This argument is ridiculous.
Tax money Nashville got before the show ran: $0
Assuming $45M was their entire tax debt, taxes they got while the show ran: $0
Tax money they will get now that the show is cancelled: $0
So, how did the city or state “lose money?” They may have lost the opportunity to make tax money, but probably would not have since the show would not have been done without the tax break.
And, the show did purchase local resources (food, hotels, vehicles rentals, etc.) and pay some local actors who most certainly paid taxes.
But, to say that it “cost” the city or state money is poppycock.
Old saying: You can’t lose what you never had.
Problem is you assumed $45M was their entire tax debt. Doubtless it was many times more than that. Being as production of a show doesn’t generate much in the way of taxes, it’s SELLING the show that generates the taxes and that all happens in LA and NYC. That $45M was free money they gave them to defray costs, the only taxes locations generally get out of filming is sales taxes from them buying supplies, and salary taxes. Nashville probably came out of that deal behind at least $35M.
What the article misses is that the show was basically an advertisement for tourism to the city of Nashville.
To compare the subsidy returns with those paid for merely siting a production in a given location is apples and oranges. Not only was the production sited here, but it kicked off a tourism boom that likely will run for years to come.
The biggest risk is not that the subsidy was ineffective, but that it was SO effective that it has kicked off an investment bubble in hotel construction!