Tax incentives used to lure - and more often keep - companies within state borders have always been controversial. New Jersey, however, has been particularly vulnerable over the past decade, because so many big drugmakers have global or US headquarters or large facilities in the Garden State and, for years, opined about building labs or factories in cheaper climes or locales where world-class teaching hospitals could be found, such as Boston.

So New Jersey officials regularly ponied up. But one wag says the effort is a waste, and cites three familiar names - Bristol-Myers Squibb, Pfizer and Novartis collectively received more than $65 million in subsidies from New Jersey, but are now laying off employees and reducing their business. And so in an editorial in The Star-Ledger of New Jersey, Sarah Stecker of New Jersey Policy Perspective wonders why the state doesn’t ask key questions before writing checks.

And she cites a lovely example. In May 1997, Bristol-Myers applied for a grant that allows a company to keep a share of money withheld from employee state income tax in return for hiring a set number of people. The drugmaker claimed that without the subsidy it would move its Seattle operation to Connecticut. But a Seattle newspaper ran a story three weeks earlier saying Bristol-Myers had notified workers it was closing the operation and moving it to Princeton. Disingenuously, it now appears, the application indicated a subsidy would be a significant factor in the decision to relocate.

At the time, the drugmaker committed to hiring up to 2,000 workers in central New Jersey and Charlie Heimbold, who was ceo at the time, called the decision to expand showed “our ongoing commitment to the state.” Former Gov. Christie Whitman called it “a great day for New Jersey.” But 10 years later, Bristol-Myers Squibb announced layoffs of 4,300 workers worldwide due to patent expirations and a thinning pipeline. Some layoffs will be in New Jersey, but the drugmaker, not surprisingly, has been tightlipped about the number.

Meanwhile, she notes that New Jersey is increasing the budget for business subsidies. So drugmakers can continue to play what she calls “payoffs for layoffs.” Just hold out one hand for money and layoff notices can be held in the hand behind your back.

Stecker acknowledges that patent expirations can cause huge problems for pharma, but chastises the state for failing to take the ups and downs into account before blanketly agreeing to deals. Bristol-Myers received $22.2 million in tax breaks over the last decade. In return, the drugmaker told New Jersey subsidized jobs would remain in the state until 2012.

Other examples cited: Novartis has announced layoffs of 3,760 workers, including at least 240 at its East Hanover headquarters, while New Jersey has given Novartis $6.7 million in subsidies for jobs there. And Pfizer will cut 10,000 jobs worldwide, but the New Jersey total has not been disclosed. Our experience is that companies rarely disclose or acknowledge the number of jobs to be cut - forgetting tax breaks - because it amounts to bad publicity and hurts morale. So it’s no surprise that specifics are hard to come by, except for required filings prior to facilities closings.