Let Georgia Keep Paying to Promote Missouri
Last year I wrote about how Georgia taxpayers were effectively subsidizing Missouri by offering tax credits to produce Netflix's show, Ozark. While the show is set in Missouri, much of the production of Ozark actually occurs in the Peach State, thanks to the generous tax incentives offered there.
Would it be nice to have the show produced here? Sure. Is it economical to subsidize such productions? No. As with many tax incentives, research demonstrating the waste associated with film tax credits is fairly clear, so if Georgia wants to underwrite dozens of hours of (dramatic) Missouri tourism videos for us, more power to them. It may already be having a positive impact in that regard.
Unfortunately, bad ideas in Missouri tend to die hard, and that has certainly been true of the state's film tax credit program.
Missouri hasn't offered perks for film studios in several years — and producers have taken note, shooting scenes set in Missouri in other, more generous states.
But, if it were up to Lt. Gov. Mike Kehoe, the state would reboot its modest incentive program, with the goal of drawing crews to Missouri to film shows such as Netflix's "Ozark" and HBO's "Sharp Objects."
"I have seen the benefits of us being a film tax credits state," Kehoe, a Republican, told reporters on Thursday.
"Lake Ozark, Branson area, would really like to work to try to attract some moviemaking," Kehoe said. "I think we need a small amount."
That this topic returns again and again to the political scene in Missouri is a testament to the voracious tax credit appetite of the entertainment industry, and I can understand why filmmakers like the set up (it's basically free money) and why politicians like it (it's publicity, albeit far from free).
But why should taxpayers let our politicians play Louis B. Mayer to Hollywood types with their tax dollars? Rather than giving away tax money to out-of-towner production companies, elected leaders should be focused on reducing the taxes of the people already here in the state, who are far more likely to reinvest in it.
View the original at Show-Me Institute →
As confirmed against the Show-Me Institute's website on August 15, 2026, the Institute's stated policy permits reprinting of its published articles and commentary provided the original author receives credit. Letting the Institute know about a reprint is appreciated but is not a condition of use.
This entry was archived under that permission as it stood on the date above. If the Institute's policy changes after that date, it does not apply retroactively to entries already reproduced here under the terms in effect at the time — this is a record of the grant as confirmed, not a live status check.
The original remains hosted at the Institute's own site — use the link below for the canonical version, current formatting, and any images.