Bill Lester and Nichola Lowe–Co-PIs. State and local governments spend upwards of $50 billion per year on a wide variety of incentive payments to induce private businesses to locate new or relocate existing establishments within their jurisdictions. Such business attractions bring the promise of additional direct jobs and tax revenue as well as potential downstream impacts throughout a local economy. However, some scholars and analysts criticize incentives as pure corporate welfare that generates a zero-sum “economic war between the states.” Viewed this way, incentives sap public resources from more worthwhile economic development programs, namely entrepreneurial support and workforce development, and thus limit potential job or establishment growth. Although the use of incentives has been debated and researched for decades in the field of economic development, most studies focus on an individual state, specific policy or program or incentivized recruitment deal. This research will link three national databases—the Good Jobs First Incentive Database, the National Establishment Time-Series (NETS) and C2ER State Economic Development Expenditure Database—to investigate whether firms which receive incentive “deals” ultimately create the jobs they promise, and whether their economic performance is higher than a similar set of non-incentivized establishments that relocated without an incentive. By including the C2ER State Economic Development Expenditure Database, we will also explore whether state’s with a more balanced economic development ‘portfolio’ (i.e., with similar public investment in recruitment, entrepreneurship and workforce development) make more effective use of their incentive dollars.