NC Budget and Tax Center

Three Questions About the MetLife Deal That Need Answers

The big news on the jobs front the past couple days has been the announcement by Governor Pat McCrory that insurance giant MetLife has agreed to make a new $126 million investment in two North Carolina locations, resulting in the creation of 2,600 jobs.

While the news of any job creation is good news when the state’s unemployment rate is over 9 percent, the price tag attached to these jobs is causing a bit of sticker shock. The deal involves providing $87 million in Job Development Investment Grant (JDIG) incentives to MetLife over the next 12 years—the largest discretionary incentive package North Carolina has ever offered from this program.

Given North Carolina’s tight state budget and persistently high unemployment, the public needs to know as much as possible about the real costs and benefits of the deal—and whether it’s really worth $87 million in taxpayer dollars, or about $33,000 per job.

To that end, here are three questions about the MetLife deal that need answers:

Question #1—How many jobs will go to North Carolina residents? While MetLife has promised to create 2,600 jobs, how many of these employment opportunities will be open to people already living in North Carolina, and how many will be filled by moving the company’s current employees from other locations in California and New England? At a cost of $33,000 per job, it’s hard to understand the justification behind simply providing taxpayer subsidies to cover the relocation expenses of out-of-state residents, unless the overwhelming majority of these new jobs can be filled with North Carolina residents.

Question #2—What are the wages MetLife will pay for the positions available to North Carolina residents? During the press conference announcing the deal, MetLife promised that the average wage of these 2,600 jobs would be $81,000 per year, but it remains unclear whether these wages will go to newly hired employees currently living in North Carolina, or whether this includes the wages going to the highly-paid technical and management workers the company is bringing into the state. Given that new positions promised by MetLife include product management, marketing, sales and customer support—positions which do not typically pay $81,000 per year—the results may not be as encouraging on the wage front as originally hoped.

Question #3—Will the large incentive offer to MetLife actually reduce the amount of incentives available to other companies in the future, including those paying better wages and employing more North Carolina residents?  Under current law, the State is not permitted to incur more than $15 million in total JDIG liability every year. Given that the MetLife deal incurs about $8 million in liability for 2013, this leaves only $7 million remaining for future projects this year. While capping the State’s total incentive liability is certainly prudent, we should be concerned if the Governor just allocated over half of the State’s available incentive dollars for 2013 for a project that may not live up to its promises of job creation and wage levels—promises that are being used to justify this historically unprecedented incentive package.

While news of new job creation is always welcome, North Carolina’s residents and taxpayers deserve answers about whether this deal is truly worth the cost of the largest JDIG incentive deal in state history.


  1. mb2004

    March 9, 2013 at 2:32 pm

    Maybe I can help answer. I work at MetLife, so here’s the scoop. We all have to reapply for our jobs, but since our salaries in the NE part of the US are so much higher, many of us won’t be chosen. They want to hire new NC people at lower wages. And the $80k figure is way high for salaries…it’s an AVERAGE – you’re taking the $30k/year job and averaging out with the VP jobs with very high wages. A lot of us make less than $80k and we’ve been told we have to take a pay cut to relocate. Many of my coworkers are taking the severance package (very generous) or retiring, while many others will consider relocating, if they are chosen. My own boss doesn’t know if she’ll be asked to move so if she doesn’t, she won’t be the one hiring us. Good luck, NC. I’ve worked at Met for 25 years and they run a tight ship. I’m happy to be retiring, probably in 2015, when my job is moved to NC.

  2. Doug

    March 10, 2013 at 8:51 am

    Hey Allen, You may want to coordinate your story with Adam. According to his story we are sitting pretty as far as the budget goes, in fact he seems to think we have a surplus we should spend instead of giving back to working people in NC.

    Is it only a tight budget when an eeeeeevilll company that will contribute high paid tax payers and corporate taxes to the state is lured here? Why is it not a tight budget when the government is being asked to fund a program for people who are not currently or likely in the future to contribute taxes?

  3. Allan Freyer

    March 10, 2013 at 1:56 pm

    Great, we have a surplus (at least until April). Not clear how this makes it less important for our incentive programs to be cost effective and to produce the job creation and wage results that are being promised.

    Hope you’re having a good weekend.

  4. Doug

    March 11, 2013 at 2:21 pm

    Sounds like every other financial services company out there. The tight ship is a model that most companies are enforcing these days. If you want rich packages in this environment then you need to work for the government.

Check Also

Here’s the skinny on the new state budget’s fat incentive programs

This year’s budget goes big on economic development ...

Top Stories from NCPW

  • News
  • Commentary

If it seemed impossible that neighbors of industrialized hog farms had any legal rights left to lose [...]

Can you put a price tag on victims' rights? A fiscal note obtained by NC Policy Watch that has [...]

A new bill to relocate the “Silent Sam” Confederate monument on UNC’s flagship Chapel Hill campus ai [...]

As LGBTQ advocates face an uphill battle to expand North Carolina’s existing Hate Crime laws this le [...]

In another effort to pander to the minority of Americans who want to make abortion and birth control [...]

The practice of loading down noncontroversial legislation with divisive and partisan provisions is a [...]

It usually happens a few times every legislative session: at some point during their annual stay in [...]

Just when you thought U.S. immigration policy couldn’t get any crueler or more dysfunctional, along [...]