For years, the narrative in North Carolina centered on a simple equation: generous film incentives or a vanishing industry. But the latest figures suggest a more nuanced reality. Film and television production in the state generated an estimated $185,521,578 in direct, in-state spending in , marking the fourth-highest year-end total since the current iteration of the North Carolina Film and Entertainment Grant program began in .
The economic impact extends beyond simple spending numbers. The 38 productions that filmed across the state created more than 7,000 job opportunities for crew, talent and extras, impacting 45 of North Carolina’s 100 counties. Governor Josh Stein emphasized the importance of this activity, stating, “Film production is important to North Carolina, generating economic activity and supporting more than 7,000 jobs across the state last year.”
Recent projects contributing to this economic boost include Season 2 of “Beast Games,” Season 23 of “Top Chef,” and Season 2 of “Blue Ridge: The Series.” Feature films like “Bad Counselors,” “Driver’s Ed,” and “May and the Woodsman” also chose North Carolina as a filming location. Even major national commercials for brands like AutoZone, Food Lion, and Mack Trucks utilized the state’s resources.
Beyond those currently in production, several projects that debuted in were also filmed in North Carolina, including “The Waterfront,” “The Runarounds,” Season 3 of “The Summer I Turned Pretty,” “Roofman,” “Christy,” “Merv,” and the critically acclaimed “A Little Prayer.” Currently, the made-for-television sequel “A Grand Biltmore Christmas” is actively filming within the state.
The success isn’t solely attributable to financial incentives. North Carolina offers a compelling combination of factors: mild weather, diverse landscapes, a skilled workforce, and a right-to-work environment. These elements are increasingly attractive to production companies.
The state’s current incentive structure, a 25% Film and Entertainment Grant rebate program, is administered by the North Carolina Film Office within the Department of Commerce. This represents a shift from the previous system, which offered a refundable tax credit.
The evolution of North Carolina’s film incentives is a case study in economic policy. Initially, in , the state began actively courting film productions. By , lawmakers adopted a 15% refundable tax credit on qualifying in-state spending, later increasing it to 25% with higher production caps by .
This earlier, more generous credit structure drew significant production to the state. While shows like “Dawson’s Creek” predated the incentive program, it helped put Wilmington on the industry map. However, by , a debate arose regarding the sustainability of relying on targeted subsidies.
The Republican-led General Assembly allowed the refundable tax credit to expire at the end of . Predictions of an industry exodus followed, but those fears proved largely unfounded. Instead, lawmakers replaced the open-ended credit with the capped Film and Entertainment Grant Program in . This new system still offers a 25% rebate, but funding is limited by annual appropriations.
The transition wasn’t without its critics, who argued that the state was sacrificing its competitive edge. However, the industry didn’t disappear. Production levels have fluctuated, as is typical, but North Carolina has maintained its position as a viable filming location. The state now attracts productions not solely based on the size of its subsidy checks, but on a more durable foundation: a strong overall business climate.
North Carolina consistently ranks highly among states for business, boasting competitive tax rates, regulatory stability, right-to-work protections, and sustained population growth. These factors benefit a wide range of industries, including film production.
This shift reflects a broader economic philosophy: broad-based policies that create a favorable environment for all businesses, rather than targeted subsidies that privilege specific industries. The argument against incentives centers on the idea that they represent a misallocation of taxpayer funds, asking other businesses and taxpayers to shoulder the cost of supporting a single sector.
The debate over film incentives often involves a “race to the bottom,” with states competing to offer ever-larger subsidies. North Carolina’s experience suggests an alternative path. The state’s economic success isn’t solely dependent on attracting film productions through financial incentives, but on fostering a stable and competitive business environment that benefits all industries. The feared collapse following the expiration of the refundable tax credit never materialized, demonstrating that an industry can thrive without relying on substantial government subsidies.
As North Carolina heads into its legislative session and budget discussions, a focus on creative approaches to spending restraint could prove beneficial. A more balanced approach could allow both sides to achieve their priorities without relying on the assumption that the sky will fall if fewer checks are written.
