House keeps rural film tax credit, removes two‑year sunset after heated debate

SALT LAKE CITY — The Utah House on Feb. 1 voted 55–18 to remove a two‑year sunset on the rural portion of the state's film production tax‑credit program, keeping the refundable rebate in place for productions that shoot outside the Wasatch Front.

Representative Stenquist, the bill sponsor, said the measure simply removes the sunset and allows biannual review while preserving a program targeted to rural communities. “What this bill does is it simply removes the sunset off of this program,” Stenquist said, arguing the incentive has helped create jobs, spur local spending and build film‑production infrastructure in smaller Utah communities.

Supporters described the credit as a tool for rural economic development. Representative Carol Moss said the program complements career and technical-education pathways and local workforce training at institutions including Weber State University and Utah Valley University, noting the program had trained local officials to be “film ready.” Representative Joe Eliason and other rural members said the program brings otherwise scarce work to communities where a handful of seasonal jobs can be transformative.

Opponents pressed two main concerns: the program’s refundable structure and whether the state is effectively subsidizing large out‑of‑state talent. Representative Brammer and others urged converting the refundable credit to a nonrefundable one to reduce potential windfalls to high‑income individuals or mobile production firms. Representative Snyder cited a specific example during debate: “When Kevin Costner came to the state of Utah, he made $4,500,000 for the TV series Yellowstone ... He was given a 25% tax credit, which means the state of Utah paid Kevin Costner almost a million dollars to film in the state,” a point Snyder used to argue for changes to the credit’s structure; Snyder acknowledged he did not have the subject’s tax records and said the calculation was an estimate.

Stenquist and other backers pushed back that the program is targeted, creates recurring local business for caterers, lodgings, equipment rentals and service providers, and helps build a local supply chain that can sustain year‑round production. Stenquist closed by recounting a local example of direct benefit: “They were paid $30,000 just for the use of their property,” referencing a Kanab property that hosted a Toyota commercial and received a one‑time payment for use of the site.

Debate included an unsuccessful procedural motion to “circle” the bill (take it down for more work). Proponents argued the sunset had been set in two years to allow evaluation and that the data show a positive return for rural communities; opponents said the program risked privileging entertainment industry winners and the refundable design could allow production companies or high‑earning talent to receive outsized payouts.

With debate closed, the House adopted the bill and sent it to the Senate for consideration. The measure will next be considered by the Utah Senate.