Malta Film Rebate Scheme Funds Local Reality TV Productions

A government-backed initiative originally intended to attract international film productions to Malta is increasingly being used by local television producers to finance high-profile commercial reality programmes, according to recent parliamentary disclosures.

The scheme — overseen by Film Commissioner Johann Grech under the portfolio of Culture Minister Owen Bonnici — has allocated approximately €4.2 million in public funds to date for the production of 15 domestically created television shows. These include adaptations of globally recognised formats such as Love Island, Big Brother, and The X Factor. Many of these programmes are aired on Malta’s publicly funded national broadcaster, the Public Broadcasting Services (PBS).

While the measure was initially conceived to serve as a financial incentive to encourage foreign filmmakers to choose Malta as a shooting location, it has evolved into a substantial funding channel for a small number of Maltese production companies.

Shift from international film attraction to domestic television support

When first introduced, the rebate scheme was promoted as part of a strategy to position Malta as a competitive and appealing filming destination, in line with practices adopted in other European jurisdictions. The rationale was to offer reimbursement for a percentage of production expenses incurred locally, thereby stimulating economic activity, creating employment opportunities in the film services sector, and boosting tourism-related revenue.

However, parliamentary questions raised by Nationalist Party Member of Parliament Julie Zahra have shed light on a shift in the practical application of the scheme. The most recent data indicates that the largest beneficiary to date is Greatt Company Ltd, which is projected to receive approximately €2.8 million in funding.

Major beneficiaries and their productions

Greatt Company Ltd has produced several well-known reality television adaptations tailored for Maltese audiences, including The Masked Singer and Malta’s Got Talent. Public records also show that the company has been awarded multiple direct orders and public tenders in recent years. This includes work linked to the Mediterranean Film Festival, a high-profile cultural event organised under the direction of the Film Commission.

Following closely behind in total allocated funding is Media Exclusive Ltd, the company responsible for producing Love Island Malta. This production house lists well-known Maltese television presenters Ben Camille and Christian Gravina among its directors.

According to the provisions of the scheme, productions that meet the eligibility requirements may be reimbursed for up to 40% of their approved local expenditure. For Big Brother Malta, it has been reported that the producers submitted cost declarations amounting to approximately €2.5 million for the first season alone. If these figures are confirmed by a government audit, the company could be entitled to a rebate in the region of €760,000.

Dual funding concerns and PBS’s role

PBS currently receives an annual state subsidy of roughly €6 million. This public service grant is intended to support non-commercial, public interest programming — such as educational shows for children, cultural content, and documentaries — which are less likely to attract sufficient commercial advertising revenue.

In practice, however, the national broadcaster has increasingly aired commercially successful entertainment shows, many of which are also beneficiaries of the Film Commission’s rebate programme. This situation raises the issue of potential “double funding” — where a production benefits both from the PBS public service grant and from the rebate scheme, which is separately financed through public funds.

Potential state aid implications

The question of compatibility with European Union state aid rules has been raised repeatedly by observers in the broadcasting and cultural sectors. Under EU law, state aid measures must not distort competition in a way that unduly benefits specific companies or gives them an unfair market advantage.

While the government has not publicly acknowledged any formal infringement, the overlapping of public subsidies from different channels for the same productions could, in principle, be viewed as non-compliant with EU regulations. If confirmed, such an arrangement might require remedial action, including repayment of funds.

To date, however, Maltese authorities have tolerated — and in some cases defended — the current structure, citing the cultural and economic value of supporting domestic creative industries.

Critics question scheme’s focus and effectiveness

Critics argue that the rebate programme has drifted significantly from its original purpose. Rather than primarily attracting large-scale foreign productions — which would inject substantial spending into the local economy and promote Malta internationally — the scheme is now heavily funding locally produced entertainment formats.

While there is no dispute that such productions create employment for Maltese crew, actors, and technical staff, opponents question whether this constitutes the most effective use of a scheme marketed as a “film industry” incentive. Some industry professionals fear that diverting funds in this way could undermine Malta’s credibility with international producers and make the country appear less committed to hosting foreign shoots.

Defenders emphasise local industry benefits

Proponents of the current approach argue that supporting domestic productions contributes to the development of local talent, strengthens the national television sector, and ensures that Maltese audiences are served with homegrown entertainment. They note that international film productions are not guaranteed to arrive in large numbers each year, whereas local producers can plan consistent output and provide steady employment opportunities.

Supporters also contend that successful reality formats can boost advertising revenue, create cultural touchpoints, and encourage investment in Malta’s broadcasting infrastructure.

Parliamentary scrutiny and future direction

The matter has gained increased political attention in recent months, with parliamentary questions aimed at clarifying how the scheme is administered, which productions are receiving funding, and whether any safeguards are in place to prevent potential misuse.

The Culture Ministry and Film Commission have so far maintained that all allocations comply with the scheme’s eligibility criteria. However, there has been no indication of whether the government intends to adjust the rules to more clearly prioritise foreign productions, as was initially envisaged.

Conclusion

The Maltese film rebate scheme remains a significant source of public financial support for the country’s audiovisual sector. Yet, the balance between attracting international film projects and supporting domestic entertainment programming has shifted notably over time.

While the injection of funds into local productions may strengthen the domestic industry, the practice also raises questions about public funding priorities, potential duplication of subsidies, and alignment with EU state aid regulations.

Whether Malta will recalibrate the scheme to refocus on its original purpose — or continue to use it as a broader cultural and entertainment subsidy — remains to be seen. For now, local production houses are among the primary beneficiaries of a measure initially designed to place Malta on the map for global filmmakers.

FAQs

What is Malta’s film rebate scheme?
It is a government programme offering financial reimbursement to film and television productions that incur eligible expenses in Malta.

Who administers the scheme?
The scheme is overseen by the Film Commission under the authority of the Culture Ministry.

What was the original purpose of the scheme?
It was designed to attract international filmmakers to Malta by offsetting part of their production costs.

How has the scheme’s focus changed?
It has increasingly funded domestic reality and entertainment television programmes instead of primarily foreign films.

Who are the main beneficiaries of the scheme?
Recent data shows Greatt Company Ltd and Media Exclusive Ltd among the largest recipients of funding.

What is the maximum rebate a production can receive?
Qualifying productions can claim up to 40% of eligible local production expenses.

Why is PBS involved in the debate?
PBS airs many shows benefiting from the scheme and also receives a separate public service grant, leading to concerns about double funding.

Are there legal concerns about the scheme?
Some observers have raised questions about compliance with EU state aid rules, though no formal infringement has been announced.

What do critics say about the scheme?
They argue that funding domestic entertainment formats dilutes the scheme’s original intent to attract big-budget foreign productions.

What do supporters argue in favour of the current use?
They believe supporting local productions develops national talent, sustains employment, and strengthens Malta’s television sector.