Skip to main content
Independent and nonpartisan. SaveYourState is a civic information resource. It is not a government website and is not affiliated with any government agency, party, or campaign.

California · 2025–26 Regular Session · Assembly Bill

AB 2319: Personal Income Tax Law: Corporation Tax Law: credits: qualified motion picture: post-production.

Enacted Official data

  1. Introduced
  2. In committee
  3. Passed one chamber
  4. Passed both chambers
  5. Enacted

Last official action: ·Record last updated:

Plain-language summary

AB 2319 is a assembly bill introduced in the California Assembly on February 19, 2026. According to its official title, it concerns: Personal Income Tax Law: Corporation Tax Law: credits: qualified motion picture: post-production. Primary sponsor: Nick Schultz (D). It lists 3 additional sponsors. Most recent recorded action (September 19, 2026): Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 343, Statutes of 2026.

Generated automatically from the official title, sponsor list, and status record only. It does not characterize the bill’s purpose or effects. How summaries are written

Official summary

Legislative Counsel’s Digest (official, as of the latest version). Written by nonpartisan legislative staff; reproduced verbatim.

The Personal Income Tax Law and the Corporation Tax Law allow various credits against the taxes imposed by those laws, including various motion picture credits, commonly referred to as motion picture credit 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, and 4.0, and the certified studio credit, to be allocated by the California Film Commission in differing amounts equal to specified percentages of the qualified expenditures of a qualified motion picture in this state. Existing law establishes the continuously appropriated Tax Relief and Refund Account and the Corporation Tax Fund and provides that payments required to be made to taxpayers or other persons are to be paid from those funds.

This bill would allow a credit against those taxes in an amount between 35% and 50% of qualified expenses relating to the post-production of a qualified motion picture in California to be allocated by the California Film Commission, as specified. The bill would require the credit to be administered in the same manner as the motion picture credit 4.0, except as specified. The bill would require the California Film Commission to utilize a post-production services ratio, as defined, to allocate credits, as specified. The bill would limit the aggregate amount of credits allocated in a fiscal year based on a determination made by the Legislature in the annual Budget Act plus additional amounts, as described. The bill would require that 85% of the total allocable credits are reserved for qualified taxpayers that attest, under penalty of perjury, that they will abide by specified labor condition requirements. By expanding the scope of the crime of perjury, this bill would impose a state-mandated locale program. This bill would allow a qualified taxpayer to elect to be paid a refund if the amount allowable as a credit exceeds the qualified taxpayer’s tax liability for the taxable year, as specified. By requiring moneys to be paid from the Tax Relief and Refund Account and the Corporation Tax Fund, the bill would make an appropriation.

Existing law requires any bill authorizing a new tax expenditure, as defined, to include tax credits, to contain, among other things, specific goals, purposes, and objectives that the tax credit will achieve, detailed performance indicators, and data collection requirements.

This bill would include findings and reporting requirements in compliance with this requirement. The bill would require exchange of information between the Legislative Analyst’s Office and other specified agencies in order to comply with these requirements. The bill would make the unauthorized disclosure of this information subject to existing law, the violation of which is a crime. By expanding the scope of a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

This bill would incorporate additional changes to Sections 17039 and 23036 of the Revenue and Taxation Code proposed by AB 2222 to be operative only if this bill and AB 2222 are enacted and this bill is enacted last.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

Sponsors

Sponsors by party (alphabetical): Democratic 4

NameRolePartyChamberDistrict
Nick SchultzPrimary sponsorDemocraticAssembly44
Benjamin AllenCo-sponsorDemocraticSenate24
Timothy GraysonCo-sponsorDemocraticSenate9
Pilar SchiavoCo-sponsorDemocraticAssembly40

“Support” is shown only as formal sponsorship recorded by the legislature. Roll-call votes are available on the official bill page.

Recent official actions

  1. Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 343, Statutes of 2026.
  2. Approved by the Governor.
  3. Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 3 p.m.
  4. Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 72. Noes 2. Page 6919.).
  5. In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending.
  6. Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 33. Noes 5.).
  7. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
  8. Read third time and amended. Ordered to second reading.
  9. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
  10. Read third time and amended. Ordered to second reading.
  11. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
  12. Read second time and amended. Ordered returned to second reading.

Sources

  1. California Legislative Information — pubinfo database export
  2. Official bill page