America's Biotech Leadership Depends on the States

For decades, America has led the global biotech industry – thanks, in part, to state-level policies that encourage research and manufacturing investments.

But other countries, including China, are sparing no expense in the bid to overtake us. Beijing has officially made biotechnology a national strategic priority and is pouring billions into state-backed research and manufacturing efforts.

All states should consider impactful biotech policies that grow and strengthen our domestic biotechnology industry. If states fail to utilize and replicate what are considered to be the best and most successful policies in biotech-focused economic development, the United States will soon lose its long-term leadership in developing medicines and medical technologies, which underpin our health, our economy, and our national security.

Thankfully, many governors and state legislatures around the country are already answering this call -- as our new study, The U.S. Bioscience Industry: A Powerful Engine for State Economies, demonstrates.

Today, 39 states offer R&D tax credit programs designed to attract investment, spur local manufacturing, and create high-skilled jobs -- while also making U.S. biotech production more globally competitive.

Massachusetts is widely recognized as a global biotech hub due in large part to its bold economic development strategy focused on the life sciences, but Massachusetts is not alone. States across country are creating biotech-focused programs, particularly in biomanufacturing. Kentucky's Reinvestment Act, for instance, provides up to a decade of income-tax relief for companies that modernize plants and retain local jobs. Louisiana and Mississippi offer refundable or carry-forward credits for property taxes paid on manufacturing inventory, reducing costs for growing firms. South Carolina, Tennessee, and West Virginia grant credits on manufacturing or equipment purchases that can offset most -- and in some cases all -- of a company's tax liability.

Together, these policies make it far easier for biotech manufacturers to expand in the United States.

Of course, it takes more than a favorable tax environment to foster a thriving biotech sector. Collaboration between the public and private sectors is equally essential. And many states are actively working to facilitate this collaboration -- from amply funding technology-transfer offices at state research universities to joint research centers and other public-private partnerships aimed at transforming academic research into market-ready products.

America's biotech sector can't succeed without an ample supply of talented workers. And on this front, states are helping support the next generation of biotech professionals through initiatives that connect schools and employers.

In Georgia, the Biotech Teacher Training Initiative equips middle and high school educators with hands-on biotechnology instruction through a longstanding public-private partnership. Meanwhile, Ohio is planning a new biomanufacturing training center and a statewide network of community-college programs. And in Maryland, the state is expanding industry-led training grants that help workers gain the technical skills needed for high-demand roles in biomanufacturing and other bioscience fields.

These efforts provide a blueprint for how states can promote prosperity and job creation while also safeguarding America's global leadership.

When state leaders support the biotech sector with smart, forward-looking policies, they aren't just growing an industry that collectively employs more than 2.3 million Americans across nearly 150,000 businesses and indirectly supports roughly 8 million other jobs along with $3.2 trillion in total economic output.

They're also strengthening our nation's capacity to treat disease and ensure that tomorrow's breakthroughs are invented and manufactured here at home.

Patrick Plues is Senior Vice President of State Government Affairs & Affiliate Relations at the Biotechnology Innovation Organization (BIO) and Executive Director of the Council of State Bioscience Associations (CSBA).