Does moving the 'Tonight Show' pencil out for NY taxpayers?

The economics are shaky at best. In the most basic terms, the amount of tax revenue given up by the state of NY in the form of special tax incentives would have to be more than offset by the amount of new tax revenue generated. Thing is, Jimmy Fallon, who appears to be the heir apparent, already has a show that's based in NY. His staff already pays NY taxes, and his fans already want to be in the NY studio audience. So aside from the promotional value of having the "Tonight Show" back in the city - and that sort of thing isn't easy to measure - the numbers don't add up all that well. NY might even lose more than it gains - a phenomenon that other cities and states are experiencing. For all the concern about runaway production, show business giveaways are often more about bragging rights than sound fiscal policy. Which is why the idea of having L.A. or California match NY's offer is downright idiotic. All you'd do is give up tax revenue for a show - and staff - that's already here. And in case anyone forgot, L.A. and California need all the tax revenue they can get. The more interesting story is who replaces Fallon and where that show will end up. If they select NY, you can expect a more noticeable economic bump (though still not huge). If it's L.A. or some other city, the benefit of NY getting "Tonight" will be marginal. More broadly, you have to wonder how many people really care where these shows are produced. Carson did have a different vibe in NY and L.A., but only because the two cities had distinctive personalities in the 60s and 70s. Today, everyone is from everywhere - and if they're not, they can hop on a plane and be there in a few hours. Danny's Hideaway versus Chasen's? Does it matter? They're both long gone.