Close Menu
Badger InstituteBadger Institute
  • Home
  • Issues
    • Taxes
    • Education
    • Housing
    • Crime & Justice
    • Spending & Accountability
    • Economy & Infrastructure
    • Federalism
    • Licensing
    • Healthcare
    • Childcare
    • Marijuana
    • Energy
    • Civil Society
  • Mandate for Madison
  • Research
  • News & Analysis
    • News & Analysis
    • Viewpoints (Op-ed)
    • By the Numbers
    • Fact Sheets
    • Magazines
      • Diggings
      • Wisconsin Interest
  • Media
    • Badger in the News
    • Press Releases
    • Podcast
    • Video
    • Audio
    • Testimony
  • Events
  • About
    • Our Mission
    • Board of Directors
    • Team
    • Visiting Fellows
    • Careers
  • Top Picks
  • Donate
  • Contact Us

Subscribe to Top Picks

Get the latest news and research from Badger Institute

Name(Required)
You can modify your subscription preferences at any time by using the link found at the bottom of every email.

What's New

Taxpayers spared nearly $8.5 million in Wisconsin alone due to Trump administration order cutting aid to public broadcasting

May 8, 2025

Local government regulations push price of a Wisconsin roof skyward

May 8, 2025

Subject by subject, Wisconsin districts face higher rates of teacher turnover

May 1, 2025
Facebook X (Twitter) YouTube LinkedIn Instagram
TRENDING:
  • Taxpayers spared nearly $8.5 million in Wisconsin alone due to Trump administration order cutting aid to public broadcasting
  • Local government regulations push price of a Wisconsin roof skyward
  • Subject by subject, Wisconsin districts face higher rates of teacher turnover
  • Milwaukee rents in national spotlight; rent caps not the solution  
  • Gov. Evers’ irresponsible budget
  • Manitowoc and builder bend to make houses attainable
  • Federal prosecutors in Madison have stopped prosecuting cannabis offenses
  • Derail the Hop permanently
  • Donate
  • Events
  • Contact
Facebook X (Twitter) YouTube LinkedIn Instagram
Badger InstituteBadger Institute
SUPPORT OUR MISSION
  • Issues
    • Taxes
    • Education
    • Housing
    • Crime & Justice
    • Spending & Accountability
    • Economy & Infrastructure
    • Federalism
    • Licensing
    • Healthcare
    • Childcare
    • Marijuana
    • Energy
    • Civil Society
  • Mandate for Madison
  • Research
  • News & Analysis
    • News & Analysis
    • Viewpoints (Op-ed)
    • By the Numbers
    • Fact Sheets
    • Magazines
      • Diggings
      • Wisconsin Interest
  • Media
    • Press Releases
    • Badger in the News
    • Podcast
    • Video
    • Audio
    • Testimony
  • About
    • Our Mission
    • Board of Directors
    • Team
    • Visiting Fellows
    • Careers
Facebook X (Twitter) YouTube LinkedIn
DONATE
Badger InstituteBadger Institute
Home » Media » News & Analysis » Foxconn deal: Why Wisconsinites should be skeptical
Economic Development

Foxconn deal: Why Wisconsinites should be skeptical

By Andrew HansonAugust 16, 2017
Share
Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Pinterest

The potential for the Foxconn deal to provide a boost to Wisconsin’s economy and the excitement provided by media coverage make it difficult to think objectively about the deal. It is referred to as a “linchpin” investment, the “first domino” in a line, “a game-changer” and “transformational.”

But Wisconsinites need to be asking, “Is this a good deal for us?”

The truth is that we are not likely to know the answer for a long time — an analysis by the nonpartisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau suggests Wisconsin’s $3 billion investment may not pay off for a quarter-century. But there are reasons Wisconsinites should view the deal with a high degree of skepticism immediately. 

• The $3 billion incentive package being offered to Foxconn Technology Group of Taiwan could instead be used for other economic development that may have more impact on Wisconsin’s economy over the long term. Most of that $3 billion is being promised as refundable tax credits over 15 years — meaning that the state will be making cash payments to Foxconn to offset payroll and capital investment that do not depend on Foxconn’s profitability as a business. These dollars instead could be returned to taxpayers or used for other economic redevelopment policies, perhaps those that level the playing field for all businesses — such as cutting corporate taxes, improving general infrastructure or encouraging entrepreneurship, all of which have a good track record of creating long-term growth.

• There is a high degree of volatility in the success that similar agreements have had on other local economies. Even the most optimistic studies find positive effects in only about a third of cases, with other cases showing either no discernable or negative effects. No matter what current projections might say, the truth is that there is uncertainty as to where in the spectrum Foxconn will fall. Adding to the volatility for Wisconsinites is that a successful deal hinges on Foxconn’s success as a business — something that depends on market forces that are nearly impossible to predict. We cannot know what future demand for Foxconn’s products — such as the LCD screens it plans to manufacture in Wisconsin — will be, what competition it will face and what other challenges it may encounter in the future. 

• Even if Foxconn continues to be a profitable company, the hope that the deal will provide more benefit to the Wisconsin economy than alternative policies is largely based on something called the economic multiplier. The idea is that for every job created at Foxconn directly, some multiple of jobs will be created in the local economy through an impact on local supply chain, local retail and service establishments and general growth in productivity. Projections showing Foxconn employment in Wisconsin at 13,000 with total employment at 35,000 imply a multiplier of about 1.7. This is an extremely generous estimate. Many studies of similar deals find multipliers of zero, with some studies finding negative multipliers as the new employer hires away workers from other companies in the area.  Even the most optimistic studies find only a multiplier of one for the skill level of jobs promised by Foxconn. Admittedly, multipliers for high-tech employers can be larger, but they are idiosyncratic, highly dependent on interactions with the existing economic base and, most important, uncertain.  

• Citizens should question how offering the deal to Foxconn might affect the relationship between the state and other large employers. Why shouldn’t Kohl’s, Harley-Davidson, MillerCoors and others expect a similar deal? Maybe it would be in their best interest to see if other states would offer an incentive package if Wisconsin isn’t willing to do so. 

• The physical enormity of the proposed Foxconn plant is an irreversible investment, and a large one at that. Once the plant is built, and the surrounding land and water used for industry, it is hard to imagine that it could be used for anything else. This isn’t a problem if the plant continues to operate, hopefully at full-employment capacity, but there will come a time when that is no longer the case. What happens to an empty 20-million-square-foot, specially built manufacturing facility? One needs to look no further than the abandoned 3.5-million-square-foot Packard plant in Detroit (empty since 1956) to get a haunting glimpse of the possibilities.   

The Foxconn deal has some appealing qualities — production of a well-known, high-tech product, the promise of thousands of jobs — but, ultimately, it is filled with too much uncertainty to be good for residents of Wisconsin.

Andrew Hanson is an associate professor of economics at Marquette University. His research focus is in public finance and urban economics.

Read our related coverage:

Mike Nichols: Unprecedented decision, disparate opinions
Noah Williams: Fiscal costs certain, but a potential for large gains
Ike Brannon: There are better ways to create jobs and growth
Robert S. Anthony: What will the future of LCDs mean for Wisconsin?

News
Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Telegram Email
Andrew Hanson

Related Posts

Taxpayers spared nearly $8.5 million in Wisconsin alone due to Trump administration order cutting aid to public broadcasting

May 8, 2025

Local government regulations push price of a Wisconsin roof skyward

May 8, 2025

Milwaukee rents in national spotlight; rent caps not the solution  

May 1, 2025
Top Posts

Emergency responders can’t find a place to live close to where they save lives

March 6, 20252,362

‘Predictable’ Hobart a rarity for developers in Wisconsin

March 20, 20251,802

To what extent are school districts losing teachers they want?

February 6, 20251,614

For now, a tiny house in a land of lakes and giant prices

February 20, 20251,488

Top Picks

Subscribe for the latest news and research from Badger Institute

Name(Required)
You can modify your subscription preferences at any time by using the link found at the bottom of every email.

Connect with Badger Institute
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • LinkedIn
About Us
About Us

The Badger Institute is a nonpartisan, not-for-profit institute established in 1987 working to engage and energize Wisconsinites and others in discussions and timely action on key public policy issues critical to the state’s future, growth and prosperity.

Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram YouTube LinkedIn

Sign up for Top Picks

Get the latest news and research from Badger Institute

Name(Required)
You can modify your subscription preferences at any time by using the link found at the bottom of every email.

What’s New

Taxpayers spared nearly $8.5 million in Wisconsin alone due to Trump administration order cutting aid to public broadcasting

May 8, 2025

Local government regulations push price of a Wisconsin roof skyward

May 8, 2025

Subject by subject, Wisconsin districts face higher rates of teacher turnover

May 1, 2025

Milwaukee rents in national spotlight; rent caps not the solution  

May 1, 2025
© 2025 Badger Institute | Privacy Policy | Disclaimer | Sitemap

Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.

Notifications