Center for Business and Economic Research - Ball State University


CBER Data Center
Projects and PublicationsEconomic IndicatorsWeekly CommentaryCommunity Asset InventoryManufacturing Scorecard

About

Commentaries are published weekly and distributed through the Indianapolis Business Journal and many other print and online publications. Disclaimer

RSS Feed

Disclaimer

The views expressed in these commentaries do not reflect those of Ball State University or the Center for Business and Economic Research.

Recent

Two Key Economic Lessons in One BillHoosiers face trade-offs and opportunity costs in the wake of SEA1.

Time to Fix Economic Development PolicyAllocating tax dollars to land development won’t cause economic growth.

The Unanticipated Effects of SB1Businesses, governments and households may all feel the effects.

The Stupidest of PoliciesThis whipsawing of tariff rates has unnerved financial markets, which on Wednesday, were toying with a liquidity crisis.

View archives

Top Tags

jobs and employment 261
economics 201
state and local government 188
education 186
economic development 171
indiana 171
budget and spending 145
taxes 144
law and public policy 142
workforce and human capital 139
Browse all tags
Reporter / Admin Login

December 15, 2013

Economic Development Studies and Tax Abatement

Over the past few weeks, the research center in which I work published three different studies evaluating the role of economic development programs in Indiana.  The results of our work held some surprises and some not so surprising findings. 

The first study evaluated the Indiana Economic Development Corporation’s suite of services. We made a number of small recommendations, suggesting, for example, that IEDC improve some website offerings, but it is clear that IEDC is offering among the most up-to-date economic development activities.  Moreover, the National Governor’s Association recently commissioned a study that strongly recommended that other states adopt the type of public-private partnership in state economic development efforts which is in use here in Indiana.  IEDC employs roughly 65 persons, while several surrounding states had more than 400 workers. So, I would expect a lot more states embracing our model.

Among the more interesting findings were that IEDC had significantly grown the number of employers it works with since shifting to the public-private model.  In 2004, IEDC was working with employers of roughly 1 out of every 50 new jobs that came to Indiana.  By 2010 that share had grown to more than 1 out of 25.  We also found that the new employers IEDC works with are more evenly distributed across the state than are new jobs as a whole.   Still, most new jobs in Indiana never connect with the economic development apparatus at the local, regional or state level, which means that economic development efforts alone won’t create prosperity.

The second study examined tax incentives in Indiana, at the state and local level.  It is worth noting that to ask me and my colleague Dagney Faulk to study the issue required a great deal of political courage by IEDC.  Both of us have studied and testified on tax incentives in a number of states, and some of my work helped aid the demise of Michigan’s largest incentive program in 2012. 

The data we used were of actual jobs created (according to the Department of Labor), and the size of the incentive reported by the states and counties.  This is important because many critiques of the job-creating effects of incentives focus on the gap between the promised and actual jobs in a business.  Economists think the important question has nothing to do with the business that gets the incentive, but rather the overall number of jobs in the region.

We found that the state level incentives (granted only after the jobs are created) resulted in a new manufacturing job for every $1,000 or so of incentives.   However, the costs to local government are closer to $30,000 per job.  This prompted a final study on local tax abatements, which found that more liberal use of incentives was associated with higher taxes for other businesses and residents in a county.  We cannot tell for certain if this is because places with high taxes need to incentivize firms or vice versa.  Either way, local tax abatements appear to be a costly way to boost the local economy.

Link to this commentary: https://commentaries.cberdata.org/708/economic-development-studies-and-tax-abatement

Tags: business, economics, jobs and employment, taxes


About the Author

Michael Hicks cberdirector@bsu.edu

Michael J. Hicks, PhD, is the director of the Center for Business and Economic Research and the George and Frances Ball distinguished professor of economics in the Miller College of Business at Ball State University. Note: The views expressed here are solely those of the author, and do not represent those of funders, associations, any entity of Ball State University, or its governing body.

© Center for Business and Economic Research, Ball State University

About Ball State CBER Data Center

Ball State CBER Data Center is one-stop shop for economic data including demographics, education, health, and social capital. Our easy-to-use, visual web tools offer data collection and analysis for grant writers, economic developers, policy makers, and the general public.

Ball State CBER Data Center (cberdata.org) is a product of the Center for Business and Economic Research at Ball State University. CBER's mission is to conduct relevant and timely public policy research on a wide range of economic issues affecting the state and nation. Learn more.

Terms of Service

Center for Business and Economic Research

Ball State University • Whitinger Business Building, room 149
2000 W. University Ave.
Muncie, IN 47306-0360
Phone:
765-285-5926
Email:
cber@bsu.edu
Website:
www.bsu.edu/cber
Facebook:
www.facebook.com/BallStateCBER
Twitter:
www.twitter.com/BallStateCBER
Close