>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.

▲

Ancapistani 11 hours ago | parent | next [-]

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.

▲

11 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

[deleted]

▲

josefritzishere 11 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

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.

▲

charcircuit 9 hours ago | parent [-]

>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.

▲

bigbadfeline 8 hours ago | parent [-]

> 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.

	▲	charcircuit 3 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Taxes are calculated individually and are independent of one another. They do not get shared among the tax base. Other people paying property tax do not have to pay the property tax for the data center's land. As a thought experiment let's say I am in a state with a sales tax. If I buy a game console from a different state that doesn't have sales tax it doesn't cost the tax payers of the state I'm in anything yet we enter a reality where I am happier than in an alternate reality where I did not buy it. The taxes paid are the same in both sceneries, but there is more happiness in society in one sceneries.
	▲	cucumber3732842 7 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		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.