a
little
bit
of
a
complex
question:
there's
currently
approximately
43
states
that
offer
film
tax
incentives
and
even
more
countries
around
the
world
that
offer
film
tax
incentives.
They
vary
greatly
in
the
type
of
tax
incentive
that
is
offered
whether
they
are
transferable
tax
credits,
whether
they
are
cash
rebates,
whether
they
are
refundable,
tax
credits.
They
vary
anywhere
from
a
state
like
georgia,
who
has
a
30
tax
credit
with
an
unlimited
amount
of
available
credits
to
be
awarded.
E
I
believe,
last
fiscal
year
they
awarded
over
900
million
in
tax
credits
programs
like
california,
which
offer
a
25
tax
incentive
and
have
a
cap
of
about
330
million
per
year.
States
like
new
york
that
have
a
420
million
program
that
offer
25
to
30
tax
credits,
so
they
vary
greatly
throughout
the
country
and
throughout
the
world
of
of
different
sizes
and
different
types
of
credits.
F
So
I
hope
that
answers
your
question.
If
I
can
ask
a
follow-up,
madam
chair,
please
go
ahead
so
then
are
we
constantly
reviewing
our
our
system
to
see
how
it
does
compare,
and
I
know
it's
very
hard
to
compare
the
states
that
you
mentioned,
I
believe,
all
of
income
tax,
which
is
something
that
we
probably
have
to
factor
into
allowing
all
of
these
credits.
But
I
just
want
to
make
sure
you
know.
C
C
It's
a
major
infrastructure
gap,
despite
being
the
entertainment
capital
of
the
world
in
gaming
and
in
theater,
and
in
shows
and
cirque
and
everything
we
actually
don't
have
the
kind
of
facility
that's
needed,
built
in
las
vegas
for
these
kinds
of
productions.
Despite
our
close
proximity
to
california,.
C
We
michael
brown
for
the
record
we've
identified
that
economic
plan
as
a
as
an
infrastructure
gap,
because
we
believe
that
with
the
advent
of
the
streaming
companies
and
that
there's
more
content,
as
eric
has
explained
to
me
being
produced
now
than
ever
before-
and
you
know
now
it's
a
typical.
You
know
I
think
friends
was
what
friends
was
nine
seasons
or
ten
seasons.
Now
it's
like
fix,
26
shows
three
years
done.
A
Okay,
thank
you
director.
I
have
some
more
questions
and
but
first
let
me
see
if
any
other
of
the
committee
members
have
questions
hey
seeing
none.
Let
me
start
on
mine,
so
I
guess
I'll
start
with
the
club
or
the
audit.
A
So
in
section
four
there's
reference
made
to
the
to
the
audit
and
and
when
we
met,
we
discussed
whether
there
needed
to
be
a
clawback
or
not,
and
it
was
and
it's
my
understanding
and
correct
me
that
that
there
that
there's
a
possibility
that
you
don't
need
a
claw
back,
because
the
audit's
done
first,
but
I'm
just
wondering
what
happens
if
there's
something
a
discrepancy
or
a
problem
that
happens
after
the
audit's
done
and
in
talking
to
staff.
A
They
reminded
me
that
that
a
lot
of
our
statutes
with
clawbacks-
I'm
sorry
with
audits,
still
have
the
clawback
provision.
So
I
just
want
to
know
if
there's
a
way,
we
could
add
the
clawback
provision
so
that
or
put
in
a
clawback
provision
so
that
if
we
find
something
out
after
this,
is
the
credits
have
been
given
out
and
sold
that
we
have
a
chance
to
recuperate.
Some
of
that.
E
When
the
audit
has
been
completed,
the
certificate
of
transferable
tax
credits
is
then
issued
typically
that
production
will
then
transfer
that
to
a
local
nevada
buyer
who
will
purchase
the
credits
and
then
apply
them
on
their
particular
return,
whether
that
be
one
of
the
approved
taxes,
gaming
insurance
or
modified
business
tax,
and
so
there
is
no
clawback
provision
because
of
the
protections
in
place
from
the
independent
cpa
audit.
E
E
Would
I
don't
I
don't
know
what
would
come
to
light
that
would
change
it,
because
the
audit
will
is
designed
to
catch
all
that
and
the
application
of
a
of
a
subsequent
clawback
provision
may
affect
our
ability
to
attract
the
productions
in
the
first
place.
If
there
is
a
risk
that
something
could
be
clawed
back
after,
a
audit
has
been
completed
and
credits
have
been
issued.
D
Kim
spurgeon
for
the
record,
if
I
could
jump
in
here,
I
have
the
law
pulled
up
in
front
of
me
and
I'm
not
sure
it's
in
the
ab20
that
you
have.
I
compared
the
two
and
I
don't
see
it
in
there.
Nrs
360.7597
repayment
amount
of
credit
required
under
certain
circumstances
that
nrs
does
allow
if
a
production
company
is
found
to
have
submitted
any
false
statement,
representation
or
certification
in
any
document
submitted
for
the
purpose
of
obtaining
transferable
tax
credits
or
who
otherwise
becomes
ineligible
for
transferable
tax
credits.
D
After
receiving
the
transferable
tax
credits,
they
shall
repay
to
the
department
of
taxation
or
gaming
control
board,
as
applicable
any
portion
of
the
transferable
tax
credits
to
which
the
production
company
is
not
entitled.
If
that
transferable
tax
credit
was
purchased
by
someone
and
not
used
by
the
production
company,
but
someone
who
bought
the
credit
the
transferee
is,
is
not
liable
for
repaying
that.
If
it's
purchased
in
good
faith,
the
transferee
is
not
subject
to
fortificature.
Just
the
production
who
applied.
A
Thank
you,
okay,
so
I
guess
yeah
so.
A
They're
so
on
page
8
in
section
4
at
the
very
bottom
line
45,
so
it's
4,
sub,
4
b2
one
and
two,
the
production
company
violating
any
state
or
local
law.
A
Yes,
okay?
Is
there
a
threshold
for
that?
You
know
if,
if
someone's
in
the
production
is,
is
driving
the
production
van
and
gets
a
speeding
ticket?
Does
that
is
that
enough,
or
can
we
put
some
some
kind
of
guidelines
on
that
of
what
what
violates
any
state
or
local
law
with
where
that
starts?.
E
Eric
price,
our
intention
with
this
is
not
to
penalize
the
production
or
to
not
provide
tax
credits,
but
but
to
protect
the
local
crew
and
and
employees
and
businesses
that
are
working
on
the
production.
So
it
is
not
in
our
intent
to
use
this
punitively.
E
A
Okay,
thank
you.
I
appreciate
that,
but
I
just
want
to
make
sure
we're
clear.
So
we've
got
a
clear
legislative
history.
I
believe
we
have
another
question
from
assemblywoman
benitez
thompson.
K
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
So
it's
real
quick,
but
I
think
it's
probably
my
my
favorite
part
of
the
spill,
which
is
this
changing
the
shell
to
the
may
in
terms
of
giving
the
your
office
more
discretion
in
the
approval
of
what
is
a
qualified
project,
and
I
guess
for
the
record,
could
you
talk
a
little
bit
about
how
you
imagine
things
look
going
forward
with
that
change?
K
Do
you
imagine
that
you
would
be
able
to
because,
with
a
shell
I'm
I'm
thinking
of
like
you
know,
you've
got
to
approve
them
as
they
come
in
and
without
any
discretion
there
might
be
a
project
that
you
know
is
coming
in
that
you'd
rather
reserve
credits
for
that's
a
much
better
deal
for
nevada
than
something
that
just
got
handed
to
you
when
you
have
a
shell,
so
I
guess,
can
you
talk
a
little
bit
about
how
this
is
going
to
change,
though
the
workings
of
the
offices
or
or
what
we
might
see
with
this
language
change.
E
Thank
you
eric
price.
The
rationale
between
this
change
was
that
we
do
have
a
small
program
currently
with
10
million
available
per
year,
and
it's
very
likely
that
we
could
be
in
a
situation
where
we
have
multiple
applications
at
the
same
time
that
push
us
over
the
limit,
and
we
do
have
to
make
a
decision
so
by
changing
it
from
shall
to
may
gives
us
a
little
more
flexibility
in
that
area.
Again,
our
desire
is
to
approve
productions
that
benefit
the
state
of
nevada,
our
small
businesses
and
our
local
industry
here.
E
So
we're
not
looking
forward
to
saying
no
but
gives
us
a
little
bit
of
flexibility
when
we
are
forced
to
make
a
decision.
K
E
C
And
and
michael
brown
executive
director
for
the
record,
madam
chair
and
leader,
that
was
also
inspired
by
a
conversation
that
we
had
about
making
sure
that
we
understand
that
there
has
to
be
some
level
of
discretion.
This
is
not
an
entitlement.
A
Program.
Okay,
thank
you
for
that.
I
don't
think
I
have
any
other
questions.
Let
me
double
check.
Oh,
I
don't
think
I
have
any
other
questions.
Let
me
check
okay,
seeing
none
I'm
going
to
open
this
up
for
support.
A
So
bps,
can
you
please
open
up
the
phone
lines
for
support.
M
B
G-E-O-R-G-E-R-O-S-S
speaking
on
behalf
of
lbgea,
the
las
vegas
global
economic
alliance,
lbga
strongly
supports
av
the
changes
to
the
film
credit
program
contained
in
ab20.
They
reflect
the
lessons
that
has
been
have
been
learned
over
the
last
10
years
and
hopefully
will
make
it
a
even
more
successful
program.
B
Particularly
some
of
those
items
have
just
been
noticed
in
the
questioning,
such
as
the
use
of
the
word
may,
the
ability
to
build
up
an
inventory
and
the
extension
of
the
auditing
time
to
more
practical
periods.
So
we
strongly
urge
you
to
support
this
program
because,
along
with
a
lot
of
other
things,
we're
trying
to
do
it'll
help
the
economy
of
southern
nevada.
Thank
you.
A
M
B
Good
afternoon,
for
the
record,
my
name
is
dylan
here
with
e-I-t-h
and
I'm
the
government
affairs
analyst
for
the
vegas
chamber.
The
vegas
chamber
has
been
in
support
of
film
tax
credits,
the
last
several
sessions,
and
we
are
in
support
of
clarifying
language
and
expansion
of
different
types
of
programs
such
as
sporting
that
would
qualify
in
section
one.
Thank
you
for
your
consideration
and
I
ask
for
your
support
on
this
bill.
A
M
M
N
Now
is
alfredo
a-l-f-r-e-d-o
alonso
a-l-o-n-s-o,
with
lewis
and
roca
today
on
behalf
of
ufc
endeavor,
and
I
think
we
our
position
is
is
is
actually
very
supportive
in
in
most
of
the
areas.
I
think
the
concerns
we
have
we'd
like
to
be
able
to
have
a
conversation
regarding
both
the
sporting
event
section
and
the
pageant
and
the
reason
being
is
the
way.
The
way
e
is
written,
where
we're
basically
saying
without
limitation.
N
The
pre-show
and
post
show
could
actually
negate
some
some
really
important
content
that,
if
you've
looked
at
a
if
you've
ever
watched
a
super
bowl
or
a
championship
game
of
any
kind,
but
any
of
the
leagues.
You
know
that
there's
a
ton
of
content
in
the
on
the
front
end
on
the
back
end
oftentimes,
they're,
biopics,
on
on
players
many
times.
N
For
instance,
you
would
have
a
situation
where
you
might
have
a
a
biopic
on,
say
tom
brady,
and
if
you've
got
a
a
super
bowl
in
las
vegas
we'd
be
prevented
from
doing
that
type
of
content.
N
I
think
that's
important
because
these
could
be
again
consistent
with
other
parts
of
the
statute
already,
but
unwillingly
we'd
be
taking
them
out
of
the
out
of
play.
I
don't
know
if
you've
ever
seen
some
of
those,
but
they
basically
do
a
five-minute
production
on
on
a
player,
and
then
you
may
see
that
later
in
a
full
documentary,
I
think
I
think
the
state
would
would
be
better
off
having
those
types
of
programming
with
it.
N
With
respect
to
the
pageant,
I
understand
that
the
policy
has
been
to
to
keep
tabs
on
on
galas
and
award
shows,
but
the
pageant
is,
I
think,
a
different
animal.
I
know
that
there's,
obviously
not
everyone
agrees
with
with
the
concept,
but
if
you
look
at
something
like
miss
universe,
that
is
a
a
international
reach
of
over
500
million
people.
N
That's
exactly,
I
think,
what
you're
looking
for
for
las
vegas
in
terms
of
the
advertising
side
of
it,
which
is,
I
think,
very
important
as
as
as
you
look
at
this
type
of
of
event
and
and
they
normally
last
a
full
week,
so
you've
got
all
the
content
that
goes
with
that.
So
it's
not
just
the
show:
it's
not
just
an
award
show
for
one
night,
it's
a
it's
an
event
and-
and
I
think
that's
important
to
remember
that
that
most
of
these
pageants
would
probably
never
meet
the
spend
requirements
anyway.
N
So
I
I
would
tell
you
that
there's
probably
one
or
two
that
would-
and
this
is
one
and
and
so
perhaps
having
that
conversation
as
to
how
we
can
distinguish
some
of
these
from
each
other
and
perhaps
allow
some
of
that
content.
That
is
not
sporting
event
related.
Necessarily.
N
I
totally
get
the
fact
that
they
want
to
get
sportscast
and
and
and
newscast
type
related
events
out
that
that
makes
perfect
sense,
but
I
think
you
want
to
have
some
flexibility
and
and
again,
as
was
discussed
earlier,
I
think
the
discretion
piece
is
going
to
help
with
that
as
well,
because
you
are
going
to
be
able
to
choose
some
of
the
better
events,
some
of
the
better
content
and-
and
it
would
make
complete
sense
to
to
add
some
of
that
back
in
if
possible.
M
M
M
B
Good
evening,
madam
chair
members
of
committee,
stephen
cohen,
for
the
record
stephen
with
the
v
calling
as
in
madam
chair,
just
briefly
with
the
sake
of
time,
in
light
of
the
sia
controversy
that
kind
of
went
viral
around
thanksgiving
and
then
rehashed
itself
couple,
I
would
love
to
see
a
disability,
talent
preference
somehow
worked
into
this
happy
to
work
with
the
agency
and
or
committee
to
accomplish
that
with
that.
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
and
I
yield.
A
A
Okay
with
the
presenters
likes
who
come
forward
and
make
a
closing
remarks,
director
brown,
director
price.
C
I
would
just
say
thank
you
for
hearing
us
today.
You
know
in
congress
they
often
put
a
date
for
our
legislation
to
be
reauthorized,
while
that
might
not
be
common
in
nevada,
and
this
isn't
a
reauthorization.
I
did
think
it
was
just
important
to
bring
these
issues
forward
and
make
sure
that
we
have
a
modern
statute
and
we'd
welcome
any
input.
There's
no
urgency
on
this
legislation.
So
you
know
if
the
committee
wishes
to
take
time
to
deliberate
on
it,
there's
no
problem
on
our
end.
Thank
you
very
much
for
the
opportunity.
A
Thank
you
director,
and
I
think
we'd
certainly
also
like
to
make
sure
that
it's
modern
and
up
to
date
and
gets
the
best
bang
for
nevada's
buck.
So
with
that,
I
will
close
out
the
hearing
on
ab20
and
open
the
meeting
on
ab66,
which
revises
provisions
relating
to
the
abatement
of
certain
taxes.
A
C
Melanie
sheldon
up
michael
brown,
for
the
record
melanie
sheldon
will
be
presenting
on
this,
and
bob
potts,
I
believe,
is
with
us
and
jimmy
who
can
also
answer
any
questions,
and
I
want
to
thank
eric
and
kim
if
they
need
to
to
leave
they
can
they
can
do
so
and
give
us
more
bandwidth,
but
you're
welcome
to
stay.
C
So
again,
I
asked
my
team
to
look
at
some
of
the
issues
that
we
could
update
and,
and
one
of
the
things
I
discovered
was
that
some
of
our
abatements
that
we
had
approved
were
taking
a
long
time
for
the
contract
to
be
finalized.
C
So
long
that
you
we
ended
up,
you
could
see
personnel
changes
on
both
sides
and-
and
I
just
thought
you
know
for
all
of
the
effort
that
we
make
in
the
recruitment
process
in
the
review
process
and
by
the
way,
the
review
of
any
abatements
and
incentives
that
we're
doing
now
includes
a
cross-agency
check
with
all
the
regulatory
agencies
in
state
government,
and
it
includes
a
cr
check
with
good
jobs
first
for
their
national
violators
database,
so
that
when
we
bring
these
companies
forward,
we
have
confidence
that
they're
good
corporate
citizens
and
we
go
through
all
of
that
and
then
a
contract
was
put
together
with
go
ad
and
I'm
just.
C
I
was
just
discovering
that
these
were
stretching
on
forever
and
I
wasn't
sure
whether
maybe
some
people
were
forum
shopping
that
now
that
they
had
their
nevada
deal.
You
know
they
were
out
shopping
for
another
deal,
and
so
I
just
said
you
know
this
can't
go
on
and
and
so
what
we're
proposing
is
a
is
a
one
year.
You
know
the
contract's
got
to
be
put
in
place
within
one
year.
C
If
a
company
were
to
bring
an
extenuating
circumstance,
we
would
certainly
take
that
to
the
board
if
need
be
and
I'll,
let
melanie
walk
through
it,
because
again,
this
revenue
committee.
This
is
very
important.
You
know
for
you
all
to
understand.
O
Thank
you,
director
brown,
chairwoman,
cohen
and
members
of
the
assembly
committee
on
revenue.
Thank
you
for
the
opportunity
to
testify
in
support
of
assembly
bill
66
for
the
record.
My
name
is
melanie
sheldon,
I'm
the
director
of
business
development
south
for
the
nevada,
governor's
office
of
economic
development,
and
I'm
here
today
with
my
colleagues
executive
director,
michael
brown.
O
O
A
company
will
file
an
application
with
goed
and
they
will
go
in
front
of
the
board
to
be
approved
once
they're
approved.
They
enter
into
an
abatement
agreement
or
a
contract
with
goed,
and
the
company
is
actually
able
to
choose
the
effective
date
of
that
contract.
We
recommend
a
go
away
that
they
align
that
with
their
hiring
and
purchasing
schedule.
O
So
just
to
give
you
an
example,
a
company
might
be
approved
for
some
reason.
There
is
a
time
lapse.
They
haven't
signed
their
contract.
They
may
decide
to
come
back
and
pursue
that,
and
currently,
as
it's
kind
of
codified
in
statute,
they
could
go
back
to
the
date
we
received.
The
application
received
the
application,
despite
whatever
time
had
lapsed
and
that
that
that
can
cause
potentially
a
refund
situation
with
the
department
of
taxation,
they
actually
administer
the
abatements.
O
O
The
possibility
could
exist
for
the
company
to
apply
that
a
baited
rate
towards
towards
purchases
and
hiring
that
had
been
done
at
the
full
tax
rate,
and
then
they
could
receive
a
refund
and
obviously,
as
I
said
in
a
time
of
fiscal
uncertainty,
the
state
doesn't
want
to
be
offering
refunds
as
well
refunds
from
what
I
hear
can
be
a
laborious
process,
and
so
that
that
also
takes
the
the
department
of
taxation
away
from
the
audit
team
away
from
their
core
duties
at
performing
the
audit.
O
So
this
is
this
is
again
to
mitigate
this.
This
was
developed
in
in
close
collaboration
with
the
department
of
taxation,
who
are
the
audit
team
who
work
on
this
this.
This
will
make
their
job
easier.
It
will
free
up
resources,
and
it
will
also
it
will
encourage
companies
to
operate
within
goethe's
policy
of
making
a
timely
commitment
to
begin
operations
in
nevada
as
well
as
well
as
adhering
to
their
contractual
obligations.
O
C
Yes,
thank
you,
madam
chair,
my
team's
available
answer.
Any
questions
like
I
say,
governor
sislek
asked
me
to
tighten
all
these
programs
up
when
I
took
this
job
and
you
know
with
all
the
fuss
and
feathers
we
go
through
to
get
one
of
these
abatement
packages
through
you
know
I
kind
of
expect
the
contract
to
get
signed,
put
into
place.
O
And
excuse
me
sorry,
I
should
add
that
most
companies
I
work
with-
have
a
very
aggressive
timeline.
A
Thank
you,
director,
sheldon.
That
actually
was
one
of
my
questions
about.
How
often
does
this
happen
has
it
happened
where
you
felt
there
was
forum
shopping
going
on
what
what's
happened
to
make
you,
you
know,
feel
the
need
not
just
to
tighten
this
up,
but
to
get
a
statutory
fix
to
this.
O
It
it's
not
common
at
all
and
and
the
department
of
taxation
have
also
confirmed
with
me
that
this
is
not
a
common
occurrence
for
them.
However,
we
we
work
very.
We
work
very
closely
with
our
depart.
Our
department
of
taxation,
colleagues
and
director
brown
has
now
commenced,
having
quarterly
meetings
with
them.
So
we've
really
started
to
look
at
issues
on
both
sides
or
efficiencies
or
ways.
We
can
address
this,
and
this
is
just
an
area
that
we
identified
as
a
group
and
realized.
A
Thank
you,
and
can
you
and
I
I
just
want
to
be
clear-
you
can
you
can
show
your
your
presentation.
I
believe
you
had
a
presentation
for
this
phil.
You
can
show
that
if
you'd
like
to.
O
A
No,
that's,
that's!
Okay,
if
you
don't
feel
the
need,
can
you
go
through
the
the
refund
situation?
I
know
there's
a
concern
about
preventing
refunds,
but
how
do
those
refunds?
O
So
a
company
might
start
might
be
approved
by
goed
and
then
they'll
they'll
have
their
contract
sent
to
them
within
or
the
draft
contract
for
their
signature
within
five
to
seven
days
of
the
meeting
and
then
for
whatever
reason
there
might
there's
a
time
lapse.
There's
a
merger
or
acquisition,
there's,
there's
stuff
turnover,
there's
a
change
in
a
business
plan,
there's
forum
shopping
and
so
for
whatever
reason
that
contract
isn't
signed
and
then
maybe
a
year
passes
and
and
the
company
realizes
they
want
to
be
in
nevada
and
this
whole
time.
O
This
is
where
they
should
have
been
so
they'll
come
back
and
say:
well
we
have
this
abatement
and
it
was
approved
and
we've
done
a
bit
of
hiring
and
purchasing.
Now
so
we'd
like
to
apply
the
abatement
to
that,
and
so
they
they
could
go
back
to
the
date
that
we
received
their
application
that
year
prior
and
capture
any
hiring
purchasing
had
been
done.
I
mean
they've
done
that
hiring
and
purchasing
at
the
full
tax
rate.
O
That's
correct:
yeah.
We
would
be
refunding
the
fully
paid
taxes
and
then,
oh
sorry,
we'd
be
refunding
the
abated
amount.
Sorry.
A
Okay,
thank
you
all
right
committee.
Do
we
have
any
questions.
K
Thanks,
I
appreciate
that,
and
so
that's
so
interesting,
I
think
the
with
the
life
of
goed
as
we
go
through
the
program.
It's
so
interesting
what
you
hear
what
the
office
encounters,
because
what
we
envision
as
legislators
and
what
might
play
out
is
always
so
different,
sometimes
than
what
plays
out
in
reality
on
the
ground,
and
I
know
none
of
us
ever
envisioned
writing
the
statute
in
a
way
that
would
allow
for
people
to
kind
of
drag
their
feet
and
get
a
refund.
K
I
would
say
that
that
is
nowhere
in
legislative
attempt,
so
I
I
do
appreciate
this
and
I
like
it
that
it's
kind
of
a
one-year
user
lose
it
like
here's,
here's
the
deal
and
in
any
negotiation,
there's
typically
an
end
date,
so
it
just
makes
a
lot
of
sense
and
it's
long
overdue.
I
I
appreciate
that.
I
guess
what
I
was
also
thinking
was
then
in
in
order
to
make
sure
that
we
we
built
all
of
these
abatement
programs
a
little
bit
differently
right.
K
Within
the
the
tesla
statute
and
the
faraday
statute,
there
were
benchmarks
on
investments
and
those
benchmarks,
then
dictated
whether
or
not
you
got
the
abatement
and
we
we
don't
necessarily
tend
to
have
that
in
the
360.750
chapters
we
we
kind
of
give
them
like
use.
You
know
two
years
or
50
employees
within
the
eight
quarters,
so
I
guess
from
what
you've
seen
would
it
make
more
sense
to
kind
of
look
at
benchmarking,
some
of
those
investments
in
order
to
prevent.
C
Yeah,
madam
chair
leader
and
members
of
the
committee,
michael
brown,
you
know
the
tesla
was
a
truly
exceptional.
You
know
one-off,
legislatively
approved.
You
know
situation,
I'm
not
sure
that,
where
you
know
these
standard
abatements
cover
a
whole
variety
of
companies
and
at
this
at
this
point
I
haven't
seen
anything
in
that.
That
would
necessitate
that
my
frustration
was
born.
Out
of
you
know
when
I
was
in
the
private
sector
and
I
got
a
permit
from
the
government,
I
went
and
did
we
started
the
next
day.
C
You
know
we
went
on
with
it,
and
I
just
I
just
did
not
understand
what
was
going
on
here
and
it
was
quite
frustrating
to
the
folks
at
department
of
taxation
who
really
this
is
not
what
they're
doing
full-time.
This
is
a
collateral
responsibility
that
they
pick
up,
and
so
it
was
also
easing
the
burden
over
there,
but
I
I
don't
know
that
I'd
want
to
get
into
the
in
into
the
existing
abatements
without
knowing
a
lot
more
than
I
have.
K
Thanks
and
I
appreciate
that,
I
know
we
can't
do
anything
about
the
the
deals
that
are
done.
I
was
just
thinking
if
it
made
sense
on
some
of
these
other
ones
to
look
at
it,
but
I'll
I'll.
Let
you
guys
tell
me
that,
and
so
I
think,
if
I'm
correct
looking
at
the
entire
bill,
you
you
cover
through
the
general
economic
abatements.
You
cover
through
you're,
adding
this
into
the
data
centers
you're,
adding
it
through.
K
B
K
A
Thank
you,
director
brown.
I
I
do
want
to
confirm
something
though
the
vice
chair
mentioned,
use
it
or
lose,
and
I
just
want
to
make
sure
I
don't
know
where
it
was,
but
I
think
there
is
there
it's
not
just
that
it's
a
year
and
then
you're
done
it's
a
year
and
you
have
to
reapply
that's.
O
Correct,
okay,
thank
you,
could
you
would
go,
your
application
would
be
considered
stale
and
your
approval
would
and
you
would
go
back
in
front
of
the
board.
C
Yes
and
madame
tara
members
of
the
committee,
you
know
when
we've
done
one
of
these
deals
and
three
constitutional
officers
and
six
and
three
cabinet
members
and
three
private
citizens
that
sat
there
and
reviewed
it.
I
want
to
get
on
with
it,
because
I've
got
other
things
we
need
to
go.
Do
you
know.
A
Right,
certainly,
that's
understandable
director.
Okay,
do
we
have
any
other
questions.
A
Okay
and
director
is
there,
do
you
have
anyone
else
as
part
of
your
presentation
that
you'd
like
to
have
speak.
C
No
thank
you.
No
okay,
appreciate
you
hearing
us
out
today.
Like
I
say
these
are
these
are
sensitive
issues
and
they're
on
my
appointment.
They
were,
they
were.
They
were
marked
as
issues
where
I
needed
to
spend
time
and
attention
to,
and
we
want
to.
We
want
to
respond
to
the
public
sensitivity
on
these
matters.
A
Well
again,
we
certainly
appreciate
you,
you
and
your
team
looking
out
to
making
sure
that
nevada
gets
the
best
bang
for
its
buck.
So
with
that
we're
going
to
move
on
to
support.
M
B
A
Thank
you,
mr
keith.
Next
person
in
support.
A
B
This
is
george
ross
g-e-r-e-e-r-o-s-s
speaking
on
behalf
of
the
las
vegas
global
economic
alliance.
Global
economic
alliance
only
supports
ab66
in
particular,
as
many
of
you
have
pointed
out
already
helps
encourage
the
recipients
to
get
on
with
their
project
number
one
and
number
two
definitely
will
inhibit
warm
shopping.
Thank
you.
M
A
Thank
you
and
just
to
be
clear.
I
think
I
we
got
to
opposition
and
there
was
no
one
there,
but
I
just
want
to
double
check.
Did.
Did
we
check
opposition.
M
L
Yes,
madam
chair
bill
stanley
for
the
record
representing
the
southern
nevada
building
trades
union.
I
would
first
like
to
apologize
for
mr
brown
for
not
following
decorum
and
having
this
discussion
with
him
prior
to
the
hearing
of
the
bill.
But
at
this
point
with
the
rules
established
by
the
chair,
we
would
support
an
amendment
to
this
bill.
So
therefore,
we
would
at
this
point
be
required
to
testify
in
opposition
to
the
bill.
L
L
We
have
numerous
problems
on
that
job
site.
Regarding
local
contractors,
local
hire
provisions,
apprenticeship
opportunities
and
the
area
standard
wages
being
paid
on
this
project.
We
believe
that
when
our
tax
dollars
are
being
spent
or
abated
in
this
fashion,
that
the
area,
standards
and
local
opportunity
and
local
higher
provision
ought
to
be
considered,
and
so
with
that.
L
Madam
chairman,
I
will
again
apologize
to
mr
brown
and
his
team
for
not
having
brought
this
to
his
attention
prior
to
the
bill
being
heard
today,
but
I
hope
that
we
can
have
some
conversations
in
the
near
future
before
the
bill
comes
back
for
a
work
session,
and
you
know
we're
all
trying
to
navigate
this
new
world
that
we're
living
in
here,
and
I
I
too
am
trying
to
do
that.
L
You
know
usually
we're
all
in
carson
city
and
I
can
walk
down
the
street
and
have
these
conversations
and
it's
a
little
awkward
now,
and
I
I
but
I
do
apologize
for
my
tardiness
and
not
following
proper
decorum,
madam
chairman,
so
with
that,
I
I
submit
thank
you.
A
Thank
you,
mr
stanley.
I'm
sorry,
I
guess
I
almost
missed
your
testimony
and
and
encourage
you
to
follow
up
with
the
director
as
we
continue
to
work
on
with
the
bill.
Is
there
anyone
else
in
opposition.
A
Thank
you
so
with
that.
Well,
I
guess
if
you
could
just
double
check
neutral
one
more
time,
just
in
case,
because
I
messed
up
the
order.
A
Thank
you
so
with
that
I'll
ask
director,
sheldon
and
director
brown
to
if
you'd
like
to
come
back
up
and
make
some
closing
remarks.
C
Madam
chair,
you
know
these
are
awkward
times
in
these
conditions
and
I
will
reach
out
to
mr
stanley
and
we'll
have
a
conversation
and
we'll
come
back
to
the
committee,
and
I
thank
you
for
the
opportunity
today
and
thank
you
for
the
kind
words
about
goethe.
Thank
you
very
much.
A
Thank
you.
I
appreciate
your
willingness
to
reach
out
to
mr
stanley,
director
sheldon
anything
else.
O
A
A
Okay,
with
that,
do
we
have
any
comments
from
the
committee.
A
Okay,
seeing
none
our
next
meeting
will
be
tuesday
february
23rd
at
4
pm,
and
that
concludes.