New Britain herald., 1925-09-11
THE FILM TAX LAW
 AND HOW IT WORKS

THE FILM TAX LAW
 AND HOW IT WORKS
 The constitutionality of the film tax law in Connecticut will be brought before the Supreme Court of the United States and 1t will be one of the most interesting legal battles for years before that august tribunal. That the law transgresses the Constitution by operating as state tax upon interstate commerce very likely will be chief point of contention. Many lawyers, in spite of the decision of the federal judges in New Haven, seem to be of the opinion that there is not much diff ference between duty" levied by a state upon product from another state and "taX" levied upon such a product. The difference between state tariff wall, which is barred by the Constitution, and the practical effect of a state tax upon the product of another state, will be a matter for the high court to de- eide.
 Meantime the public is cheerful to contemplate the prospect that the tax will not be added to the cost of theater admissions in this city; at least not flor the present." The tax itself would not amount to much when spread over thousands of admissions, but nobody expects that, in the event of raise. 1t would merely amount to the per capita tax on theater patrons. Things don't work out that way in practice, ir- respective of the theories.
 Churches and similar organiza- tions which show films are in a pe- culiar situation, irrespective of the original intentions of the framers of the law. The tax on a film is only paid once, and the tax applies to each individual film. When the same film is shown in a dozen theaters in the state at the same time and in all of them in due time, the tax will be spread in the manner evidently intended by the Legislature. But If church rents a film that is not 1 being shown at other theaters or elsewhere the tax will be the same, according 10 an official of the pro- | duCers. Thus, if the South Congre- | gational church rents a Fairbanks | film of last years vintage, for in i stance, the state tax will apply upon l the film even If the South church | happens to be the only place where 1 the film is shown in the state during the year, acording to this official. The contention of the producers, by the way, does not coincide with the contention of Representative Rack life as to the exemption of churches. Where the doctors dis agree the public will have to depend upon experiencing what actually happens. The general public will not think we'll of a law that forces a church to pay a film tax, even though the film be in reality com mercial product; and it Is entirely likely that no matter what a strict application of the law would be, the churches using films will not ir practice pay q film tax
 The law will work its chief hard ships in connection with the show. ing of old films that are rented by community organizations and small town theaters, films which have been used in the larger circuits and are nearing the limbo of the film graveyard. Unfortunately, the law appears to make no distinction be twen such films and the new pro auctions. The movie interests state that the hardships to the smal theaters in tho small towns would wipe them out of existence. If thu thoater owners in the larger citie' can assist them over the period un till the operation of the law i stabilized, as some of them hav' promised 10 do. the situation ma! yet be saved to the small towns where most of the legislative rep resentatives come from.
 It is 10 be hoped that the Su preme Court decides the issut promptly. If the state Is victoriou before this court the film industr! will in due time face special taxei in 4s states. The industry is flghtini for the principle of unrestricted trade between states. as well a making an effort 10 avoid the pay ment of a neE fern of taxation.