The Great Hollywood Migration: Why Location Incentives Are Just the Tip of the Iceberg
The film and TV industry is in flux, and the latest numbers from ProdPro’s Q2 2026 report paint a fascinating picture of shifting power dynamics. California, long the undisputed king of production, is facing stiff competition from New York and New Jersey, while former upstarts like Georgia are seeing their star fade. But what’s really driving these changes? Personally, I think it’s not just about tax incentives—though they’re a big part of it. It’s about a broader reevaluation of what makes a location truly attractive for filmmakers.
California’s Comeback: A Temporary Fix or a New Strategy?
California’s $1.33 billion in production spend and 11% increase in filming count are impressive, especially after a sluggish Q1. The state’s doubled incentive program seems to be working, but here’s the thing: incentives alone aren’t enough. What makes this particularly fascinating is how California is leveraging its existing infrastructure—experienced crews, iconic locations, and a talent pool that’s hard to replicate. In my opinion, this is a triage effort, not a long-term solution. California’s real challenge is staying competitive in an era where other states are offering more aggressive packages. If you take a step back and think about it, the Golden State’s dominance has always been about more than just money—it’s about culture, history, and prestige. But as other states catch up, that’s no longer enough.
New York’s Rise: More Than Just a Tax Haven
New York’s 57% surge in production spend is nothing short of remarkable. The state’s decision to remove the cap on above-the-line spending is a game-changer, but what many people don’t realize is that New York is also investing heavily in its soundstage infrastructure. The opening of Sunset Pier 94 Studios and the rebound in motion picture employment to 86% of pre-pandemic levels show that the state is playing the long game. From my perspective, New York’s appeal isn’t just about incentives—it’s about creating an ecosystem that rivals California’s. The fact that A Quiet Place III chose to film there speaks volumes. This raises a deeper question: Can New York sustain this momentum, or is it just a temporary blip in California’s dominance?
New Jersey’s Quiet Revolution: The Underdog Story
New Jersey’s 41% increase in production spend, despite an 11% drop in filming activity, is a detail that I find especially interesting. The state’s strategy of partnering with Netflix, Paramount, and Lionsgate is paying off, with Netflix building its East Coast base at Fort Monmouth. What this really suggests is that New Jersey is positioning itself as a hub for long-term production rather than one-off shoots. One thing that immediately stands out is the irony of Cupertino, a show named after a California city, being filmed in New Jersey. It’s a symbolic shift that underscores how the industry is decentralizing. But here’s the catch: New Jersey still lacks the cultural cachet of New York or California. Can it overcome that?
The Decline of Georgia: A Cautionary Tale
Georgia’s 40% drop in filming activity is a stark reminder that incentives alone aren’t enough. The state’s loss of Marvel projects to the U.K. is a major blow, but what’s more concerning is the lack of diversification. Georgia’s production ecosystem was built almost entirely around tax credits, and when those credits became less competitive, the state struggled to retain projects. This is where the broader trend becomes clear: states that rely too heavily on incentives without building supporting infrastructure are vulnerable. In my opinion, Georgia’s decline is a wake-up call for other states chasing the Hollywood dream.
The Bigger Picture: What’s Really Driving Location Choices?
Alex LoVerde, ProdPro’s CEO, nails it when he says incentives are just one factor. What this really suggests is that the industry is looking for a holistic package: experienced crews, reliable infrastructure, and a place where talent wants to live and work. But there’s another layer to this: the psychological appeal of a location. California has decades of cultural capital behind it, while New York offers a certain grit and authenticity. New Jersey, meanwhile, is betting on convenience and long-term partnerships. If you take a step back and think about it, the industry is becoming more fragmented, with producers weighing not just financial incentives but also the intangible benefits of a location.
The Future: A Multi-Polar Production Landscape?
Here’s my prediction: the days of California’s unchallenged dominance are over. We’re moving toward a multi-polar production landscape where states like New York, New Jersey, and even international players like the U.K. will compete on equal footing. What makes this particularly fascinating is how this shift reflects broader trends in globalization and decentralization. The industry is no longer tied to one location—it’s becoming more fluid, more adaptable. But this raises a deeper question: What does this mean for the identity of Hollywood itself? If productions are spread across the globe, does the term ‘Hollywood’ still hold the same meaning?
Final Thoughts: Beyond the Numbers
As someone who’s watched this industry evolve, I can’t help but feel we’re at a turning point. The numbers tell a story, but they don’t capture the full complexity of what’s happening. California’s comeback, New York’s rise, and Georgia’s decline are all symptoms of a larger transformation. Personally, I think the real story here isn’t about tax incentives—it’s about adaptation. The states that thrive will be the ones that understand the industry isn’t just about money; it’s about culture, infrastructure, and the intangible allure of a place. And that, in my opinion, is what makes this moment so exciting.
