Economic Incentive Activity Report | September 2026

Economic incentive opportunities are often missed because the teams making real estate, tax, finance, and operating decisions do not always have a clear view of what peer companies are securing in the market. This monthly report is intended to give corporate decision makers a practical benchmark for evaluating whether active or planned projects may be under-leveraging available state and local incentive programs.

The report focuses on state and local economic incentives, where program design can vary significantly by jurisdiction. Counties, municipalities, and state agencies may offer tax abatements, tax credits, sales tax rebates, cash grants, real estate grants, utility rebates, infrastructure grants, or workforce training support. Because the structure, timing, and compliance requirements differ by market, comparing actual awarded deals is one of the most useful ways to calibrate expectations before a site decision is finalized.

Although federal incentives can be relevant for certain industries, particularly defense, energy, agriculture, infrastructure, and advanced manufacturing, they are not comprehensively tracked in this report. The data below covers closed state and local economic incentive activity from July 2026, sourced from IncentivesFlow, a service from FDI Intelligence. The report is designed as a benchmarking tool for CFOs, tax departments, business unit leaders, and corporate real estate teams evaluating facility expansions, relocations, or major capital investments.

Market Snapshot

These summary figures provide a high-level benchmark for evaluating active projects. The July dataset reflects approximately $3.8 billion in total economic incentives, $20.3 billion in reported capital investment, and 40,446 jobs created or retained across 312 projects. The $116,863 incentive value per new job and 18.7% capex recovery rate are useful reference points, but they should be evaluated alongside project-specific factors such as job quality, industry, location, wage levels, capital intensity, and timing.

What the Data Is Telling Finance and Real Estate Teams

July’s dataset is anchored by one of the largest single-deal incentive packages in recent months: Octapharma’s $650 million award in Rock Hill, South Carolina, supported by a $1.5 billion manufacturing investment and 1,500 jobs. The deal reflects South Carolina’s increasing competitiveness for large-scale life sciences manufacturing, combining a Governor’s Closing Fund grant with job development credits to secure a major foreign direct investment from Switzerland. For companies in biologics, pharmaceuticals, and medical manufacturing, the Octapharma package sets a meaningful data point on what states will commit to win a flagship project.

The July data includes a notable cluster of California film and television tax credit awards, with six productions — including Paramount Pictures, CBS Studios, Universal Television, and 20th Century Studios — collectively receiving more than $100 million in incentives through the California Film & Television Tax Credit Program. While these are not directly comparable to corporate facility investments, they illustrate the scale at which California deploys its incentive programs for the creative industry sector and serve as a reminder that the state’s incentive activity extends well beyond manufacturing and tech.

Nuclear energy and advanced propulsion investment stood out as a distinct theme in July. TRISO-X received an $11 million grant from Tennessee’s Nuclear Energy Supply Chain Investment Fund to expand its Oak Ridge fuel fabrication campus, while Valar Atomics secured $106.7 million in Utah tax credits through the EDTIF program for a $1.3 billion small modular reactor project. Ursa Major Technologies added $58 million in Colorado incentives for a $408.5 million propulsion systems expansion in Longmont. Taken together, the deals signal a meaningful acceleration in state-level support for next-generation energy and defense propulsion infrastructure.

AST SpaceMobile’s $66 million incentive award from the Midland Development Corporation for a new satellite manufacturing facility in Texas, and Salesforce’s $65.5 million Illinois EDGE credit for a Chicago office expansion, reflect two different but equally instructive patterns: competitive local governments making large commitments to attract high-wage employment, and states using performance-based tax credits to retain and grow headquarters-adjacent office functions. Both deals underscore that incentive negotiation leverage is highest when companies have credible alternatives and a defined timeline.

July activity reinforces a consistent theme from recent months: the most competitive incentive packages are typically tied to a combination of strategic industry alignment, meaningful job creation, above-average wage commitments, and capital investment that generates a clear fiscal return for the jurisdiction. Companies that approach incentive negotiations with multiple credible alternatives and a defined project timeline continue to secure the most favorable outcomes.

Selected State and Local Economic Incentive Deals  

The following deals represent selected high-value state and local economic incentive packages announced in July 2026. Incentive structures may include tax abatements, tax credits, sales tax rebates, cash grants, real estate grants, utility rebates, infrastructure support, and workforce programs, depending on the jurisdiction and project profile. The table is intended to serve as a practical benchmark when evaluating whether an incentive offer on an active or planned project is directionally competitive. Unless otherwise noted, incentive amounts are performance-based and contingent on the company meeting capital investment, job creation, wage, or other compliance requirements.

How to Apply This Data Inside Your Organization

For tax departments:  the economic incentive packages reflected in this dataset may have very different tax, accounting, and compliance implications depending on structure. A property tax abatement, refundable or nonrefundable tax credit, cash grant, infrastructure reimbursement, or utility rebate will affect timing, recognition, documentation, and clawback exposure differently. Before comparing an outside benchmark to an internal project, confirm the instrument, benefit period, required filings, and performance obligations. 

For CFOs and business unit leaders: if a major project is under consideration — whether it involves a new facility, expansion, consolidation, relocation, or workforce growth — incentive analysis should begin before the location decision is finalized. Many of the deals in this report were negotiated while companies still had credible location alternatives. Once a lease is signed, construction starts, or the project is publicly announced, negotiating leverage with state and local economic development organizations can decline quickly.

For corporate real estate executives: incentives should be integrated into the site selection timeline rather than treated as a late-stage add-on. Site Selection Group works exclusively on behalf of occupiers, with no landlord or developer relationships, so the incentive strategy is aligned with the company’s financial and operational objectives. Early coordination between real estate, tax, finance, and operations can materially improve the value and usability of an incentive package. 

To learn more about this month’s report or explore incentive opportunities for your next project, reach out to us.

Source: IncentivesFlow, a Service from FDI Intelligence. Data covers state and local economic incentive deals tracked through July 2026. Federal economic incentives are not comprehensively included.

© 2026 Site Selection Group, LLC. All rights reserved. This report is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal, tax, or investment advice.