Elon's Vision
  • Contacts
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms & Conditions
  • News
  • Economy
  • Editor’s Pick
  • Investing
  • Stock
No Result
View All Result
  • News
  • Economy
  • Editor’s Pick
  • Investing
  • Stock
No Result
View All Result
Elon's Vision
No Result
View All Result
Home Editor's Pick

Marvel’s Endgame in Georgia

by
August 18, 2025
in Editor's Pick
0
Marvel’s Endgame in Georgia
0
SHARES
0
VIEWS
Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

Stephen Slivinski

Maybe you’re like me and you stick around until the end of the movie credits. (Or maybe you’re normal?) Sometimes it’s a key part of the experience—Marvel films famously have a (occasionally worthwhile) scene at the end of the credits of each of their theatrical releases.

If you stick around for the credits, you may have also noticed the state of Georgia’s giant peach logo popping up in the tail end of the credits scroll after several high-budget movies, particularly those made by Marvel.

That’s because the state of Georgia has been handing out billions of dollars in tax credits for movie and television production for nearly two decades. These tax credits basically subsidize the cost of filming a television show or movie in the state of Georgia. Marvel alone has filmed nearly two dozen of its productions there. 

One of the conditions of receiving the tax credit is the production company putting that logo in the end credits. (I also wonder if the American Dental Association is another key lobbying influence here. I, for one, grind my teeth strongly whenever I see that logo because … well, read on.)

According to the Wall Street Journal, Marvel Studios productions have decamped to the United Kingdom, mostly because of lower labor costs there.

In other words, even these overly generous tax credits were not enough to keep the Marvel productions in Georgia.

The state wasn’t getting much in return for the handouts anyway. According to a 2023 study from Georgia State University—requested and paid for by the state’s own Department of Audits and Accounts—the estimated return on “investment” per dollar via these tax credits was no more than 19 cents. This lines up with many other studies, which estimate that when you tally up all the costs—including the opportunity cost of what the money could have been spent on otherwise, including not spending it at all and letting the private sector choose the best targets for investment capital—these film tax credits are, at best, much more costly than they are worth.

This brings us back to Marvel’s departure. It is just the latest example of one of the dirty secrets of state government subsidies geared to so-called “economic development”: the subsidies end up paying companies for something they would have done anyway without the taxpayer-funded handout. Marvel was likely in Georgia in the first place due to the state’s favorable labor cost climate at the time. When that changed, so did the balance sheet math.

As Scott Lincicome, Marc Joffe, and Krit Chanwong point out in their recent Cato policy report, “Reforming State and Local Economic Development Subsidies”:

“[S]tate and local subsidies often pay companies for investments they would have made regardless of whether a business incentive was offered. Notably, research shows that very few business incentives are directly responsible for causing the investment at issue. In fact, a literature review from 2018 by the W. E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research found that subsidies and incentives decisively affected only 2 to 25 percent of all investment decisions, implying that at least three of four incentives did not play a crucial role in attracting an investment. Similarly, a 2015 survey of North Carolina executives found that the availability of state and local business incentives ranked below more than a dozen other factors in their assessment of the state’s business environment.”

In other words, successful business models don’t really change once a state government throws somebody else’s money at them.

If they do, it’s best to refer to the wise words of former Congressional Budget Office Director Doug Holtz-Eakin: “If your business cannot survive without a tax provision, you don’t have a business—you have a tax shelter, and it should go away.”

Previous Post

Abouammo v. United States Brief: The Government Can Prosecute Crimes Only in the Districts Where They Happen

Next Post

NorthDirect.com Review: Building a Brokerage for Today’s Investor

Next Post

NorthDirect.com Review: Building a Brokerage for Today’s Investor

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Get the daily email that makes reading the news actually enjoyable. Stay informed and entertained, for free.
Your information is secure and your privacy is protected. By opting in you agree to receive emails from us. Remember that you can opt-out any time, we hate spam too!
  • Trending
  • Comments
  • Latest

Jay Bhattacharya on Public Health

October 12, 2021

That Bangladesh Mask Study!

December 1, 2021

Antitrust Regulation Assumes Bureaucrats Know the “Correct” Amount of Competition

November 24, 2021
Pints of champagne could be the next ‘Brexit dividend’

Pints of champagne could be the next ‘Brexit dividend’

December 24, 2021

BrentMarkets.com Review: The Broker Quietly Improving Over Time

0

0

0

0

BrentMarkets.com Review: The Broker Quietly Improving Over Time

August 18, 2025

NorthDirect.com Review: Building a Brokerage for Today’s Investor

August 18, 2025
Marvel’s Endgame in Georgia

Marvel’s Endgame in Georgia

August 18, 2025
Abouammo v. United States Brief: The Government Can Prosecute Crimes Only in the Districts Where They Happen

Abouammo v. United States Brief: The Government Can Prosecute Crimes Only in the Districts Where They Happen

August 18, 2025

Recent News

BrentMarkets.com Review: The Broker Quietly Improving Over Time

August 18, 2025

NorthDirect.com Review: Building a Brokerage for Today’s Investor

August 18, 2025
Marvel’s Endgame in Georgia

Marvel’s Endgame in Georgia

August 18, 2025
Abouammo v. United States Brief: The Government Can Prosecute Crimes Only in the Districts Where They Happen

Abouammo v. United States Brief: The Government Can Prosecute Crimes Only in the Districts Where They Happen

August 18, 2025

Disclaimer: ElonsVision.com, its managers, its employees, and assigns (collectively "The Company") do not make any guarantee or warranty about what is advertised above. Information provided by this website is for research purposes only and should not be considered as personalized financial advice. The Company is not affiliated with, nor does it receive compensation from, any specific security. The Company is not registered or licensed by any governing body in any jurisdiction to give investing advice or provide investment recommendation. Any investments recommended here should be taken into consideration only after consulting with your investment advisor and after reviewing the prospectus or financial statements of the company.

  • Contacts
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms & Conditions

Copyright © 2025 ElonsVision. All Rights Reserved.

No Result
View All Result
  • News
  • Economy
  • Editor’s Pick
  • Investing
  • Stock

Copyright © 2025 ElonsVision. All Rights Reserved.