|
Please
bookmark this page and visit for regular updates.
Update
12.8.08
The following discussion paper relates to Acts and agents,'
forgetting' to say "plus gst" when they quote on an act they
represent. We welcome your comments.
Dear Member Agents
Below I have outlined a scenario
which began in my office and I felt needed some input from other
seasoned agents and possibly a clarification or
ruling by our AEAA.
.
I welcome your comments and input
but please don't be offended if I don't reply personally in the
same detail that I have with Cathy Dean as outlined below. You
would most likely say I have said enough anyway. The meeting on
this Tuesday night would also be a great forum for us to discuss
this issue.
First of 3
examples in 2 days:
1. I recently offered an act a gig
as another act had pulled out due to illness. This new band told me
the best they could do the job for was $1500, very close to the
other fee, so I proceeded to lock it in by dropping my
commission a little so the original fee to the client did not
change. The client then wanted some extras and
wanted to know the costs of these. All was going well with emails
back and fourth with this great act, until I received this email
from the band.
"Hi Brian, I’ve contacted the keyboardist
and for an extra set the cost will be $70. (On top of our
performance fee of $1500 which is not including the
GST)"
Fine, I took it on
the chin, the client had a tight budget and I knew would not
come at the extra 10%, I had to find another band. And as some of
you would say, I should have said to them in the first place "the
$1500 has to include 'any chargable' GST". Well,
this got me thinking. Was this really my
responsibility?
Then the following
email arrived after I informed them that I could not just go back
to the client with the 10% increase as their budget was too
tight
"Hi Brian, Firstly I was wrong to assume that
the GST wasn’t included. In my experience, given it
is a corporate function and that it is invoiced through an agency,
GST has always been added on top of the quoted
figure...................."
I've heard this
before and quickly realized the confusion and
misunderstanding I feel exists in our industry in this pricing
area.
Example No. 2 Then that evening I needed a price on a well known artist
for a country gig. "$5000" I was confidently told by the manager
"and that includes travel." I waited, nothing else was forthcoming.
Should I just add on my $500-600 on the top and quote this too
my client, no, I knew better, so I asked if this included the GST.
"Oh no" he said," that's extra." He's just broken the law but I'm
the one feeling a bit silly for expecting it to be any other
way!
Example No. 3 I wont go into it here but almost the same as the above
example happened as I went to book a well know vocal
harmony group the next day.
So I felt I needed to raise the issue
and suggest the AEAA may be in a perfect position to suggest
a constructive guideline to help clarify that appears to me to be
a confusing area when viewedclosely.
I feel our
industry is out of step with generally accepted community standards
and the law in this area. I'm interested to know if others share my
concern.
My fist step was
to use my trusted colleagues, AEAA president Kevin Kosky and
Treasurer Cathy Dean as my sounding board and sent off the
following email to both for their valued opinions.
_______________________
Brian Moran
Secretary
Australian Entertainment Agents Association Inc.
Ph 61 3 9441 0661
contact@aeaa.com.au
Hi Cathy and
Kevin
As I was in the
middle of responding to an email from an act that quoted me a
figure and did not mention the GST was not included, it dawned on
me that this issue is worth discussing and maybe
taking further with our members.
I think the practice
reflects badly on our industry and our code of ethics should
address this.
You will get an idea of the
situation from the emails below. What annoys me most is her line,
which I have heard many times. "In my experience, given it is a corporate
function and that it is invoiced through an agency, GST has always
been added on top of the quoted figure." The inference here is
almost " your industry expects us to quote
without GST as they add the 10% onto our quote." When it
has gone this far I think we need to look at educating the acts, or
it maybe another agent quoting us a price, and raise it with
members.
Why does our
industry flout the law when quoting when few others do.
You see if you can find a car advertised without the GST included,
or a new house, a Coke or a new laptop.
To save the
confusion our government enacted very clear legislation to
cover this but in our industry nobody seems to follow
it.
I put this down or
a couple of possible reasons:
1. Almost all our
quotes are phone based and whoever is quoting feels $5000
might get us a over the line a little easier than $5500. If we had
to put it in writing we would have to be a little more careful and
the client could quite legally enforce the $5000 figure if we had
not added "+GST"
2. Gst registered
acts have a few more non gst registered competitors than most other
industries, this drives them up the wall when they may be quoting
against such acts, so they conveniently don't mention it
when trying to get the job, and hope the client will not mind
finding out later and hope that the line "you can claim the GST
back anyway" will save their skin. A bit of a rough way to run a
business, be it an agency or a band.
I think the
practice reflects badly on our industry and our code of ethics
should address it.
Am I expecting too much
to try to bring about a change in this area?
Cheers
Brian
Kevin responds with:
Hi Brian
I agree with you completely on this
issue and from my understanding of the gst in general, the complete
figure needs to be quoted including gst. Otherwise how would the
client know what they are paying.
Then the fun starts
Cathy responds in black below, I respond to her in blue, she
responds to this in green and
then I to her in red.
It gets a bit drawn
out and you don't have to read it all. However it highlights
many of the situation and issues involved and maybe helpful for
some who want to have a say on the issue. The highlighted bit are
worth noting I feel. (there again I've only highlighted my bits,
sorry Cathy)
Hi Brian,
I don't really have this
problem as when quoting I always, always say the figure and then
say if there is gst included or not ... i.e. $500 no gst or $500
plus gst. This is
because I work with as many people who are gst registered as are
not. No problems or confusions encountered because it's so clear as
to what's involved. (It's not you I'm worried about Cathy, its the
clowns that quote you and me sometimes. You say here "no
problems", but as I read on I did notice a few
problems !- yes but
altogether different to the problem you're having and could occur
under either system. No, I think
it is exactly the problem I'm concerned about, ) Because I work this way when a performer gives me a quote
I will assume that there needs to be gst added .... I never, ever
assume gst to be included no matter what goes on in other
industries because it can't be assumed in this
industry (this is exactly
what I want to address) because of
the two different groups of performers clearly working the industry
...those that are gst registered and those that are not. So
assuming gst is included or not an option in this office. We take
the base figure and then add the gst if needs be
What you are really saying
here is "I know the performers will quote me without the GST, I
make allowance for there naivety and ignorance, and I work around
it." I'm suggesting the AEAA has a ruling that brings anybody
quoting into line with the law, and the industry will quickly
change, especially if the ruling confirms that their fee should be
literally what they quote and not the 10% extra they 'forgot'
or neglected to tell you about. I would even
argue if acts quoted their prices to you in the way the
law states, you don't even need to know if they are GST registered
or not at the quotation stage. You add on your commission to the
figure they give you and quote the client. You could add "inclusive
of any chargeable GST" but even that is not necessary, as the law
clearly states that any figures quoted without the words "+GST"
must include any gst in the figure.
And
that responsibility lies with agents too as they quote to clients
so if the agents want to cover their butts then make sure they
know and declare the gst status of the performer ... yell at the
performer all you like for not doing so but they will have declared
to the agent at least once upon the start of any work with
that agent and that should be recorded and be known by the agent
and if not ... then the aforementioned ... cover your butt
and double check with the performer.
No, If an agent or act tells me their
fee is $5000, I should be able to just add my $600
commission on and quote the client $5600, that is all I need to
say. (None of this '+gst' or 'Gst is not included', keep it simple
like the Check out Chick in Coles. Do you ask the Check out
Chick if the $87.49 includes the GST before you pay?If my
client asks I say, "of course, that fee is inclusive of any GST, I
always quote my figures inclusive of any gst that is
chargeable" Why would you even suggest the possibility
of splitting the fee into two parts . If there is gst chargeable,
there is no way they can engage the act without paying the Gst so
why separate it. Almost nobody else does it so why should
we. Only when I go to write up the paperwork/invoicing
do I need to document it and what the GST actually is for
there BAS statement.
Working like this would mean
that if a new the act was gst
registered and they gave me a quote then I would add the gst
automatically, not assume the gst was included. I have received
quotes from acts that have included the gst but not many. Most say
the figure plus gst ... if they don't stipulate and I know
they're gst registered then I'd add it ... if I wasn't sure of
their status then I'd find out and then add the gst or
not.
I'm complaining about all this
extra checking we should not be responsible for. The whole reason
for the legislation is to save this confusion and the re
checking we have to do. If we all took the acts on their
word and by the letter of the law, they ended up with 10% less on
the first one or two jobs, they would very quickly fall into
line with the rest of the community on this one. If we treat
our acts like they don't have to really understand their
responsibilities and just continue to make allowances for
their ignorance of the law, I feel it is demeaning of them and we
are not acting in their best interest.
Yes, yes, yes ... but you
SHOULD KNOW without checking from your first encounter with them.
They would complain about having to keep telling
you. No, strongly disagree. Tom the stilt
walker tells me two years ago he was registered to collect GST. I
phone him today and ask if he wants a 1 hour gig for
$270. He says yes. He has to take responsibility for agreeing to a
figure that must include GST because I never said $270 +GST. I'm
not expected to know what may or may not happened to his
registration over the last two years
If our Association sent out
an informative and education bulletin stating the correct
quoting guidelines, and make it one of our our web
site's Performers Guidelines, think of the PR, kudos and
credibility it bestows on the AEAA.
Yes I agree ... but there is not only
one correct way.
I think there is, and our
Association should take leadership in establishing and
recommending the best practice procedure. The association should
investigate by consulting with all members of our industry and
determine the least confusing and most accurate way of quoting
and recommend this to be standard procedure in our
industry.
I don't want to pre-empt such a
finding but my hunch is it will be to stick with the letter of the
law. If some other agent, manager or act is silly enough to quote
me $5000 for an act and I proceed and book it in exactly
for what he/she quoted me then our association's
ruling will have predetermined he/she is unethical or
negligent and needs to take responsible for
his/her negligence, rather than ask me to phone my client and
talk them into paying the extra 10% he forgot or neglected to
include in the first place, on the premise that "the client
will get it he GST back anyway" If the associations ruling backs this up this
person will only make the same mistake once and not come back to me
saying "In my experience,
given it is a corporate function and that it is invoiced through an
agency, GST has always been added on top of the quoted figure."
which is the line that started all this rainbow coloured
emailing. And it is not the first time I have heard this
line.
If there was an error and the
gst was not added and I had to go back to the client and explain
the situation then that's what I'd do. I wont. If I
have quoted the client a fee on behalf of the performer, I need a
better reason than " the performer misquoted me" to even consider
going back to the client with a variation after he/she has accepted
the quote. That's you not
taking responsibility for your part in the quoting
process .... and it's not a big deal anyway .. don't quite
understand your reticence ... it wouldn't be a common
occurrence.
I don't see it as my responsibility
to have to check if the figure the band has given me is correct, it
is their responsibility. And I'm saying it is common. I reckon if
I asked ten GST registered acts tomorrow what their fee was
for NYE, at least 3 would flout the law but saying the
fee they want to clear is $XXX and make no mention
of the GST but expect me to know that I should add it on.
Unless the client is non gst registered
themselves then it doesn't make any difference to them and over the
past 8 years of the gst, when this has occurred, (ah, so you have had the
problem! Never happened ...
just a scenario) (It
either occurred or it didn't!) not
one gst registered client has been
bothered (well, they didn't
say they were anyway ... no you are quite correct but all I can say is what I've
perceived from my personal encounters. But they're all grown up and
I'd assume they'd say so) I wish some of
my clients were all grown up! because they do claim
the amount back. And
what about the other 50% of our clients who are private and cannot
claim it back, stiff luck, is that what we tell
them? Because I work the
way I do, I can only say to you that I do not have the
problems you're suffering and can categorically swear to you
that no non-gst registered client has suffered as a result of
my wayward and seemingly crazy way of operating. I think this
speaks for itself. As wayward
and as crazy as your ways may seem I still come to you as
my sounding board due to the high respect you are held
with in our industry. I know you would not sleep at night if
some private client felt aggrieved by having to have the quote
revised upward, nor am I overrun with this issue on a daily basis
but I feel a standard should be set It's just a bit
more paperwork for us to remedy. And we've had to do this for
not only the reason of error but also because there have been
several performers who mid financial year have changed their tax
status. So we've need to reapproach the client with the problem and
it's only ever been a short note of explanation and a reissuing of
the invoice. No tears involved at all.
I really don't think it's an
ethical issue (I think it is when other agents quote me
$5000 and don't add on the GST. It happens all the time from some
agents and it is unethical and illegal and they should know
better if they are professional and AEAA members, is my
view) So the agents are
the culprits more than the performers?? Definitely, that is what I am saying and we are even
training our performers to go the same incorrect
way. ... don't you think
that when I've quoted you that you have always known precisely what
the gst story is? Because of how I do it?....No, I've go to
write down two figures each time then add them up, bloody annoying,
and one of the first times I used Chris on Nye's I some
how didn't note down the GST component and quoted my client
without it (or you or Red did not tell me) and I've been
making about half my normal commission on this repeat job ever
since as the client will not accept an increase larger than
CPI. it's
a practical issue which revolves around the clarity of quoting. I
think what Melissa was saying was that she's come across a lot of
people who work like me (I know, that 's my whole point, and it's this
culture, we as an association, have a responsibility
to offer some constructive guidelines to the industry
yep ... constructive
being the operative word ... who is having the least problems under
which system?) You don't have problems because you are so
well organized and take a personal interest in, and detailed
record of, the GST status of all your acts. Its the other
10,000 agents, managers, individual artist, some who don't
even know what GST registered is, that concerns me. It's them, and
us they quote to, who would benefit from a definitive
guideline from the AEAA. so that when she
gave you the quote she assumed you would add the gst whereas you
assumed the gst was included. So not an ethical problem I wouldn't
think ... more miscommunication. Unless I don't get it. (Ok, so how can we, as a
responsible industry Association help fix this miscommunication
problem then?) Quote
including the gst status of the act like I do already.... eg. $500
no gst or $500 plus gst. It works. But why not
just $500 like most other industries do? Don't complicate the
issue. If the client wants to know the GST situation let them ask
and give them the honest answer.
What I have a problem with is
bloody performers sending me invoices .... I can't tell you how
many times I've delivered the 'agents position on this as ratified
by the ATO speech' ... and to make it worse, some non gst
performers send me tax invoices ... double wrong. Sigh ... after
all this time.
Hope this helps ... sorry if it
doesn't. Thanks heaps,
all part of the process. Do you mind if I send your email (with my
comments) to all other agents to gains a consensus of
views. Nup Thanks
The more I discuss all
this the more I am convinced that it would be so much
simpler if the AEAA recommend all quoting be a set fee and
ignored the "+gst" option. The plus"+gst" option is an
encouragement for the agents and acts to, accidentally or
conveniently, forget to mention it
regards Cathy
Cathys Clowns Entertainment
Consultancy
PO Box 842, Panton Hill, Vic 3759
T: 03 9719 7395
F: 03 9719 7735
www.cathysclowns.com.au
News update
1.5.07
Victoria
Rocks Announcement
As part of the 2007-08 state budget, Victorian Minister for the
Arts Lynne
Kosky today announced Victoria Rocks, a Bracks Government
election
commitment as part of the Creative Capacity + policy, designed to
support
the growth and viability of the state's local music industry.
The commitment will draw together expertise from three areas of
government,
- Arts Victoria, Office for Youth and Tourism Victorian - to
support
pathways for young people and professional musicians at different
stages of
career development. The sector's creativity and potential for
growth will
also be supported by strengthening its position in the local
and
international contexts.
The package builds on the earlier initiative Music for the
Future, which
was managed by Arts Victoria until it's conclusion in 2005, and
enables
continuation of the FreeZACentral
program managed by the Office for Youth. Also, it introduces
several new
elements to strengthen links between music and industry
development
including campaign delivery by Tourism Victoria to promote
Melbourne as the
nation's capital for live contemporary music.
Extensive consultation with musicians and key music industry
representatives has already commenced to ensure the package to
meets the
current and future needs music community.
Further details including the application criteria and closing
dates for
the first round of funding will be announced in early July
2007.
Please see media release attached:
http://www.arts.vic.gov.au/arts/news/news/budget0708.htm
Regards,
Jonathan Williamson
Senior Arts Officer - Victoria Rocks
www.arts.vic.gov.au
Discussion
Paper
25.4.06
The provision of Alcohol as a contractual requirement in an Artist
Contract
In light of the changing public attitude in the area of alcohol
consumption I wish to raise the issue of an agent stipulating on a
contract that alcohol must be provided for the performers in their
work place.
My concerns relate to the following issues:
- I can think of no other profession where this is a norm.
- Given the sometimes precarious stage situations a performer is
asked to work in i.e. dodging electrical cords and equipment,
negotiating steps and other stage obstacles, is an agent not
compounding a potential Health and Safety issue by the stipulation
of the alcohol provision?
- Is an agency leaving itself open to a potential legal claim in
the unfortunate event of damage or a personal injury claim related
to alcohol consumption at an event?
- I understand that currently a part responsibility for
consequences for injury or damages caused by alcohol consumption
can rest with the person who provides the alcohol. If then, the
alcohol provision is stipulated in our contract, are we part
responsible, as the provider had no choice, as it was a condition
of engagement.
- If our association takes a stand on this issue it will be much
easier to explain to our performers who question the exclusion of a
rider “the AEAA, due to Health and Safety reasons, cannot allow its
members to include an alcohol rider.”
- Should the AEAA take a position on this issue and have a
recommended policy for its members discouraging or forbidding the
stipulation of alcohol provision in contracts? Currently the
guidelines state ”A professional, sober and drug free manner is
strictly required at all performances.” Are we as agents
acting professionally and within currently accepted community norms
by then stipulating an alcoholic drinks rider?
- There is a chance too that different insurance policies (i.e.
Public Liability) may be invalid where alcohol is concerned.
- Perhaps one suggestion is that instead of a drink rider as
such, there is a 'refreshment allowance’, which if not used in
drinks can be kept as cash? This of course may lower the
initial fee but may be worthwhile given the complexity of the
issue. It also means that the employer is at arms length from
the alcohol situation - it makes alcohol at the choice of the
performer and not of the employer.
- Is the situation different, say at a wedding, when the father
of the bride comes up to the band table with a jug of beer or
bottle of wine to thank the performers for a great night?
- Should we as agents go so far as to stipulate that a performer
is not to consume alcohol during a performance period?
I acknowledge the historic and traditional provision of alcohol
to performers in our profession and at the risk of being seen as ‘a
bit or a wowser’ (no one enjoys a good glass of red wine more than
me) I wish to bring this topic to the table at the next AEAA
meeting. I invite input and comment from musicians and all those
working in our industry. Please click on "Entertainer Feedback" for
your comments to be added to this page. The Musicians Union have
been contacted by me and asked to have an input into this
discussion. They currently have no official stand on the issue.
Brian Moran
Gum Tree Entertainment Co.
Member of Australian Entertainment Agents Association Inc.
94973229
briangum@tpg.com.au
News Update 22nd June 07
Dear friends in the music
industry
I was saddened to hear of the
passing of Dennis Farrington who was a well know band leader,
identity, and legend in the music industry for so many years.
He was 87 years young and greatly respected by those who dealt with
him, including myself. He was a gentleman in the true sense of the
word and will be greatly missed, especially by the hundreds of
musicians who turned up over the years to play in a 'Dennis
Farrington Band' at some gala event at a town hall in
Victoria.
Thank you Dennis for your
remarkable contribution to the Australian live music
industry.
Fortunately he was interviewed and
recorded by Bill Stephens at the National Library of Australia last
year and an abstract of that recording is listed
below:
- Denis Farrington born 1920 in
Tallangatta, Vic., talks about his family background; his siblings;
growing up on a dairy farm; his schooldays; his swimming career;
training for the Olympics; his career as a barber; Harry Motherson;
his interest in music; playing in a brass band; selling records;
being selected to represent the State of Victoria at the Berlin
Olympics; his swimming skills; how the outbreak of war affected his
swimming career; training in fitting, turning and welding while
continuing work as a barber; football, cycling; moving to Richmond;
commencing his music career; his first band, 'The Blue Moon
Orchestra'; finding engagements for his orchestra during the
depression; a typical routine for the orchestra; the source of his
band arrangement; how the first vocalist sang with a megaphone;
demonstrates with a snippet of song; dance styles in vogue at the
time; maintaining 'The Blue Moon Orchestra'; sourcing musicians.
Farrington discusses his reasons for not pursuing a career in
recording and broadcasting; how he became an employer of musicians;
deputising at the Tivoli; sourcing musicians to work in television
in the early days; working two jobs; playing at Government House;
routine for musicians playing at Government House; protocol when
playing at Government House; popular dance repertoire; supporting
charities; obtaining sheet music and orchestrations; his favourite
musicians and their attributes; Bob Gibson; Jimmy Burke; Kenny
Weate; Max Reddy; Stella Lamond; Toni Lamond; Helen Reddy; working
several Dennis Farrington Orchestras on the same night; a brush
with gangsters; meeting Pat Lewis in 1972; dress codes and
presentation; musicians and alcohol; his children and
grandchildren; his O.A.M; his life governorship of Royal Melbourne
Hospital.
Vale Dennis.
_______________________
Brian Moran OAM
Vice President of Australian
Entertainment Agents Association Inc.
Ph 03 94973227
briangum@tpg.com.au
|
