Streaming Subscription Price Increases and Music Royalties The economics of music streaming are undergoing a subtle but profound shift that has artists and labels recalibrating their expectations for royalty revenue. In late 2025, reports indicate that Spotify is...
Royalties & Bundles: How “All-in-One” Plans Cut Payouts — and When Clarity Might Arrive When a streaming service adds audiobooks (or other media) to a music plan and calls it a bundle, U.S. mechanical royalties for songwriters can be calculated at a discounted...
Taylor Swift’s Fight for Her Masters & What It Means for Creator Rights In the high-stakes intersection of creativity and commerce, few stories illustrate the power dynamics of ownership better than Taylor Swift’s years-long battle over her master recordings....
Every Play Pays™ — How Your Music Earns, and Why the Details Matter Your music did the work. The streams were delivered. The plays happened. Now the question is: did every play pay? At Studio Budgets, our mantra is Every Play Pays™. That means we believe your music...
2025 Tax Overhaul Impacts Royalty Earnings The tax landscape for music creators is changing rapidly. Effective January 2025, new IRS and regulatory provisions introduce tailored treatments for royalty income—from cost-of-living adjustments (COLAs) on mechanical...
Per-Stream Payout Comparisons: Apple Leads, Peloton Surprises In January 2025, new data show that per-stream payouts across digital platforms remain vastly different — and that difference matters to creators. Platforms like Apple Music and non-traditional services...
All the Ways — and I Mean All - that Creator Make Money from Music Why this matters In an era where streaming dominates and traditional income sources shift, understanding every income stream available and how it works is the difference between scratching by and...
Drake and Allegations of Fake Billion Streams: What It Means for Streaming Integrity As of early November 2025, the music industry is again wrestling with streaming-fraud allegations, and one of its biggest names—Drake—is cited at the center of a new class-action...
The State of Artist Royalties in 2025: What Every Music Creator Needs to Know The music industry is generating more revenue than ever, yet the question of who benefits remains front and center for creators. With streaming payouts reaching historic highs, AI disrupting...
In the spring of 2025, the music industry’s long-standing debate over broadcast radio royalties re-entered the legislative spotlight with the renewed push for the American Music Fairness Act (AMFA) — a policy proposal designed to bring terrestrial radio in line with digital and satellite platforms in terms of artist compensation. From the vantage point of both a lifelong music enthusiast and a financial professional, I see this as a corrective step toward closing a structural discrepancy in how artists are paid for public performance of their sound recordings.
Under United States law today, AM/FM radio stations pay royalties to songwriters and publishers via performance rights organizations (PROs), but they do not pay recording artists when their music is broadcast, a right that many peer countries already grant in some form. The AMFA’s intent is to create a performance right for sound recordings on terrestrial radio, ensuring that recording artists — not just songwriters — are compensated when their work drives significant advertising revenue for broadcasters. This is analogous to existing royalties paid by streaming platforms and satellite radio, which already compensate performers and labels.
Artists perceive this gap not as theoretical, but as a real economic inequity. Decades of exposure via radio did offer promotional value in the pre-internet era, but with today’s streaming-centric discovery culture, that promotional effect—while still meaningful—often does not translate into measurable revenue gains for creators. Many performers argue that the modern economy demands a performance right that captures the commercial value generated by their recorded work, especially when stations earn millions in advertising without returning compensation to creators themselves.
From a strategic business perspective, major record labels have shown cautious interest in the proposal. While new royalty obligations to radio would introduce a fresh cost layer, it also extends monetizable rights to a high-reach channel that has long been exempt. For large catalog holders and legacy artists, this change could unlock a non-trivial new income stream. For independent artists, the signal is equally important: policy evolution should equate consumption with compensation more consistently across formats.
Critics of AMFA warn about potential burdens on smaller and community broadcasters. Proponents have responded by outlining tiered royalty structures that differentiate based on station revenue — a familiar regulatory approach in other copyright contexts. This balance illustrates a broader point: the goal is not to upend local radio, but to align compensation mechanisms with the economic reality of audience and revenue today.
For labels, publishers, and artists alike, AMFA represents more than a new royalty line item. It is an acknowledgment that the music economy must evolve its rules to match how music is valued and consumed in the 21st century. Whether this bill becomes law, is amended, or inspires other reforms, its prominence in 2025 underscores a shifting industry consensus that fair compensation should follow usage — whether the platform is digital, satellite, or broadcast.
Streaming Subscription Price Increases and Music Royalties The economics of music streaming are undergoing a subtle but profound shift that has artists and labels recalibrating their expectations for royalty revenue. In late 2025, reports indicate that Spotify is...