![[DEV] SC Policy Council](https://assets.nationbuilder.com/themes/64a70761f9279500cd767ee8/attachments/original/1680182376/logo-nerve.jpeg?1680182376){kind=logo}
By RICK BRUNDRETT
In announcing last month that the Chicago-based Ferrara Candy Company would locate a $675 million manufacturing complex in Orangeburg County and create 1,000 jobs, Gov. Henry McMaster described the project as a “transformative moment for Orangeburg County and all of South Carolina.”
“Ferrara Candy Company’s $675 million investment in the Midlands is a powerful vote of confidence in our state that will bring many new opportunities for our people,” the Republican McMaster said in a state Department of Commerce release.
Ferrara CEO Marco Capurso said in the release that the company is “excited about the opportunity to inspire sweetness in the Palmetto State,” thanking McMaster and other state and county officials for “their partnership and effort to bring us to South Carolina.”
The 118-year-old privately owned company employs more than 9,400 workers in 30-plus facilities worldwide and produces brands including Brach’s, NERDS and SweeTARTS, according to the release.
But a review by The Nerve of state incentives agreements provided by Commerce under the S.C. Freedom of Information Act, as well as readily available public records, shows that for taxpayers, the offered state and county incentives collectively are high-priced sweets.
For starters, the legislatively controlled Joint Bond Review Committee (JBRC) and State Fiscal Accountability Authority, which includes McMaster, in February each approved the sale of up to $85 million in taxpayer-funded state bonds for the Ferrara project – identifying the company only by its "Project Panther" code name.
With interest, the total state taxpayer cost over 20 years would come to $120.29 million, according to a Commerce report prepared for the JBRC. That works out to a debt of $120,290 for every one of the 1,000 jobs to be created.
In comparison, the median household income in Orangeburg County was $45,675 in 2024 dollars, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.
Under a state “performance” agreement between Ferrara and Commerce and dated Feb. 2 of this year, the company is required to create 1,000 jobs and invest $675 million by no later than eight years from its official start date to avoid repayment of any of the bond proceeds. Ferrara is identified by name in the agreement, which wasn't publicly released at that time.
But if Ferrara instead creates at least 400 jobs but fewer than 1,000 jobs and invests at least $400 million but less than $675 million by that deadline, it would have to repay a pro-rated portion of the bond proceeds based on 50% of the expended $85 million, according to the agreement.
Generous “clawback” provisions also are offered to the company for a subsequent “maintenance” period after the initial eight-year “achievement” period.
In addition, the agreement specifies that “qualified” jobs to be created by the company or related company “entities” include full-time employees who are offered a “comprehensive health plan”; or full-time “equivalent” workers, which include part-time employees counted as one-half of a full-time worker.
And as many as 100 employees toward the required 1,000 total could be outside “badge” workers hired by the company, such as janitorial maintenance, cafeteria, security, and warehouse workers, as well as “transportation logistics providers,” under the agreement.
Sometimes, if companies can’t meet job or investment requirements by specified deadlines, Commerce has renegotiated incentives agreements to lower those thresholds so that the companies don’t have to repay certain awarded incentives, as The Nerve previously has revealed.
Big bond costs
Of the $85 million in bond proceeds for the Ferrara project, a collective $28 million would be used for a new wastewater pretreatment facility and wastewater system improvements, according to a breakdown included with the performance agreement.
Another $19 million under the agreement would be used for site preparation, while $10 million is reserved for environmental “wetlands mitigation” – funds typically used or designated to preserve off-site environmental sites in exchange for destroying or damaging on-site wetlands or other environmentally sensitive areas.
The remaining $28 million would be used for land acquisition, on- and off-site road improvements, a rail spur and projected cost overruns, according to the agreement.
The manufacturing complex will include a 750,000-square-foot manufacturing facility, a warehouse for raw and pack materials, and an administrative office, according to the Commerce release last month announcing the project.
The project would be located primarily on approximately 750 acres of county-owned land off U.S. 21 south of the city of Orangeburg, according to a labeled “Confidential Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), which was agreed to last June 27 by the company – identified then as “Project Rhino” and later in two amended MOU agreements as “Project Panther” – the county and Commerce. Those records were provided this month by Commerce to The Nerve under the state's open-records law.
Generally, MOUs are considered preliminary agreements. The initial MOU for the Ferrara project specified that it was a "preliminary incentive agreement" and noted that the parties “acknowledge the terms set forth in this MOU are summary in nature and certain items will be treated in greater detail in subsequent agreements relating to the Project to be entered into between SCDOC and the Company, and the County and the Company.”
Besides the primary site, Ferrara also identified another approximately 169 adjacent acres as “necessary to establish the Project,” under the MOU. Of the bond proceeds, $5 million would be used toward acquiring the 169 acres, plus another approximately 5-acre parcel.
If the total purchase price for the additional collective 174 acres exceeded $5 million, the county would commit up to $900,000 in “additional local funding,” while Ferrara would “secure a matching commitment” of $900,000 from the City of Orangeburg's Department of Public Utilities, according to the MOU.
The county or “an acceptable public entity approved” by Ferrara and Commerce would lease the project site to the company for “nominal consideration for up to 50 years,” under the MOU.
The MOU also requires that any actual costs of “wetlands mitigation” exceeding $15 million would be covered by Commerce and the county. As a comparison, Commerce has contended that “additional mitigation” contributed to $150 million in cost overruns for the Scout Motors electric-vehicle project underway in Richland County.
S.C. lawmakers in 2023 quickly approved a nearly $1.3 billion appropriation for the Scout Motors project – approximately $240 for every man, woman and child in the state – including about $1.1 billion in state surplus funds for, among other things, land acquisition, infrastructure improvements, a rail spur bridge and a training center, as The Nerve previously reported.
Other state, local incentives
Besides taxpayer-funded state bonds, Ferrara under the MOU would be offered state job development credits (JDCs), which are reimbursements of a portion of employee state withholding taxes. The credits would be offered for an initial 10-year period and extended to 15 years after the company meets minimum job creation and investment requirements, provided the jobs pay at or above the county’s per-capita income for the year in which the JDC application is approved.
The credits would be capped per year at $3,250 per eligible worker, according to the MOU.
JDCs are considered “discretionary” incentives, approved by the state Coordinating Council for Economic Development (CCED), made up of the heads or board chairpersons of 11 state agencies, including Commerce, involved with economic development. By law, the Secretary of Commerce – currently Harry Lightsey – chairs the CCED.
The MOU noted that “upon application by the Company, the Secretary will recommend approval by the Coordinating Council of the Company’s eligibility to collect job development credits.” A Commerce spokeswoman in a written response this month to The Nerve said Ferrara was approved for the credits in February.
The MOU also offered other state incentives, including:
- Statutory tax credits
- Sales tax exemptions on such things as manufacturing machinery and equipment, building materials, and raw materials used in the manufacturing process.
- Worker training through the S.C. Technical College System’s “readySC” program.
- In-state tuition at public universities for full-time employees and their dependents.
As for local incentives, the City of Orangeburg’s Department of Public Utilities (DPU) would be responsible for constructing – with state bond proceeds – operating, and maintaining an off-site wastewater pretreatment facility on publicly owned property, while also committing to electrical and natural gas improvements for the project, according to the MOU.
The county and state Department of Transportation would be responsible for improving off-site public roads connected to the project; any cost overruns beyond the $6 million committed with state bond proceeds would be the county’s responsibility. The company would be responsible for "internal” road improvements at the project site but could be reimbursed for those costs with bond proceeds, “subject to availability,” under the MOU.
The MOU also specified that a rail spur at the project site, to be constructed under a separate agreement that would include the Norfolk Southern Railway Company, would be owned entirely by the county and maintained by the county up to Ferrara’s property line.
In addition, the county agreed in the MOU to provide, “at no additional consideration” to Ferrara, temporary office space for the company and about 12,000 square feet of space at the Orangeburg County Technical College for employee recruitment and training.
Secret dealings
The Nerve on April 24 submitted an open-records request to Orangeburg County for all incentives agreements related to the project but was provided only a copy of the approved county ordinance establishing a fee-in-lieu-of-taxes (FILOT) agreement for the project, though the ordinance language provided no details of the terms of the incentive.
FILOT agreements with counties typically provide large property tax breaks for approved manufacturing projects – with company identities and other details often kept secret until after a public announcement of the project is made.
Under a proposed FILOT agreement with Orangeburg County, for being located in a “multi-county industrial park,” the Ferrara project site would be assessed at the 4% owner-occupied residential assessment rate and subject to a fixed millage rate of 390.8 mills for “at least 40 years with respect to each phase of the Project placed in service” during an initial minimum 10-year “investment" period, according to the initial MOU.
During that period, there would be no general “clawback obligations” by Ferrara to repay the county for the received benefits if it created 125 jobs and invested $150 million within the “investment" period – far short of the announced 1,000 jobs and $675 million investment.
On top of that, Ferrara’s property tax liability would be reduced even further with awarded “special source revenue credits against fee payments” in the amount of at least 80% in the first 10 years and 65% in years 11 through 15, with no “clawback obligations” if the company created 600 jobs and invested $540 million in first 10 years, under the MOU.
In a written response this week to The Nerve, Ray Jones, the county’s outside economic development attorney with the Parker Poe law firm in Columbia, contended that the FILOT terms, including the assessment rate, millage rate and length of the agreement, were exempt under the state Freedom of Information Act. He also said an exhibit attached to the approved FILOT ordinance, titled “Form of Fee Agreement” but otherwise left blank, has “not been finalized,” adding, “No responsive document in final form exists at this time.”
The Nerve has long pointed out the lack of transparency with state and local incentives agreements. In 2023, for example, The Nerve detailed the secrecy surrounding the Scout Motors project, including a billed “confidential” dinner at the Williams-Brice football stadium in Columbia attended by Gov. McMaster, state lawmakers, other state and local officials, and top Scout executives.
For the Ferrara project, the county gave first and second readings of the FILOT agreement on Dec. 15, 2025, and March 16 of this year, respectively, without identifying the company by name. Jones in his written response said Ferrara was “first publicly identified by name when the agenda for the April 22, 2026 meeting was posted, and at the April 22, 2026 public hearing itself” – the same day as the joint written announcement of the project by state, county and company officials.
Yet the initial MOU, which included the county as a party, was agreed to last June 27 – nearly six months before the first reading of the FILOT ordinance. Amendments to the MOU were approved last Sept. 29 and Oct. 31; as with the initial MOU, the subsequent agreements were labeled as “confidential,” according to records provided by Commerce.
In addition, although left mostly blank, an exhibit attached to the initial MOU indicated that a “commitment” letter was issued by the City of Orangeburg’s DPU on Dec. 19, 2024 – 16 months before Ferrara was publicly identified for the first time.
In a related matter, The Nerve on April 24 asked Commerce, under the Freedom of Information Act, for all state incentives agreements for the project, including any cost-benefit analyses (CBAs), though a standard “revitalization” agreement was not included with the provided records because Ferrara had not yet “finalized” it, Commerce spokeswoman Dorothy Weaver said in a May 5 email response. No CBAs were included with the provided records.
The South Carolina Policy Council – the parent organization of The Nerve – has recommended a number of reforms to improve transparency of taxpayer-backed incentives, including:
- Holding public hearings on proposed incentives prior to their approval, noting, “While many incentives currently are given final approval in open meetings, this would hardly qualify as advance public notice.”
- Conducting third-party reviews – not overseen by the Department of Commerce – of proposed incentives deals to determine their true costs and benefits.
- Requiring counties to publish annual incentives reports detailing FILOT agreements and other taxpayer-backed benefits.
Brundrett is the news editor of The Nerve (www.thenerve.org). Contact him at 803-394-8273 or [email protected]. Follow The Nerve on Facebook, Instagram and X (formerly Twitter) @thenervesc.
Nerve stories are free to reprint and repost with permission by and credit to The Nerve.