Netflix's 'Don't Look Up' Got $46 Million From Massachusetts Taxpayers
According to recently updated figures, more than half of the state's film production credits for 2021 went to just one film, whose two stars collectively earned over $50 million.

Newly released state revenue data shows that Massachusetts taxpayers played a major role in funding a mid-budget Hollywood movie about climate change.
The dark comedy Don't Look Up premiered on Netflix in December 2021. In the film, a team of scientists discovers that an asteroid will soon hit the Earth and destroy all human life, but they find that nobody wants to heed their warnings. A blunt allegorical tale, the movie tries to do for climate change what Dr. Strangelove did for nuclear war.
The film grossed less than $800,000 worldwide against a budget estimated between $75 million and $110 million. (Since the film debuted on a streaming service, box office receipts matter less than viewership numbers: Viewers streamed the film for 111 million hours in its first two days and then for another 152 million hours over the following week.)
Variety reported that stars Leonardo DiCaprio and Jennifer Lawrence received $30 million and $25 million, respectively, though that total includes money from Netflix to compensate for the film not receiving a wide theatrical release, since stars could otherwise negotiate for a percentage of the box office proceeds. But as it turns out, more than half of the production budget came not from a studio or a producer with deep pockets, but from Massachusetts taxpayers.
Like many other states, Massachusetts offers tax credits for film and television productions that film in the state. In particular, Massachusetts offers credits worth 25 percent of a production's expenses and payroll tax liability incurred in the Bay State. If the credits exceed the production's Massachusetts tax liability, they can claim 90 percent of the remainder as a refund. There is no maximum, and the credit is transferable, meaning a production company can sell it to another company or taxpayer and pocket the cash.
This month, the Massachusetts Department of Revenue released updated numbers for the 2021 tax year. Much of the film tax credits went to productions like This Old House ($545,159 over two series) and Antiques Roadshow ($687,403 over two seasons). But the new numbers also show that of the $73.3 million total that the state reports spending on film tax credits for 2021 productions, a whopping $46.3 million went to Don't Look Up.
In other words, Massachusetts taxpayers covered more than 84 percent of the two stars' salaries, or between 42 percent to 61 percent of the film's entire budget.
Supporters of such programs argue that they stimulate the economy: "The level of impact and the amount of benefits the film tax credit brings to Massachusetts is immeasurable, creating local jobs and boosting overall economic activity in our cities and towns," state House Speaker Ronald Mariano (D–Quincy) said in 2021 after the legislature voted to make the credits permanent. State Rep. Tackey Chan (D–Quincy) said the production of Don't Look Up means more than 15,000 hotel room nights rented in the state.
But evidence doesn't bear out that optimism. According to a 2021 report by the Tax Expenditure Review Commission, while "by its nature, this credit produces immediate and measurable spending within the Massachusetts economy…the Film credit has had no discernable impact beyond its one-time spending. Further, much of the initial spending that qualifies for the Film credit occurs outside of Massachusetts, providing no benefit at all. The result is that, while the film credit provides some immediate stimulus, it does not contribute to the long run growth of the state's economy. Even though we are able to measure in detail all of the economic benefits of this credit, it still results in a cost of $100,000 per job created. We conclude that this is not the best use of the state's money."
The story is the same in other states. State auditors found that Georgia's film credit program cost the state $160,000 for every job produced, a return on investment of just 19 cents on the dollar. According to the New York state government's economic development entity, "The Film Production Tax Credit program is designed to strengthen the film production industry in New York State and its positive impact on the State's economy." But even though state lawmakers plan to spend as much as $700 million on production credits this year, a December 2023 audit found that the credits were "at best a break-even proposition and more likely a net cost," with a return on investment of 31 cents on the dollar.
In Don't Look Up, writer-director Adam McKay crafted an allegorical tale about climate change denialism, similar to how he previously depicted the 2007–08 financial crisis in The Big Short. Perhaps with his next film, he could turn his trademark wit to another public policy shortcoming: the tendency of central planners to use other people's money to shape the world to their own will.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments 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 and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Did anyone else feel like "Don't Look Up" was a trust-the-science propaganda piece?
I took it as a how far people will stick their head in the sand. Much like we just saw with Biden's cognitive state.
I took it as a how far people will stick their head in the sand
Yeah, exactly, like how people wouldn’t get on board with how safe and effective covid/lockdown/masking/double-masking/one-way-maskinization/mandates/climate change/net-zero policies were.
Did anyone else feel like “Don’t Look Up” was a trust-the-science propaganda piece?
Didn't see it, but it gave off that vibe pretty strongly. Along with "made by people with no understanding of any science."
What I enjoy about allegories like this one is to take note of just how far off they have to make the dramatic situation in order to make their trope work.
"Society may face mild discomfort in coming decades, or maybe not, and people don't seem to care that much" is, as even Hollywood people know, an uncompelling movie. So the "mild discomfort maybe" has to be replaced with "absolutely empirically certain imminent doom," which then makes people's inattention absurd. But also highlights why they can't actually use Climate Change as the disaster, tacitly admitting that the threat from Climate Change is not absolutely empirically certain imminent doom, and that people ignoring the hysteria wouldn't be nearly as absurd as it is in the case of a huge rock plummeting toward Earth.
I felt it was something of a blunt instrument - enjoyable enough, but nor as clever as it thought it was.
I have one guess as to why it bombed.
Those two have nothing in common. If that's typical of the movie, the script must have been pretty damned bizarre.
One of the more telling parts is how Adam McKay acknowledged through DiCaprio's character that the country was so polarized that half the people wouldn't listen to him, without any reflection whatsoever as to how things got to that state. Jennifer Lawrence's character was basically just her playing herself--a hyper-emotive creature who politicized everything, and ended up alienating the very people who she should have been finding comfort in with the inevitable end of humanity.
Your quote doesn't have enough highlights. Dr. Strangelove was an allegory for nuclear war the way The Passion of The Christ was an allegory for torturing and killing a Messianic Jew.
This really is no different than any other sort of tax credit or subsidy or distortion. They all mostly just change decisions to reward rent seeking behavior.
Im old enough to remember a tax reform in the mid80's that was intended to simplify everything and eliminate a lot of the shit from the tax code. IIR it lasted about one year before the grifters started back in with distorting things. After all - if you can't get tax distortions wtf would you buy pols.
No, this one's different in being 90% refundable.
Government makes the worst investments.
Usually.
But thank God our social security trust fund is only invested in super duper secure US Treasury Bonds. That's why it is 'secure'ity.
Often enough, but not axiomatically, true.
Go ahead, let them run your 401-k. I dare you.
I bet the nattering elitist gas bags in Massachusetts will be even more pleased with this news. They were able to extract tax money from others, both believers and heretics. They can claim responsibility for "clever" propaganda (which they can enjoy over and over in family viewing groups and college courses). They supported the hyper-elites in Hollywood. And they avoided any nasty, evil profit.
My preferred write in candidate is "Giant Meteor".
I didn't bother watching this one. It looked excessively mid.
Somebody wake me up when they make Sharknado 3.
Wake up. They have already made #6.
Oh, Hell No!
No explanation from Biden tonight as to why he didn’t think this a week ago.
He could've said, "I bit off more than it turned out I could chew. Sorry I didn't notice that until a few days ago." I'd've believed him. Instead, it's like nothing changed, like he never said anything about running for another term. Like the topic never came up before.
That's why this feels like he should be blinking out an sos
I'd guess the party insiders told his wife, Doctor Biden (who didn't spend six years in evil medical school to be called "Mrs." thank you very much) that they could get on board or get thrown under the bus.
I just checked headlines at Drudge and MSNBC to see what it's all about. Talking points were obviously party written, right in with the mass of coverage. He's doing it to save democracy.
Along side his exactly party line comments, I also noticed several articles about how people opposing Kamala are racist and sexist, and discounting anything any critic has to say about her because someone on the internet pointed out that she was a diversity hire, or that she cackles. SO, I guess being embarrassed by a national leader who can't speak and has an unsettling demeanor, and wondering how horribly other world leaders would respond to her, is not a valid criticism of our next, first woman, first black woman, bestest, most moderate, uniter of a president to be.
Here's the first link: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/rcna162570
Also, Republicans are floundering, Kamala has a massive lead in the polls, and Democrats are so optimistic they'll have the first female president.
Yeah, this shit was coordinated. I'll never know, but if someone suggested even before the debate I'd believe them.
"Along side his exactly party line comments, I also noticed several articles about how people opposing Kamala are racist and sexist"
I called this a few days ago.
And yes, this "rushed, desperate" handover of power, or at least the occupant of the throne, was planned months ago--at least.
Yeah, that was you that said it.
And, just to be clear, my problem with cackling and word salad has nothing to do with her being a diversity hire. I cringe listening to FJB mumbling his way through a speech, too. Politicians, in general, are mortifying, but Kamala is particularly cringeworthy.
Stupid and unselfaware know no racial or gender bounds.
It'd probably help republicans case if the very online right would stick to making fun of her laugh and inability to make a cogent statement instead of droning on for 2 days straight about diversity hires, blowjobs and her not being black.
Or they could talk about her lack of political talent and terrible policy ideas.
I guess we'll see if a certain crowd plays directly into the msm's narrative or not.