COMMENTARY
INTERVIEWS
SPECIALS
CHAT
ARCHIVES

Moves afoot to persuade states to shift cinema to Concurrent List

With most states and Union Territories opposing the proposal to bring cinema on the Concurrent List of the Constitution, experts feel that mere recognition as industry is unlikely to make any major difference to Indian cinema.

Film-makers, who had enthusiastically welcomed the recognition of cinema as an industry, feel the rejection of the proposal for bringing cinema in the Concurrent List is not good news as it will prevent unified steps to tackle problems like video piracy and irrational taxation, which were taking away a large chunk of the income from Indian films.

Film-maker Vidhu Vinod Chopra and actor Anupam Kher said it was necessary to rationalise the tax structure so that film-makers who put in hard-earned money into films get proper returns.

Kher said the industry had been functioning in a non-institutionalised atmosphere and would take time to start working in an organised manner.

Shatrughan Sinha, member of Parliament, had expressed optimism that the working of Indian cinema would get more organised. However, even he agreed that video piracy and irrational taxation were eating into the very vitals of the industry.

Leaders of various film bodies are also piqued that two major demands of the industry are still pending. They say the counterveiling duty on raw film stock is illegal since the Hindustan Photo Films does not make colour stock in the country and only slits jumbo rolls. Furthermore, benefits should be given under Section 80 HHC of the Income Tax Act as the filmmakers exported films and earned foreign exchange.

Representatives of various states who had attended the 23rd state information ministers conference last month had made it clear that cinema should remain within the ambit of the state.

With the exception of a few states like Mizoram and Nagaland, the ministers and officials said this was a major constitutional issue affecting the revenues of the state and needed greater discussion.

According to information and broadcasting ministry sources, the proposal to bring cinema from the State List to the Concurrent List was to avoid the situation created by states taking ''independent and isolated'' decisions with no uniformity in various legislations enacted by the state governments relating to cinema.

Bringing it onto the Concurrent List would have meant avoiding any discriminatory legislation and greater uniformity, particularly in the areas like entertainment tax which in some states was as high as 167 per cent, and video piracy.

Although most states announced at the meet that they were initiating steps to rationalise entertainment tax, no steps have so far been taken by any state in this direction.

It had been announced over two months ago that the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry would be holding a meeting along with the Film Federation of India to discuss the issue of making the films marketable. However, no date has yet been fixed for this purpose.

Meanwhile, ministry sources said there was no proposal to set up any financial institution for funding of production of films. But the ministry has initiated proposals with the primary objective of making film production eligible for institutional and bank finance.

The finance ministry has been asked to include production and allied activities in the list of activities eligible for institutional finance. Recommendations have also been made for rationalisation of certain taxation issues which have a bearing on the film industry.

The information and broadcasting ministry being the nodal ministry is also taking steps to solve the problem of video piracy, which falls under two heads. It comes under the Copyright Act which is a matter relating to the human resource development ministry, and under the states in the matter of policing and law and order.

Three different bodies had been set up to help in the transition of cinema from an unrecognised entity to an industry. These are the core advisory committee which has nine members and is headed by the I&B Minister Sushma Swaraj, a 39-member Film Development Council, and a 29-member Film Export Forum, both headed by I&B Secretary P G Mankad.

The FDC which has a term of one year is to suggest ways and means for sustained and all-round development of the film industry and recommend ways for improving and upgrading the technological and qualitative aspects of Indian cinema. The FEF will consider ways of improving exports of films, television software, music and other forms of audio-visual entertainment products in a coordinated manner.

UNI