"The real crime is that a movie starring Richard Dreyfuss ever qualified for taxpayer funds in the first place"

News from the Bay State, where a film subsidy programs not only funded the making of movies that should not have been made in the first place but larceny:

A Cape Cod film maker was indicted today on 10 counts of making false claims and larceny after receiving $4.7 million in tax credits from the state, according to the attorney general’s office.

A Suffolk County Grand Jury returned the indictments on Daniel Adams, 50, who was arrested last week on charges he defrauded Massachusetts taxpayers. He pleaded not guilty last Friday and is being held on $100,000 cash bail.

Tomorrow he is scheduled to appear in Suffolk Superior Court, according to Attorney General Martha Coakley’s office. It was not immediately known who Adams’s lawyer was.

Adams created the films “The Lightkeepers,” a romance starring Richard Dreyfuss in 2009, and “The Golden Boys,” about retired sea captains vying for a younger wife, in 2008. Both were set on Cape Cod. He took advantage of a state incentive that allows film makers to apply for a tax credit equal to 25 percent of eligible production expenses. But prosectors said he deceived the state about his expenses, claiming, for instance, that he paid Dreyfuss $2.5 million, when in fact he paid him only $400,000.

Whole piece here. These sorts of stories remind us that while film subsidies can mean that certain movies get made, it doesn't mean they get watched.

Hat tip to Keep Food Legal head and Reason guest blogger Baylen Linnekin, who notes, "The real crime is that a movie starring Richard Dreyfuss ever qualified for taxpayer funds in the first place."

Reason on film subsidies.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Brian D||

    News from the Bay State, where a film subsidy programs not funded the making of movies that should not have been made in the first place but larceny:

    I know what the article is about, but this sentence doesn't read well to me.

  • Tim||

    Me not sense understand to me. Need caffeine more than now later.

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    My thoughts as well, it's nice to have validation because I start to think "Is today the day that the Alzheimer's sets in?"

  • Dick Fitzwell||

    Also, what the hell is a "prosector?"

  • Bill||

    Yes, change the order of not and funded, then it makes sense.

  • Sparky||

    I think the first not just needs to come out of there.

  • Bill||

    Actually, I change my mind. I should say funded not ONLY films that should not have been made ........ but larceny.

  • Brian D||

    And shouldn't 'programs' be singular?

  • anarch||

    Programs s/b The Singularity.

  • Warty||

  • Bill||

    I agree. The sentence not well reads.

  • Yoda||

    Perfectly fine sense to me makes.

  • Yoda||

    Read it sideways, you must!

  • Tim||

    This all my fault is, not for giving no moeny to webathon. Now interns editing type and not well.

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    I gave at 8:59am, just so The Jacket's intern can afford to hit the remedial English classes at the local community college.

  • Scruffy Nerfherder||

    And it worked! Fast learners, these interns are.

  • invisible furry hand||

    Pity that the teacher was Yoda

  • ||

    Baylen Linnekin is an ignorant philistine. Richard Dryfus is a great character actor.

  • Krampus Kristen ||

    Yeah - he sure killed it in What About Bob?. No scenery chewing or overacting in that role, nosiree.

  • ||

    In an ironic twist, Dreyfus was actually fired from the London stage production of The Producers.

  • DJF||

    I am shocked, shocked that movie producers would lie about money or that the government would waste taxpayer money on things that were not necessary.

  • ||

    Richard Dreyfuss is still alive?

  • Colin||

    According to wikipedia, The Lightkeepers made $32,000.

    Nice investment, Massachusetts.

  • Radioactive||

    J'accuse...whoops wrong Dreyfuss, sorry

  • Paul||

    But same Dreyfuss. They're related.

  • ||

    This may well be the coolest thign I have ever seen dude.

    www.AnonSurfing.tk

  • Franklin Harris||

    "The real crime is that a movie starring Richard Dreyfuss ever qualified for taxpayer funds in the first place"

    Are you kidding? The real crime is this movie starred Bruce Dern!

    It also starred Richard Dreyfuss' son, Bob, so it's taxpayer-subsidized nepotism, as well: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1156067/

  • Neal Simon||

    I
    Don't
    Like
    The
    Subsidies
    Of
    The
    Actors

  • ||

    Did the movie have a liberal message? If so no amount of subsidy was too small!

  • db in a C3PO suit||

    It's ME! Richard Dreyfus!!

  • ||

    What is a "tax credit"? Is it just a reduction in taxes? If so, then why is the article talking about funds having been taken from other taxpayers?

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Progressive Puritans: From e-cigs to sex classifieds, the once transgressive left wants to criminalize fun.
  • Port Authoritarians: Chris Christie’s Bridgegate scandal
  • The Menace of Secret Government: Obama’s proposed intelligence reforms don’t safeguard civil liberties

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement