Just to reiterate, it isn’t really a problem. Its just another facet of tax payer lobbying for a UK based industry propped up
and dependent on subsidies, with inefficient, ‘temporary-harvest’ based business models, built on tax transfers and short term international workers cast-on, cast-off at will. They do not want – and could not accomodate – 150+ fresh new faces annualy in an essentially cynical, subsidy dependent business model.

The study, entitled Next Gen, concluded: “That is mainly a failing of our education system – from schools to universities and it needs to be tackled urgently if we are to remain globally competitive.”

Isn’t bournemouth university in southern england meant to be the flagship premier training centre in Europe for visual effects?
Doesn’t that institution draw the vast majority of its students from other european countries (fee-paying not free)? So what is the story here? Bournemouth vocational graduate and undergraduate programmes are not up to scratch? Compared to say Savanah in North America? If so, how come so many students from Bournemouth, Ravensbourne and NTFS jumped ship to forge successful careers in North America? And why then are so many nationals of Central and Eastern european nations taken over en-mass, for short term contracts, when those nations have a tradition of free, socialist and even communist education systems? What is the deal with that then? Is it a case that the semi-private or private, fee paying education systems of the UK, with heavy student funding and indebtness, is inherently inferior to those socialist/communist education systems and not producing the results they are whining about? It doesn’t add up. Unless its all about continually claiming tax subsidies from the local tax payers and having access to revolving door cheap labour? Head is spinning now ….

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-13354845

Basically, they are yet again asking for yet more taxes to be transferred over to them – likely from the lowest paid in the country like overnight office cleaners who patrol their studios at night to eek a minumum wage – so they can continue to endulge their desire to play ‘movies’.

Again, The government does not possess resources of its own – every cent it spends must be taken from the private sector in one way or another. The government can not add one iota of new wealth to the economy – it can only dispose of already existing wealth by taking it from the private sector. You have a fierce lobbying group there with sharp elbows and loud voices. You may also note that most of those company leaders are almost always ‘oxbridge’ (equivalent of Yale-Harvard ‘skull-and-bones’, only much, much more so. It is the nepotistic school of the privileged where parents can ensure their lazy children can maintain a strangle-hold over opportunity and ensure freemarkets and aspiration is chanelled through their control system of lords, dukes, etc., refer boston tea party and war-of-independence for more background on the British system of patronage – little changed in 1000 years).

Particularly like the bit ;

“A report, commissioned by the government and published earlier this year, delivered a worrying prognosis.It warned that, while special effects was enjoying a rapid growth, the sector was also “having to source talent from overseas because of skills shortages at home”. The study, entitled Next Gen, concluded: “That is mainly a failing of our education system – from schools to universities and it needs to be tackled urgently if we are to remain globally competitive.”

Well, they have been claiming government and lottery funds training for a decade or more and still seem to have never achieved this training and structural short fall. You would think the state planner bureaucrats and lobbying groups would be questioned by now, told “hey, you are saying one thing, taking money and never seeming to produce a result”

They won’t of course, because it is probably the plan. Use your Oxbridge connections within government (who all mostly attend the same groups and schools so know each other) to ensure ‘training and infrastructure’ becomes part of your revenues. In the meantime, you trawl the international labor markets for temporary ‘harvest-time’ staff to try and fullfill your projects. The DNEG fella was even in another interview admitting “we have a temporary, project lead business model”. So of course you will always be just using and disgarding non-local and local staff in an unstable workflow. How can you ever base government funding for such a business model? And how will you ever develop a sound business model if you are always running to the taxpayers and temporary international staff to keep going? Sad as many of the closures in the US has been over the past few years, at least it shows the lobbying has limits here and something resembling free-markets may exist, with the establishment and consolidation of other companies in their place, and many other companies surviving through competitive business planning and private investment. Not so in the UK, home of corporate-welfare cheats.

However, the bank can only bank up to 75-80% of the tax credits upfront, with 20-25% discount, based on the assumption that there will be overages later on included on the final report for matching comparison. That way, they wouldn’t risk 100% banking of the tax credit upfront.

For that, either the producers still need the remaining 25% of tax credit money from the investors or live it with a hole in the budget, by having their salaries and other fees deferred, in order to make up for the 20%-25% of labor tax credit (i.e. nearly10-12% of final total budget), which is more about the producers’ fees and some part of the 10% contigency budget as well…. etc.

In order to believe that this will create ‘economic growth’, one has to believe that government bureaucrats are better at allocating scarce resources than the private sector. This seems an absurd proposition to us. Since government bureaucrats are not driven by the profit motive in their allocation decisions, they have no means of ascertaining the opportunity costs of their actions. They are faced with a somewhat milder form of the socialist calculation problem – ‘milder’ only because they can observe prices in the market economy and are thus not entirely groping in the dark. The only sense in which government spending can be said to add to ‘growth’ is the fact that it is treated as a positive contributor to GDP. However, this merely reveals that GDP is a very flawed measure of wealth creation.

Quoted:

What is dumping?

Dumping is the sale of goods in foreign markets at prices below those charged for comparable sales in the home market or that are below the cost of producing the goods.

What is antidumping (“AD”)?

An antidumping duty is a special levy imposed on imported merchandise to protect an affected domestic industry from injury caused by sale of dumped goods in the importing country.

What is subsidy?

Generally, subsidy occurs when imported goods benefit from foreign government financial assistance.

Examples of subsidies include: loans at preferential rates, grants, tax incentives, or a provision of goods or services by a government at prices below market levels.

What is a countervailing duty (“CVD”)?

A countervailing duty is a special duty imposed on imported merchandise to protect a domestic industry from injury caused by subsidized imports from other countries.

What is injury?

Injury is caused by dumped or subsidized imports resulting in lost sales, reduced prices, lost market share, decreased profits, and other such difficulties for the injured industry.

Who may complain about dumped or subsidized goods?

Injury is caused by dumped or subsidized imports resulting in lost sales, reduced prices, lost market share, decreased profits, and other such difficulties for the injured industry.

For guidelines in preparing a written complaint, you may consult:

Canada:

http://www.cbsa-asfc.gc.ca/sima-Imsi/publications-eng.html

U.S.A.

http://ia.ita.doc.gov/admanual/index.html

http://ia.ita.doc.gov/filing/index.html

ftp://ftp.usitc.gov/pub/reports/studies/PUB3257.PDF