It seems to me that there are two possible characterizations of this scenario, neither of which are good.

First possibility: Cephalon wanted to expand here in the first place, whether or not they got the tax credits, so the Governor's Office's decision the credits to them is a waste of Utah taxpayer dollars.

Second possibility: Cephalon's decision was based upon the tax credits (or decided by the incentive deal), in which case the company will only stick around in Utah until it can get a better tax incentive deal in another competitive location. I mean, why should they care if their relocation leaves unemployment and economic hardship in its wake? They got their tax credits, which in is what they really wanted. These kinds of businesses are more destructive than constructive to Utah's economy.

If there are other possible characterizations, I would be open to hearing them. I would tend to believe the first one, though. Businesses don't locate simply to get a good tax deal; their bottom line is decided by other factors. If that's true, then the Governor's Office spent $1.7 million of Utahns money to get zero added value to the state.