Estimated Time to Read: 6 minutes
Texas Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick (R) has made it clear that one of his major legislative priorities for the ongoing 89th Legislative Session is establishing Texas as “America’s Film Capital.” His plan? A massive expansion of taxpayer-funded film subsidies, allocating nearly $500 million in incentives to lure Hollywood productions to the Lone Star State. While Patrick and industry advocates argue that the plan will generate jobs and economic growth, critics see it as yet another corporate giveaway that benefits a select few at taxpayers’ expense.
Who Really Benefits from Texas’ $500 Million Film Incentives?
Patrick’s proposal includes:
- $450 million in tax credits for large-scale film and television productions.
- $48 million in grants for smaller films and commercials.
- Texas residency requirements to ensure film crews are local.
Supporters claim that for every dollar Texas spends on film incentives, it receives $4 in economic return. However, such projections are difficult to verify, and independent studies on film subsidies have shown mixed results at best. While some productions may bring in temporary jobs and short-term economic boosts, the long-term financial benefits remain questionable—especially when taxpayer money is involved.
The actual legislation has yet to be filed at the time of publishing.
Texas Actors Push for Hollywood Handouts
To bolster support for the program, a group of prominent Texas-born actors—including Matthew McConaughey, Woody Harrelson, Dennis Quaid, Billy Bob Thornton, and Renée Zellweger—have put together a promotional video urging lawmakers to approve more film funding. The campaign argues that Texas has the locations, talent, and infrastructure to compete with major production hubs like California and Georgia.
Yet, one has to wonder: Should Texas taxpayers really be subsidizing multi-million-dollar Hollywood productions when the state has more pressing priorities?
Texas’ Film Incentive Program: A Track Record of Waste
The Texas Moving Image Industry Incentive Program (TMIIIP) was created in 2005 to attract film productions to the state. However, its funding has fluctuated wildly:
- 2022-2023: Allocated $22.5 million
- 2024-2025: Increased to $200 million
- 2026-2027 Proposal: Nearly $500 million
If previous years’ investments haven’t made Texas the top film destination, why should taxpayers believe that throwing even more money at the program will yield better results now?
The 2023 Attempt to Expand Film Subsidies: A Failed Effort
During the 88th Legislative Session (2023), a similar attempt to expand Texas’ film incentives was introduced under House Bill 3600 by former State Rep. Four Price (R-Amarillo). This legislation sought to create the Texas Multimedia Production Program, offering tax credits to production companies that met specific in-state spending requirements. It included provisions such as:
- A minimum of $15 million in in-state spending for eligibility.
- A requirement that at least 25% of filming occur in Texas.
- A tiered tax credit system, offering up to 38% wage credits for Texas-based workers in economically distressed areas.
- The possibility of selling or assigning tax credits, leading to concerns about financial manipulation.
Despite initial progress, HB 3600 was ultimately postponed beyond a key legislative deadline, preventing it from being considered by the overall House of Representatives and ending its legislative prospects.
Notably, duplicate legislation filed in the Texas Senate in 2023, authored by State Sen. Charles Perry (R-Lubbock), never made it beyond the Senate Natural Resources and Economic Development Committee, despite receiving a public hearing.
Corporate Welfare Disguised as Economic Growth
Critics—including fiscal conservatives, taxpayer advocates, and state officials—have voiced strong opposition to the film subsidy expansion. Many see it as a blatant example of corporate welfare, where the government picks winners and losers by giving taxpayer-funded handouts to politically connected industries.
Even Texas Comptroller Glenn Hegar has warned against the inefficacy of economic incentive programs like this. States like Louisiana and North Carolina have scaled back their film incentives after finding that they did not generate sustainable economic growth.
Many studies have found that states with aggressive film incentive programs often fail to see long-term job growth in the industry once subsidies dry up. Instead, productions simply chase the best handouts, moving from state to state without any lasting impact on local economies.
Government Overreach? The Strings Attached to Film Incentives
One major red flag in Patrick’s proposal is the potential for content restrictions tied to state-funded film incentives. According to The Austin Chronicle, industry insiders worry that the funding could come with political and ideological strings attached. This raises concerns about government overreach into creative expression—especially given Texas Republicans’ frequent criticisms of Hollywood’s left-leaning influence.
Should Texas taxpayers be funding an industry that, in many cases, actively promotes values contrary to those held by the majority of Texans? Furthermore, what happens when politicians begin using these subsidies as leverage to dictate content?
A Smarter Approach: Free Market Solutions Over Film Subsidies
Rather than handing out massive subsidies, Texas could focus on making the state more attractive to all businesses through:
- Lower taxes across the board (not just for the film industry).
- Deregulation to foster a truly free-market environment.
- Infrastructure improvements that benefit multiple industries, not just Hollywood.
If Texas is such a great place for film production, why does the industry require half a billion dollars in government incentives to stay here?
Several Texas elected officials have voiced their concerns:

“People and companies move to Texas because we have no state income tax and a fair regulatory climate. If you want more people and companies to move to Texas, let’s eliminate property taxes!”
Source: State Rep. Briscoe Cain (R-Deer Park), Twitter/X Post, 1.30.2025
“Hollywood is dying. Productions can’t get out of California fast enough. Texas will benefit without subsidizing the folks that brought us woke, anti-Christian bigotry, socialism, transgenderism, etc.”
Source: Texas Agriculture Commissioner Sid Miller (R), Twitter/X Post, 1.30.2025


“The success or failure of this venture does not, and should not, depend on government forking over your hard-earned money.”
Source: State Rep. Andy Hopper (R-Decatur), Twitter/X Post, 1.30.2025
“Texans don’t pay taxes for us to incentivize a Texas-sized version of Hollywood. They pay taxes for us to keep them safe and free, and to ensure that the state continues to have the infrastructure in place so that businesses both large and small can succeed. Texas stories already have Texas-sized incentives. So let’s write that story anyway.”
Source: State Rep. Daniel Alders (R-Tyler), Twitter/X Post, 2.1.2025

Conclusion: A Raw Deal for Texas Taxpayers
Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick’s push to make Texas the next Hollywood may sound like a bold vision, but in reality, it’s another example of government playing venture capitalist with taxpayer money. With a history of film incentives failing, concerns over government interference in creative content, and the undeniable corporate welfare aspect, lawmakers must ask: is this truly the best use of half a billion dollars?
Texas thrives when it allows the free market to work—not when it subsidizes billion-dollar industries in the name of “economic development.” If Patrick and his allies want Texas to become a film powerhouse, they should lower barriers to entry, not cut checks to Hollywood elites.
Texas Policy Research relies on the support of generous donors across Texas.
If you found this information helpful, please consider supporting our efforts! Thank you!