When Samsung secured billions in U.S. CHIPS Act funding to expand its semiconductor operations in Texas, it sent a clear message to global investors: America is not just open for business—it actively rewards foreign-backed firms that bring jobs, technology, and capital to U.S. soil. In 2025, federal and state agencies continue to allocate over $200 billion in grants, tax credits, and incentives tied to manufacturing, clean energy, R&D, and workforce development. For international companies entering the U.S. for the first time, understanding how these incentives work—and who qualifies—can determine whether expansion is merely possible or truly profitable. Understanding What the U.S. Really Offers Foreign Businesses Foreign-owned companies often underestimate how accessible U.S. incentives truly are, assuming that programs like the CHIPS Act, the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), or state-level grants are designed only for domestic firms. In reality, major U.S. incentive programs actively welcome foreign investors, provided the project is set up through a U.S.-registered entity and complies with national security conditions. The real barrier isn’t foreign ownership — it’s avoiding classification as a Foreign Entity of Concern (FEOC), a restriction that applies mainly to companies tied to certain adversarial countries. This is why firms from Japan, South Korea, Germany, and other allied nations have secured billions of dollars in U.S. federal and state support for semiconductor plants, clean-energy manufacturing, EV battery facilities, and other strategic projects. While the U.S. does not operate on a single unified “performance-driven economic model,” most federal, state, and local incentive programs do rely on performance metrics. These targeted programs award benefits based on the tangible economic impact a project creates. For business incentives, eligibility often depends on factors such as capital expenditure on U.S. facilities and equipment, creation of American jobs, strengthening domestic supply chains, and commitments to workforce development or innovation. These performance-based conditions apply especially in high-priority sectors like semiconductors, EV batteries, clean energy, hydrogen, and advanced manufacturing, where grants and tax credits are tied to measurable outcomes rather than company nationality. Federal programs offer a broad mix of grants, tax credits, loan guarantees, and production-based credits, especially in priority sectors such as semiconductor fabrication, hydrogen, clean energy, EV batteries, and biopharma. Meanwhile, state and local governments compete aggressively for foreign direct investment by offering customized incentive packages — including multi-year property tax abatements, R&D credits, payroll rebates, utility rate reductions, expedited permitting, and infrastructure assistance. The core principle is simple: U.S. incentives are not based on nationality — they are based on economic contribution. If a foreign company builds in the U.S., hires American workers, and supports strategic supply chains, it can qualify for many of the same incentives available to U.S.-owned companies. How Foreign Firms Can Strategically Position Themselves to Qualify To secure high-value U.S. incentives, foreign investors must follow a structured approach that aligns with federal and state program requirements. First, companies need to conduct eligibility mapping, as each program has precise definitions regarding ownership, corporate structure, and sector focus. For instance, CHIPS Act funding targets semiconductor fabs, packaging plants, and supply-chain clusters; DOE grants prioritize clean energy, hydrogen hubs, and grid modernization; and many state economic development offices require pre-approval before breaking ground. Second, investors should perform economic impact modeling, demonstrating the projected benefits of their project. Governments evaluate factors such as the number of U.S. jobs created, capital expenditure plans, partnerships with local suppliers, and long-term contributions to regional economic development. This is why major foreign entrants, including BMW, Toyota, and Siemens, prepare detailed workforce and investment roadmaps before negotiating incentive packages. Third, companies must focus on compliance structuring, ensuring they meet federal requirements for programs like the Inflation Reduction Act, which may include prevailing wage payments, apprenticeship participation, and domestic content sourcing. Firms that integrate these considerations early into budgeting and planning significantly increase their chances of approval. A strong real-world example is SK Innovation’s EV battery plant in Georgia, where careful coordination with state agencies on workforce partnerships, apprenticeship programs, and supplier localization helped the company unlock one of the Southeast’s largest incentive packages. Implementation: Timelines, Compliance & Navigating Red Tape Foreign-backed companies often encounter predictable hurdles when pursuing U.S. incentives, including confusion over which programs require U.S. majority ownership, complex compliance rules for clean-energy credits, tight application timelines for federal grants, and challenges in accurately projecting job creation. Many companies also struggle with understanding the different requirements at federal, state, and local levels, which can vary significantly depending on the sector and the type of incentive. The key to overcoming these obstacles is early sequencing and structured planning. Companies should begin by forming a U.S.-registered entity, registering for relevant state tax IDs, and establishing detailed payroll and workforce plans that align with incentive requirements. Only after these foundational steps should firms submit incentive applications and finalize investment commitments. Premature construction, procurement, or hiring can lead to disqualification from critical programs, wasting both time and capital. Additionally, firms should maintain clear documentation, track all performance metrics tied to incentives, and monitor regulatory updates to ensure ongoing compliance. By taking a disciplined, step-by-step approach, foreign companies can navigate red tape effectively, meet program requirements, and maximize the likelihood of successfully obtaining grants, tax credits, and other financial support for their U.S.-based projects. Samsung’s CHIPS Funding & Texas Incentive Package Samsung’s semiconductor expansion in Texas provides a clear example of how a foreign-backed firm can successfully secure substantial U.S. incentives. The company qualified due to a multibillion-dollar capital investment, creation of thousands of local jobs, strong support for the domestic semiconductor supply chain, and commitments to workforce training in collaboration with local universities. As a result, Samsung received multi-billion-dollar federal funding under the CHIPS Act, loan guarantees, and extensive local incentives from the City of Taylor and Williamson County, including property tax abatements, infrastructure support for roads and utilities, and workforce development programs. The key takeaway for foreign investors is that Samsung’s incentives were not awarded because it is a Korean company, but because it delivered measurable economic benefits to the U.S.. Any foreign firm—whether headquartered..
