Not in isolation, no - but this is effectively light industry we’re talking about, and at least some of the infrastructure necessary to support it is being paid for by tax dollars. If you cut taxes for those entities too far, they end up not paying for the services they’re directly using.
They kind do cost the public millions of dollars. Land that once was taxed, stops generating tax revenue, (depending on the type of tax break) but the data center requires much more infrastructure: roads, lanes, sidewalks, lights, power transport, utilities. Then the public pays for all that infrastructure through fees and taxes. then the data center competes for utilities, driving up those prices. There's little to no upside. I understand the resistance.
> That tax was a cost for the property owner. If the tax revenue goes away then there is a cost for no one.
Wrong. The tax revenue "doesn't go away", it's shifted to the other taxpayers who foot the bill for those who don't pay. That's why tax-breaks are recognized as subsidies by everyone who knows something about the topic.
So if I don't develop my land (because the government won't let me do so affordably, lol) and pay $0ish that's better than if some big moneyed interests that can pay their way through the regulatory spaghetti you've concocted and develop something, anything there? Even if they pay no tax on the land development there's still taxable activity going on there. Someone is paying tax on the toilet paper in the employee bathroom and whatnot. And of course the actual productivity gets taxed too (investment income, capital gains or whatever) or the income of the accountant you hire to prevent that stuff from getting taxed gets taxed. In any case it's still very net positive.
IDK if you've ever driven through Kentucky but it's the kind of state that isn't exactly lacking for places to put odious industry.
Why do you even care about some town in Kentucky's tax receipts anyway? Lord knows they'll probably use it on abstinence only sex ed.
Tell you what, if you oppose "data centers", which has devolved into a non-specific cause-of-the-day for stay-at-home moms to complain about, you don't get to reap any of their benefits.
NIMBYism has now become networked.
It only seems fair that you should be locked out of any apps, platforms, etc. that directly or indirectly rely on their function.
Ironically everyone loves data centers, as long as their function is sufficiently obscured and they are located "somewhere else". This movement thrives on the extremely low intelligence of its constituents, who don't seem to understand how the Internet and its applications they use, work.
Not all sites are equally suited for a data center. This is especially true when you look at plans that allow data centers to operate off of on-site generators prior to full grid connection. There's no reason data centers should be exempt from noise pollution controls near residential areas, and yet there have been cases where this is true.
Local politicians and commissioners also seem to be poorly suited to understanding the impact of data centers on their surrounding environs, being lured (as usual) by overly optimistic estimates of jobs and revenues.
> which has devolved into a non-specific cause-of-the-day for stay-at-home moms to complain about
This is a deeply uncharitable interpretation of people speaking up when there isn't anyone else speaking up for them.
I see. So you are saying that they are poorly suited to understanding the impact of DCs .. because obviously the job estimates .. vested interests (why not) .. basically you are saying “I know that others (politicians and commissioners) are dumb/lack smarts/gullable but I’m not since I’m so wise .. got it.
> “I know that others (politicians and commissioners) are dumb/lack smarts/gullable but I’m not since I’m so wise
Not at all. I'm saying that there are competing interests in placing these projects, and the people speaking up against them are making their interests heard. Municipal commissioners / planners also may not have experience with this kind of project, or underestimate issues that can be caused.
The DC has 14 diesel generators to supply 18 megawatts of power. That level of noise and combustion exhaust is utterly unsuitable for residential zoning, and yet that's what has happened.
These people (and the others in the class action lawsuits and other news articles that are easy to find with a simple search) are NOT merely a "non-specific cause-of-the-day for stay-at-home moms to complain about". There are genuine complaints due to a failure to properly site the DCs.
I'm from Jefferson county KY, the FAA had to fund a sound proofing program for a huge part of that area because one of the 5 busiest cargo airports in the world is smack in the middle of Louisville metro. Having lived in NoVA as well, the data center noise really doesn't compare (and there's no risk of the data centers dropping a 100 ton firebomb on your home the way UPS did last year).
>Tax breaks for proposed and potential data centers could easily cost billions of dollars
Does the author not understand what a tax break is? Tax payers are not giving billions of dollars to the company building a data center.
Not in isolation, no - but this is effectively light industry we’re talking about, and at least some of the infrastructure necessary to support it is being paid for by tax dollars. If you cut taxes for those entities too far, they end up not paying for the services they’re directly using.
They kind do cost the public millions of dollars. Land that once was taxed, stops generating tax revenue, (depending on the type of tax break) but the data center requires much more infrastructure: roads, lanes, sidewalks, lights, power transport, utilities. Then the public pays for all that infrastructure through fees and taxes. then the data center competes for utilities, driving up those prices. There's little to no upside. I understand the resistance.
>stops generating tax revenue
You have it backwards. That tax was a cost for the property owner. If the tax revenue goes away then there is a cost for no one.
>the data center requires much more infrastructure
Regardless of if the infrastructure upgrade is not fully funded by the company building the center, this cost is independent from the tax break.
> That tax was a cost for the property owner. If the tax revenue goes away then there is a cost for no one.
Wrong. The tax revenue "doesn't go away", it's shifted to the other taxpayers who foot the bill for those who don't pay. That's why tax-breaks are recognized as subsidies by everyone who knows something about the topic.
So if I don't develop my land (because the government won't let me do so affordably, lol) and pay $0ish that's better than if some big moneyed interests that can pay their way through the regulatory spaghetti you've concocted and develop something, anything there? Even if they pay no tax on the land development there's still taxable activity going on there. Someone is paying tax on the toilet paper in the employee bathroom and whatnot. And of course the actual productivity gets taxed too (investment income, capital gains or whatever) or the income of the accountant you hire to prevent that stuff from getting taxed gets taxed. In any case it's still very net positive.
IDK if you've ever driven through Kentucky but it's the kind of state that isn't exactly lacking for places to put odious industry.
Why do you even care about some town in Kentucky's tax receipts anyway? Lord knows they'll probably use it on abstinence only sex ed.
[flagged]
Tell you what, if you oppose "data centers", which has devolved into a non-specific cause-of-the-day for stay-at-home moms to complain about, you don't get to reap any of their benefits.
NIMBYism has now become networked.
It only seems fair that you should be locked out of any apps, platforms, etc. that directly or indirectly rely on their function.
Ironically everyone loves data centers, as long as their function is sufficiently obscured and they are located "somewhere else". This movement thrives on the extremely low intelligence of its constituents, who don't seem to understand how the Internet and its applications they use, work.
Not all sites are equally suited for a data center. This is especially true when you look at plans that allow data centers to operate off of on-site generators prior to full grid connection. There's no reason data centers should be exempt from noise pollution controls near residential areas, and yet there have been cases where this is true.
Local politicians and commissioners also seem to be poorly suited to understanding the impact of data centers on their surrounding environs, being lured (as usual) by overly optimistic estimates of jobs and revenues.
> which has devolved into a non-specific cause-of-the-day for stay-at-home moms to complain about
This is a deeply uncharitable interpretation of people speaking up when there isn't anyone else speaking up for them.
I see. So you are saying that they are poorly suited to understanding the impact of DCs .. because obviously the job estimates .. vested interests (why not) .. basically you are saying “I know that others (politicians and commissioners) are dumb/lack smarts/gullable but I’m not since I’m so wise .. got it.
> “I know that others (politicians and commissioners) are dumb/lack smarts/gullable but I’m not since I’m so wise
Not at all. I'm saying that there are competing interests in placing these projects, and the people speaking up against them are making their interests heard. Municipal commissioners / planners also may not have experience with this kind of project, or underestimate issues that can be caused.
Take for example this: https://denverite.com/2026/07/21/denver-data-center-noise-co...
The DC has 14 diesel generators to supply 18 megawatts of power. That level of noise and combustion exhaust is utterly unsuitable for residential zoning, and yet that's what has happened.
Here's another example, with similar details: https://wjla.com/news/local/data-center-noise-fumes-create-f...
These people (and the others in the class action lawsuits and other news articles that are easy to find with a simple search) are NOT merely a "non-specific cause-of-the-day for stay-at-home moms to complain about". There are genuine complaints due to a failure to properly site the DCs.
I'm from Jefferson county KY, the FAA had to fund a sound proofing program for a huge part of that area because one of the 5 busiest cargo airports in the world is smack in the middle of Louisville metro. Having lived in NoVA as well, the data center noise really doesn't compare (and there's no risk of the data centers dropping a 100 ton firebomb on your home the way UPS did last year).
Drop the disdain, it makes your argument look uninformed.
Try talking IRL with what people dislike about datacenters. You might be surprised.