3 ms·
If we are going in the details, maybe tax credit should be over a small fraction of benefits for that game. You'd only get back a bit of what you paid.
by cryptonym 2y ago
If we are going in the details, maybe tax credit should be over a small fraction of benefits for that game. You'd only get back a bit of what you paid.
- rickdeckard 2y agoThe problem is that you can barely reach consensus that tax-money is spent on elderly homes and child-care, as the a critical mass of your taxpayers are not yet old and don't have children. Once you try to establish that tax-payers money is being spent to preserve art, you inevitably cause a unsolvable political discussion on what art actually is. At best, the budget will be drained uncontrollably with the system being abused by players gaming the system, at worst the ruling political party will define what art is and only provide funding for the most boring forms of art. - To be a bit constructive: Instead of a dedicated credit/payout, it would make more sense to establish a mandate in a region (i.e. US, EU) that public funding or tax-credits for ANY company can only be made on the premise that the output created by the company becomes partially owned by the public (and the citizens of this region), which requires it to provide value even without the company's involvement. This would apply for any form of financial incentive given to company offices in a region, regardless whether it's hardware, software or services. But I wouldn't hold my breath on that ever being properly mandated/executed...