New Jersey’s studio boom is part of a wider global contest as the UK, Canada, Australia and other countries use tax incentives to attract film and TV production projects.
What’s Been Reported?
According to reporting highlighted by AOL and The Wall Street Journal, the U.S. State of New Jersy is successfully attracting some of the world’s most prolific filmmakers as economic pressure mounts on legacy film hubs, particularly Los Angeles. Netflix is developing a major studio complex at Fort Monmouth, while Lionsgate and Paramount have also been linked to significant studio infrastructure in Newark and Bayonne. The state reportedly attracted nearly US$1 billion in production spending from 17 major projects in 2025 by offering long-term incentives that can reach up to 45% for selected production partners.
The migration of major entertainment production facilities to New Jersey is not an isolated domestic story for the United States. It’s part of a much wider international shift in which studios are moving work toward jurisdictions offering better production incentives, modern infrastructure and lower friction.
For those who must stay in LA, this is a problem. For everyone else, its opportunity.
New Jersey has become one of the most aggressive new entrants in this contest.
But it’s not competing only with the Hollywood of Los Angeles County. It’s competing with the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and other global production centres that have spent years turning economic development policy into industrial strategy.
Reuters has reported that Hollywood production has been leaving Los Angeles for years, drawn to locations with government incentives that make filming cheaper. California’s response has been to expand its annual film and television tax credit programme from US$330 million to US$750 million, specifically to counter rivals such as the UK, Canada and other U.S. States.
The UK is perhaps the clearest example of what’s at stake. Official British Film Institute figures show that film and high-end television production spend reached £6.8 billion in 2025, with inward investment films contributing £2.51 billion from 58 feature-film projects. The Guardian reported that Netflix, Disney and Amazon spent £2.82 billion on UK-produced premium television in 2024, accounting for 82% of total UK high-end TV spend.
See Also:
Australia has also strengthened its position. The Australian Government’s Location Offset now provides a 30% rebate for large-budget film and television projects shot in the country, while its PDV Offset supports post-production, digital and visual effects work. Ausfilm notes that the 30% Location Offset can be combined with state and territory incentives, giving international producers a stackable support structure.
Canada remains another powerful competitor, especially through its combination of federal and provincial incentives. British Columbia, Ontario and Quebec have long attracted U.S. television and film work, helped by crew depth, infrastructure and currency advantages.
The story, then, is not simply that Hollywood is shifting productions to New Jersey. It’s that governments everywhere understand the economic benefit to film and TV productions that no longer need to shoot in Los Angeles, and that they’re willing to work for it.
Why It Matters
For investors, entrepreneurs and media executives, New Jersey’s rise should be understood as part of a global production-arbitrage story just as economists, central bankers and politicians are beginning to understand the depth and breadth of today’s global Media & Entertainment industry.
The economics of screen production have changed.
Studios and streamers are under pressure to control costs just as investors are demanding profitability. In that environment, a 30%, 35% or 45% content production incentive can materially change a project’s budget. Tax policy has long been part of the financing model, but now production rebates are being balanced against employment opportunity and the knock-on effect of film production on adjacent economic sectors.
Why governments are treating production as economic strategy.
A major studio facility is not just a place where films are made. It creates demand for construction, equipment rental, payroll services, post-production, transport, catering, legal services, insurance, hotels and skilled labour. Once a production cluster forms, the benefits can spread across a broader local economy.
New Jersey’s approach mirrors the international playbook. The State is not merely offering rebates to passing productions. It’s trying to anchor long-term studio infrastructure. That makes it competitive, in strategic terms, to the UK’s inward-investment model, Australia’s location incentives and Canada’s federal-provincial production framework.
For Los Angeles, this is the deeper challenge.
Hollywood is not being replaced by one or two rival North American cities. It’s being pressured by a network of rival nations. A production that once defaulted to Southern California can now compare New Jersey, Georgia, Canada, the UK, Australia or Hungary or the Czech Republic. Each jurisdiction may offer different advantages: tax credits, labour costs, stage availability, exchange rates, visual effects capacity or proximity to story settings.
This makes California’s expanded US$750 million programme defensive as much as promotional. It’s a recognition that heritage alone is no longer enough. Reuters reported that Los Angeles had suffered weak production levels and thousands of entertainment job losses, while California policymakers argued that stronger incentives were needed to keep jobs in the State.
Where productions shoot, economics follow.
For entrepreneurs, the opportunity lies around modern production hubs with an old-fashioned work ethic. Production migration into emerging jurisdictions creates increased demand for local service companies, workforce training, studio operations jobs, production technology adoption, virtual production know-how, post-production and location management. Plus, local production options increase opportunities for local creatives to produce local content for audiences at home and abroad, further expanding global awareness of local culture, scenery and places to visit.
For investors, the question is whether these hubs can become self-sustaining. Incentives can attract the first wave of projects, but durable clusters require availability of trained crews, efficient permitting, transport links, reliable stage capacity and a pipeline of repeat work. The UK has shown how international investment can become embedded. Australia and Canada have built similar reputations. New Jersey is attempting to join that tier.
There’s also a policy risk. Film and television incentives are expensive, and critics argue they can become a subsidy race in which governments compete to attract prestige rather than create real jobs. The danger is that public money underwrites select, private production decisions without creating a broad incentive for sustainable production work and lasting local value.
Yet the political appeal is obvious. Studio investments are visible, employment claims are easy to communicate and production spending touches many local businesses. For government officials, attracting Netflix or Lionsgate offers both economic development and cultural prestige.
The broader lesson for the media business is that production is no longer tied to mythology. “Hollywood” remains a brand, but production has already become a global market.
The Story
On May 28, 2026, The Wall Street Journal reported that New Jersey is using long-term tax incentives to attract major studio investment from Netflix, Lionsgate and Paramount.
Reuters framed the issue as part of California’s wider struggle to keep film and television production from moving to incentive-rich rivals, including the UK, Canada and other U.S. states.
BFI reported that UK film and high-end television production spend reached £6.8 billion in 2025, underscoring the UK’s role as a major global production hub.
The Guardian reported that Netflix, Disney and Amazon drove a large share of UK premium TV spend in 2024.
Australian Government / Ausfilm detail Australia’s 30% Location Offset, which has strengthened the country’s appeal to large-budget international productions.
Curation Details
We encourage readers to review the original reporting that inspired this analysis:
Primary Source
The Wall Street Journal
“New Jersey’s Film Boom and the Race for Production Investment”
Source: The Wall Street Journal Coverage
Additional Sources Referenced
“Major Studios Are Moving Productions From Hollywood To New Jersey — Here’s Why”
Published by AOL News, May 29, 2026.
Source: AOL News Article
Yahoo Finance
“An Unlikely State Is Taking Jobs From Hollywood”
Source: Yahoo Finance Coverage
British Film Institute (BFI)
Official production statistics detailing record inward-investment film and high-end television spending in the United Kingdom.
Source: BFI Official Statistics 2025
The Guardian
Reporting on the growing role of Netflix, Disney and Amazon in UK television production and the broader international competition for screen investment.
Source: The Guardian Media Coverage
Australian Government / Ausfilm
Information regarding Australia’s 30% Location Offset and international production incentive framework.
Sources:
Australian Government Screen Production Incentives
Ausfilm Incentives Guide
Its all hands on deck within the Media C-Suite! The Newsroom Staff includes every writer we have. Whenever something catches the attention from over the news wires, and we can add to it, then it is commented on internally and we all put a little bit into helping you stay in the Know.
Follow the money!