ASK & DISCUSS INDEX

11 years, 1 month ago - Dan Selakovich

There is also a legal reason for keeping shit separate. Let's say Paramount is going to back your film. They give money to the corporation: "DavidsFilm". That way, when you burn down the barn you were shooting in, the farmer can't sue Paramount. Or another example, DavidsFilm Inc. is not a signatory to any unions. Paramount is signatory to all of them. If it were a "Paramount Picture" you'd have to use union labor. (Not that that is a bad thing).

11 years, 1 month ago - David O'Sullivan

Thanks for an answer.

11 years, 1 month ago - Marlom Tander

It depends. On what you mean by project, and what you mean by accounts :-)

If the project is entirely internal, then it should have its own management accounts so that you know what you made/lost and can pay any staff whose remuneration depends on the projects financial performance.

If the project involves other parties then other factors come into play. If people trust each other then a simple reporting process backed by (unlikely to be invoked) audit rights can work.

But if you have a more complex set up, with investors etc (esp if there are tax issues) then in many cases you'll want an SPV - Special Purpose Vehicle, i.e. a company called "ProjectBrilliant Ltd" which is owned in an agreed fashion, and where contracts have determined who can charge what for services, and how any revenue / profits are divided. All parties should have full access to all accounts at any time.

The real answer is that if it isn't obviously "in house management accounts", you need to talk to your accountant.