policy greenfield bias

published: December 22, 2025

overview

most state data center tax incentives are location-agnostic—they apply equally to greenfield and brownfield sites. this creates structural bias toward greenfield development because when incentives are equal, developers choose the lowest-cost, fastest site.

state incentive summary

statetypepercentagedurationannual cost
virginiasales tax exemption100%through 2035$1.02b (fy2024)
ohioproperty tax abatement65-100%15-30 years~$357m/yr avg
texas (jeti)property tax abatement50-75%variablen/a
arizonaproperty taxup to 75%up to 20 years$19m (2024)
nevadapersonal propertyup to 75%10-20 years~$100m+
georgiasales tax exemption100%ongoing~$296m by 2025

job creation requirements

statejobs requiredinvestment required
texas20 jobs$200m over 5 years
nevada10-50 jobs$25m minimum
ohio (example)20 jobsvaries
alabama20 jobs$40,000+ avg compensation

note: requirements are modest relative to investment scale ($200m project requiring only 20 jobs).

the greenfield bias mechanism

when incentives are location-agnostic

  1. greenfield land costs 20-50x less than industrial
  2. greenfield power interconnection is 2-3 years faster
  3. greenfield has no remediation or demolition costs
  4. greenfield title is clear (2-3 landowners vs hundreds)

result

developers rationally choose greenfield when incentives are equal. brownfield barriers exceed any incentive value.

federal brownfield programs (limited)

programstatusnotes
brownfield tax incentiveexpired jan 2012not reauthorized
ira energy community bonusactive+10% tax credit for brownfield/coal sites
epa brownfields grantsactiveassessment, cleanup, loan funds

the federal brownfield tax deduction—which allowed remediation cost deductions—expired in 2012 and has not been renewed.

the michigan exception

michigan (jan 2025) created explicit brownfield preference:

  • standard sites: tax exemption through 2050
  • brownfield/former power plant sites: exemption through 2065 (15-year extension)

however: bipartisan repeal legislation introduced dec 2025 (11 months after enactment). program stability uncertain.

policy instability examples

stateeventtimeline
michiganenacted jan 2025; repeal introduced dec 202511 months
georgialegislature passed repeal; governor vetoed2024
virginiajlarc report: “does not pay for itself”dec 2024

cumulative program costs

stateprogram costperiod
virginia$2.73b2021-2024
virginia$1.02bfy2024 alone
ohio$2.5b2017-2024
arizona$19m2024 (1,200% growth since 2020)
georgia~$296mby 2025 (projected)
iowa$151mcumulative

what would change the calculus

potential policy reforms

  1. brownfield interconnection priority: queue preference for sites reusing existing infrastructure
  2. enhanced remediation credits: tax credits covering 50-75% of remediation costs
  3. utility incentives for urban substations: rate structure rewarding grid-connected urban development
  4. brownfield-specific abatements: higher incentive percentage for brownfield vs greenfield

current reality

no state has implemented comprehensive brownfield preference. michigan’s attempt (15-year extension for brownfield) faces immediate repeal effort.

the jlarc assessment (virginia)

virginia’s joint legislative audit and review commission (2024):

  • classified exemption as “moderate economic benefit”
  • noted: “like most economic development incentives, the data center exemption does not pay for itself”
  • 74,000 jobs supported; $5.5b annual labor income
  • but: $1b+ annual cost to state revenue

sources

  • virginia jlarc 2024 report
  • ncsl legislative agenda reports
  • jobsohio program documentation
  • texas comptroller data center incentives
  • state legislative records (michigan, georgia)
  • good jobs first subsidy analysis
on this page