Speaking of which, why the hell do production companies hire this guy at all? Isn't his name by itself a definitive guarantee for a movie's failure?
As I understand it, and I may be completely wrong about this, it's all to do with money.
Suppose you were a millionaire living in Germany. You'd have to pay tax. Let's say, for the sake of argument, you had to pay one million Euros. Now you could just pay this. But the German government, in an effort to encourage investment in the German film industry, has an offer. You can put that money into making a film instead, and that counts as your tax for this year.
Now this doesn't really benefit you. Instead of giving the taxman a million, you've given the film makers a million. Either way, you are a million down. If the film does well you will see some return, but that's not guaranteed, and you'd have to pay more tax on any profit you make.
Rather than giving the film makers your own money, you could borrow the amount from a bank and use that. Again, this does not benefit you. Instead of owing the taxman a a million, you now owe the bank a million.
But...
Because the film industry is high risk, it is unlikely to gain investors unless certain guarantees are in place. So the German government has agreed, under certain circumstances, to cover any losses should a film fail to recoup it's production costs.
In other words, if a film does badly, really badly, at the box office, the government will give you back your investment.
So.
You owe the taxman money.
You borrow money from the bank.
You invest this money in a film.
You now owe the bank money, but no longer owe the taxman.
The film flops.
The government reimburses investors, giving you the money back.
You give this back to the bank.
You now no longer owe anyone anything.
You've not profited from this, but you have avoided a large tax bill.
And all you need to make it work is someone capable of delivering movies that could never succeed at the box office.
!
