The federal CHIPS Act signed into law by President Joe Biden in August 2022 is offering $52 billion in federal subsidies to boost America’s semiconductor industry. The goal is to reduce U.S. dependence on foreign chip production. The federal program has lured states and cities to serve up billions of dollars of their own subsidies in a bid to win projects.
These public corporate subsidies have long been a way for companies to lower the cost of developing everything from factories to shopping malls. For decades they’ve been used for projects like a uranium enrichment plant near Idaho Falls, a Google data center in Pryor Creek, Oklahoma, and an electric vehicle battery plant in De Soto, Kansas.
These subsidies manifest in different ways, including generous tax abatements and tax credits to reduce or eliminate federal, state, or local corporate tax liabilities. They include no-interest loans, loan guarantees, infrastructure assistance, workforce training grants, and other forms of public support for private development.
Case study: Micron’s “Megadeal”
So far, the biggest deal in the wake of the CHIPS Act has been in New York, where the state is dishing out $5.5 billion in tax breaks to Idaho-based computer chip maker Micron Technology (NASDAQ: MU). In return, Micron says it will spend $100 billion over the next 20 years to develop the semiconductor facility near Syracuse.
As outlined by the non-profit subsidy watchdog group Good Jobs First, Micron is receiving additional public support through hundreds of millions of dollars in state and county funds to improve roads and infrastructure around the factory complex. The company says it will also require federal support through the CHIPS Act.
New York Gov. Kathy Hochul touted the deal as a win-win that will bring 50,000 jobs, including 9,000 permanent company positions. This Rust Belt region witnessed the exodus of big local employers like Carrier and General Electric in recent decades.
Why are corporate subsidies controversial?
Critics say that there are better ways to promote economic growth and create good jobs. They argue that these corporate tax cuts reduce public revenue to pay for public schools, road maintenance, and other services. Subsidies can also generate private-sector dependency on public support, reducing incentives for businesses to innovate on their own. These deals also lack transparency, making it difficult to measure their true economic impact. Lobbying efforts and campaign donations may also tip the scale in favor of corporations that receive these subsidies.
Proponents have a different view. They argue these subsidies provide benefits to local economies that are greater than the costs. Public support of the private sector creates jobs, promotes business retention and expansion, revitalizes economically depressed areas, and propagates industry development. Infrastructure spending around these project sites make an area more attractive to businesses and the employees they hire.
How do we even measure the long-term benefits of corporate subsidies?
One of the big challenges is simply auditing a subsidized project years down the road. A “megadeal” like Micron’s makes big headlines when it’s announced with fanfare by its backers. But will the same attention be paid 20 years from now to examine if the deal had the long-term benefit touted by its backers today?
Studies about the long-term benefits corporate subsidies have mixed results. “Distinguishing ‘good’ and ‘bad’ subsidies is analytically and politically fraught,” said a 2022 report from international organizations including the International Monetary Fund and the OECD.
Challenges to auditing corporate subsidies to measure their long-term impacts include establishing a mutually agreed-upon definition of a subsidy. For example, people who believe tax cuts promote job creation and economic growth (aka supply side, or “trickle down” economics) don’t view corporate tax cuts as handouts. Crucially, the availability and quality of data can be incomplete or unreliable, making future subsidy audits difficult.
The largest corporate subsidies in every state
These are the companies that won the largest state and/or city subsidy deals in every state. Megadeals are subsidies that are worth at least $50 million to their corporate recipients. These figures exclude federal support, such as the recently announced $15.5-billion Department of Energy program to boost the manufacture of electric vehicles and EV batteries through grants and loans. This information comes from the Megadeals Subsidy Tracker at Good Jobs First and numerous media reports.
Twenty-five of these megadeals occurred from 2010 to 2020. Sixteen were unveiled since 2021. Hawaii, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont, New Hampshire, and Wyoming don’t have any megadeals, meaning subsidy packages worth at least $50 million, and so have no entries on this list.
Alabama – Company with biggest megadeal: ThyssenKrupp
Number of megadeals: 18
Total value of state’s megadeals: $4.27 billion
Company with state’s biggest megadeal: ThyssenKrupp