Meta to receive $3.3B in tax breaks for its $10B Louisiana data center

https://fortune.com/2026/05/14/meta-data-center-tax-break-hyperion-louisiana/

by logickkk1 • 2 months ago

193 173 2 months ago

fortune.com

Protagorist• 2 months ago

So glad to see small companies like this get a leg up.

repelsteeltje• 2 months ago

Seems only fair that we pay our taxes when those are used to subsidize such lofty endeavours.

aspenmartin3• 2 months ago

I think there are plenty of issues with data center construction but there are real economic benefits here. If there weren’t it would be pretty easy for states to thwart them. You would see the leverage switch and companies paying states incentives.

giancarlostoro3• 2 months ago

Now if they can actually do something with AI that is meaningful? I assume Mark is trying to reach for like some crazy goal instead of just getting reasonable products to market. I've known the type of person who chases the stars instead of just taking their time, building up the core and then snowballing into greatness.

mentalgear2• 2 months ago

You call chatting with AI-influencer chatbot 'friends' un-meaningful ? Don't make little Marky cry. Not after the VR disaster.

giancarlostoro3• 2 months ago

I mean a lot of my friends own Meta headsets but the “metaverse” is not relevant to anyone. He had a neat idea, but he needs to stop making everything ingrained to Facebook.

alex1138• 2 months ago

It's actually kind of amazing that (apparently, but I'm willing to be wrong) AI has resulted in more people getting banned (rather than less, which you would think. You would think AI makes this easier to filter out, search for problem accounts, whatever)

Like, the problem was always the asymmetry. Can FB police everything? Probably not. Should they be able to operate at scale if they can't? Unclear. Section 230 blah blah platform not responsible for things users post

But YOU sure get banned. At any time for any reason. When you then "report" (that button does... what, exactly?) an actual problem, platform happily tells you no community standards were violated.

You might even get banned for something you were forced to do https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24776748 (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24201306)

See, this is why shit like holding his feet to the fire for Dumb Fucks https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1692122 matters. I don't care if he was young, he also hacked Crimson reporters. Because what he ('he', assuming he didn't just steal it from the Winklevosses) built early on has evolved into a platform that is many things and fucking broken (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14147719; https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6090712) on top of that

giancarlostoro3• 2 months ago

I stopped using Facebook because they nearly banned me because their AI was too stupid to notice a joke comment. I was working for Red Lobster corporate at the time, and was the admin of the Facebook app, so if I had gotten banned, it would have been a mess. So I flat out stopped using Facebook. I maybe log in once in a blue moon, then log back out. I appealed the strike, then not even 5 minutes passed, I was denied. I don't even remember being able to explain why what I said was not worthy of a warning, but honestly, screw em. I don't even need it for work anymore, but I'm never going back to that dystopian shell of social media.

I do hate it though, Mark has meaningful funding to build some actually useful AI, hell if he started bottom up, he can have his anime waifu he wants.

tencentshill• 2 months ago

He's the #1 advocate for virtual AI "friends". What CEO wouldn't like hundreds of people telling him he's right all the time? Meta will probably be the first company to have an AI board member.

dmix• 2 months ago

Hyperion will be exempt from state and local sales and use taxes on its data center equipment for the next 20 years, which includes the GPUs that train and develop AI models. Sherwood News estimated that since the state’s combined state and local sales tax stands at 9.56%, spending the roughly $35 billion for the GPUs of the center will hand the firm about $3.3 billion in tax breaks.

dietr1ch2• 2 months ago

If they are willing to spend 35B there's no doubt they could spend 30B without asking the government to reach into the people's wallet.

The US needs to do something about lobbying. It seems too late already, but maybe you can get things to improve a bit.

ChadNauseam4• 2 months ago

It's tempting to blame any political outcome you don't like on lobbying. It allows you to believe that almost no one supports the outcome that you don't like, because you can blame it on politicians manage to be bought by a small number of lobbyists. But it might not be the case. Several states (I believe Texas, Georgia, and Indiana) don't charge sales tax to data centers. So from Louisiana's perspective, the alternative to the tax break might not be $3B in tax revenue, but $0 (as Meta would simply build elsewhere). I'm sure they still plan to collect income taxes for the temporary jobs created for the construction of the data center, and of the permanent jobs required to maintain it.

If states all worked together, they could plausibly prevent this race to the bottom by agreeing on a universal sales tax minimum, but there are many obstacles to that as well besides some vague sense of "lobbying". You'd want all states to work cooperate on their minimum tax, but every state has a big incentive to break from the cartel and offer lower taxes in exchange for getting all the datacenters built there. There are lobbyists who are working against this, but it's not just meta and google, it's also local utility companies and construction/trade unions (who all want their state to defect and be the one to get all the new money and jobs)

tt248• 2 months ago

Do you have evidence that lobbying is what produced this outcome?

gonzalohm• 2 months ago

It's funny that the US still uses the word lobbying. At this point this has been corruption for years now. Corruption in the US is rampant

bombcar• 2 months ago

Does Hyperion have to buy GPUs in the state where they deploy them? How does that stuff even work at those scales?

mentalgear2• 2 months ago

At this rate, it's almost an equal public-private cooperation - which would actually make more sense as it would give the public ownership over datacenters instead of creepy tech bros.

cj• 2 months ago

No one likes to see big companies avoid taxes.

But I don't see what other options are available for states to compete with each other if not through tax breaks.

Edit: I suppose if you ban tax breaks, if a state wants to be competitive, they still can but through modifying the tax code for everyone instead of giving certain people exceptions. That doesn't seem like a terrible alternative..

lern_too_spel• 2 months ago

Compete for what exactly, in this case?

amazingamazing2• 2 months ago

Capital, assets, jobs.

ceejayoz14• 2 months ago

First to touch the bottom!

laweijfmvo2• 2 months ago

Seriously. A few thousand construction jobs, short term, and a few tens of jobs long term. For $3,000,000,000 dollars.

cyanydeez2• 2 months ago

compete for graft, kickbacks, energy parasites.

aspenmartin3• 2 months ago

You know I’m sure this is true on some level but if you think this is all or a majority of the motivation I think that sounds pretty conspiratorial.

ianm2183• 2 months ago

Why do you see data centers as "energy parasites"? They are basically the best customers of the grid possible - consistent high usage. This is an opportunity for the US to pursue energy abundance and grow the economy. The only issues these cause is when states make it impossible to deploy more energy.

Anti growth environmentalism is so toxic when we could just be pursuing wide spread clean energy and growth.

swatcoder• 2 months ago

The important consideration is whether states are competing for community benefits truly worth the bids made as tax breaks or whether the competition is just among politicians leveraging their personal control over tax breaks towards private benefit as power brokers.

ceejayoz14• 2 months ago

But I don't see what other options are available for states to compete with each other if not through tax breaks.

Federal ban on tax breaks for companies over a certain market cap?

Why can't they compete on "we have a good regulatory setup" or "we have good schools for your employees" or "we are a nice place to live"? Why compete on "we'll soak or own taxpayers more than the next state over so you can make even more obscene profits"?

twoodfin2• 2 months ago

How would that not require a Constitutional amendment?

triceratops2• 2 months ago

Or make state tax breaks taxable federal income. No need to interfere in any state law whatsoever.

ReptileMan3• 2 months ago

Infrastructure is a good one. Universities and high quality labor too.

dgellow2• 2 months ago

Do datacenters really require good infrastructure? Given they are planned all around I suspect that’s not really the case. I’m also not convinced university or the quality of labors are strong arguments. Aren’t those datacenters made fairly cheaply and full of automation?

pertymcpert2• 2 months ago

Universities...for a data center?

cogman102• 2 months ago

The other option is to not offer the tax breaks and if the company wants to build a data center, they also need to pay the taxes for it. If a state is dumb enough to offer tax breaks that's on them.

There's also not "competition" here. It isn't as if data centers have almost any positive local effects, beyond their property tax revenue. They have very few employees and if the property tax is cut they ultimately don't generate any income for the locality.

I can tell you that as someone living in Idaho, I see no differences when I work with the datacenters in Oregon, Washington, or Utah. I'm not benefited in the slightest by the few Idaho datacenters that I interact with currently.

It's the same argument that's been used to give sports stadiums sweetheart deals. These things have almost no local benefits and a lot of negative side effects with their presence.

papichulo2023• 2 months ago

At this scale they ask different countries for tax breaks though

KingMachiavelli• 2 months ago

But I don't see what other options are available for states to compete with each other if not through tax breaks.

They should compete based on actual policy including tax policy. "Tax breaks" for specific projects are just unfair and a quick race to the bottom. Instead, areas should be required to treat all entities equally. Even tax breaks for specific industries like tv/film production are unfair but at least industry wide tax breaks treat individual entities more fairly.

If a state's taxes are too high to attract investment, then they should have to lower taxes for everyone (of the same type).

exempt from state and local sales and use taxes on its data center equipment for the next 20 years

That said, the real issue IMO is that "use taxes" are just absurd to start with. Why should a random city/town be taxing products neither made nor sold in their jurisdiction. If anything, the sale of the datacenter product/services should be taxed but the external inputs "imported" from other states or countries is crazy to tax.

Again, I will die on the hill that a land value tax makes this all very simple. A LVT is the perfect strategy for extracting public value from data centers since electricity & water availability is a major input to a lands value.

recursivecaveat• 2 months ago

The endgame of competing with lower taxes is handing out $99 in incentives to get $100 of mobile corporate spending in your area. The only winners are the corporations. There needs to be a collective spine.

charcircuit2• 2 months ago

The other winners are whoever the companies is selling goods or services to.

8note• 2 months ago

building a ton of renewable power is a pretty good one

data centers could be a great thing for helping with the duck curve and the like, if they can throttle up and down based on energy cost

gizajob2• 2 months ago

The big companies have the cash for this by avoiding paying tax in the first place, then, in the areas where they’re spending money like capex and have to pay tax, they pull moves like this to further avoid them.

tstrimple3• 2 months ago

"No one likes to see big companies avoid taxes."

Bullshit. There is one political party in the US entirely dedicated to this outcome.

htrp• 2 months ago

Entergy plans at least three new combined‑cycle gas plants totalling ≈2.26 GW specifically to serve Hyperion, with additional plants in the wider “AI build‑out” pipeline.

https://spectrum.ieee.org/5gw-data-center

axpy906• 2 months ago

Will the earth’s climate get tax breaks too? What about the people living around these and paying for taxes. What about zero sum game we have here.

charcircuit2• 2 months ago

The climate doesn't pay taxes. Unless the people living around them are investing $200 million into a datacenter they would not fall under the bill.

ceejayoz14• 2 months ago

The climate doesn't pay taxes.

It's more likely to impose them.

imzadi• 2 months ago

The blinders on people about these things is insane. I'm in Arizona. We are having a water crisis but they are building data centers and oat milk factories. WTF?

shimman3• 2 months ago

Good, now start to question why such a system should continue to flourish and not be drowned violently in a bathtub.

Neoliberalism is a blight upon the world and it has only been around for 50ish years or so. It doesn't have to be this way.

jackbrookes• 2 months ago

The irony is that beef and cattle feed use vastly more water than oat milk production. Oat milk would help reduce water use if its used as a substitute for dairy.

CamperBob2• 2 months ago

Success at developing and deploying AI will be immensely climate-positive. Half the vehicles on the road won't need to be there.

Forgeties797• 2 months ago

For those who are unaware, construction of this datacenter has so far been an unmitigated disaster for the community and a fantastic example of how few shits companies like Facebook give when it comes to cutting corners vs. spending money to do things more safely. To say they aren’t taking the community into consideration is an understatement.

They averaged 7 crashes a month near the site at the time of this article. The community isn’t even 2000 people. They’d had 1 fatality already by the time this article was written as well.

It’s so dangerous the local school has shut down their playground despite being a mile away. If kids being unable to have a basic outdoor recess isn’t enough to make you care I don’t know what will.

https://lailluminator.com/2025/11/22/meta-data-center-crashe...

ReptileMan3• 2 months ago

I think that this is one of the cases in which the Fed government should use it interstate commerce clause to prevent the states to compete until rock bottom. The EU has some regulations that forbid state help to private enterprises and they do seem to have some teeth. Nothing wrong with different states having different tax rates, but states should not be allowed to have favorite companies and kill competition.

dgellow2• 2 months ago

The US federal admin is all in the grift. Whoever offers the best kickbacks to the president is the favorite company

jorblumesea2• 2 months ago

What's the value add for states and cities? data centers don't create a lot of long term jobs, the skills required are highly specialized and will probably hire out of state. the construction itself will likely hire locals but that can't go on forever. these centers are loud, increase power costs and water usage.

feels like short term job creation program at best.

whimsicalism2• 2 months ago

doesn’t increasing power usage create jobs?

ceejayoz14• 2 months ago

Not as much as you'd think. Power plants are heavily automated. A complex nuclear plant may provide a couple hundred; a big solar farm might need a dozen or two maintenance staff.

You're usually better off landing a new Target.

peyton• 2 months ago

the construction itself will likely hire locals but that can't go on forever

Does any construction project go on forever?

It’s just a building. Come on.

jorblumesea2• 2 months ago

right my point is these are 1 time investments, locals will be dealing with the consequences and most of the workers will just leave after the job is done.

adamredwoods• 2 months ago

From https://sherwood.news/tech/hyperion/

> Per the report, the package of tax breaks and incentives was achieved through local officials bound by nondisclosure agreements, quietly struck legislative deals, and parliamentary sleight of hand to avoid public scrutiny of the deal.
> So the residents of Richland Parish did not have much of a heads-up on what was coming.

No voting, no public interests, only closed-door politics.

laweijfmvo2• 2 months ago

but there will be voting; all of the elected officials will have to face elections at some point, and voters can put their feet down right now: everyone is voted out.

nomorewords• 2 months ago

When the damage is already done?

pertymcpert2• 2 months ago

That's already factored in the cost of doing business for them.

kovek• 2 months ago

What negative consequences does being unelected have?

rjbwork• 2 months ago

And then those companies can give them their due ~~bribes~~ totally free and unrelated gifts out of the goodness of their hearts to such illustrious paragons of American governance, as legalized by the supreme court recently.

tstrimple3• 2 months ago

You're underestimating just how much damage conservative mindsets can do to a state/country/world. From a US perspective, Donald Trump isn't the problem. The tens of millions of American citizens who are willing to vote for someone like Trump in 2024 are a huge fucking problem that will outlive Trump. Even today he has something like an 80% approval rating from conservatives. Some people cheer the concentration camps. And if your only hope is to outvote them, welcome to Nazi Germany.

TFYS• 2 months ago

The new people voted in are likely to be corporate stooges as well, as they have good and well funded infrastructure behind them for getting elected.

heylook• 2 months ago

Yet another moment where Strangers in Their Own Land[0] is prescient.

From an interview[1] given by the author: "I think the next most important reason they distrusted the federal government is their experience with protective agencies in the state of Louisiana, and they thought, “Gosh, these are a lot of people we pay taxes to but they don't really protect us.” And they’re right, because Louisiana is an oil state - that was a big discovery for me - and it outsources, in a way, the moral dirty work to the state. So, the state actually pretends to protect the citizenry from hazardous waste and pollution of air and water and ground, but it doesn't actually protect it very much. It gives out permits, as one Tea Party person said "like candy." And so, they felt the federal government is just a bigger, badder version of a state government which isn't protecting us. So, they'd had bad experience. They’d been burned, and I think that's the second kind of source of resistance to the government. But the third is that they saw the government as an instrument of what I'll call “the line cutters.”"

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strangers_in_Their_Own_Land [1] https://www.loe.org/shows/segments.html?programID=18-P13-000...

cucumber3732842• 2 months ago

Man, "instrument of the 'line cutters'" describes my government to a tee and I live in one of the wealthiest states.

LogicFailsMe• 2 months ago

Which is what we keep electing so boohoo. I'd like to be less pessimistic but people are irredeemably irredeemable. I am hugely pro-AI, but the tech bros need to channel more Ronald Reagan* and less f**ing Homelander or this ends very badly for everyone.

*And I hated Ronald Reagan at the time

Now bring me some downvotes to show me the error of my ways... Thank you for restoring my lack of faith in humanity...

malshe4• 2 months ago

I'm not at all surprised to learn that Republican politicians royally screwed their constituents. I was going to say maybe these people will vote better next time just to read that Colorado governor is commuting the sentence of Tina Peters. Democratic leadership is so freaking weak it's unbelievable. With one party full of grifters and the other with full of weaklings, we need to abolish this two-party system.

selimthegrim5• 2 months ago

Louisiana had a Democratic governor from 2016-2024.

gizajob2• 2 months ago

Don’t worry, if you take a step back it’s been a one party system for decades already.

ChadNauseam4• 2 months ago

Does the commutation of Tina Peters' sentence have anything at all to do with this situation?

tstrimple3• 2 months ago

The choice unfortunately often boils down to choosing between blatant psychopathy or completely useless platitudes. Yes. A vote for Democrats results in less harm. But Democrats are never actually willing to address the problems. Democrats would rather reach across the aisle than actually help people as has been proven out ever since my very first eligible vote for Obama. Some Democrats promise "Hope and Change" but won't bother to fight for it. Many Republicans promise to hurt the people you hate and often try to follow through on it. Both sides aren't the same, but neither side will fix anything.

alsetmusic3• 2 months ago

I couldn't agree more. What voters want is progressive policies (healthcare, housing, childcare, taxing mega-corps, etc). Dems are absolutely allergic to anything of the sort. The funny thing is that a lot of people voting on the other side want these things too. It's just that in a vacuum, they also want revenge for society changing without them enough to vote for that when it's dangled in front of them.

I was listening to a podcast recently talking about how if Dems ran on a platform of, "we're going to abolish all the BS from this admin and do the trials correctly and put these crooks in jail," they'd have tons of support (and I agree). But tepid positions and weak statements with no real plan to do anything (other than preserve the status quo) has become the party's playbook. No wonder it's failing.

selimthegrim5• 2 months ago

There was a public hearing of the state public service commission I attended which essentially boiled down to well all these big Wall Street banks are guaranteeing payment so it should be fine and plus we need jobs up there.

pesus• 2 months ago

I wonder if they actually believed it would bring more than a handful of permanent jobs or whether they're just saying to get their bribe.

whimsicalism2• 2 months ago

Tax benefits, if they exist, should be federal - not states competing.

downrightmike2• 2 months ago

Isn't LA soon to be underwater

ChiperSoft• 2 months ago

Richland Parish is pretty far north, so not likely to be under sea water.

It is, however, in the Mississippi River delta... so I wouldn't put flooding out of the picture.

downrightmike2• 2 months ago

With tornado alley already migrated east, river flooding makes the most sense then

fullshark2• 2 months ago

What's are the positives for local communities for data centers? I see only negatives. At least prisons have to hire people.

wnevets2• 2 months ago

The local officials get slightly richer.

fullshark2• 2 months ago

I'm not that cynical, I think they got stars in their eyes, were charmed at the idea of doing business with big money / tech and didn't do any actual cost/benefit analysis. Maybe they get an opportunity to make a very powerful friend/crony and took it without considering their duty to their constituents.

tartoran• 2 months ago

Higher energy prices. Oh, you mean net positives? I can't see any unfortunately..

cdrnsf• 2 months ago

Jobs that exist only during construction, ambient noise, higher electricity and water prices. They also get the privilege of living near technology that represents the future: degraded education, unemployment and spiraling inequality.

selimthegrim5• 2 months ago

I believe in Richland Parish people were excited about the opportunity to sell hot plates to the construction workers.

ch0wn• 2 months ago

You're forgetting insane levels of air pollution and a measurable increase in ambient temperatures.

googlehater• 2 months ago

Sure, in Loudon County, which has the highest concentration of data centers in the world, has seen its property tax rate fall about 40% since 2010. This is due to data centers representing about half the tax base now.

Key difference with this and TFA though: Loudon has never offered a tax abatement

There's one example. I'm not saying on the whole they're positive.

neksn• 2 months ago

What’s interesting to me is that for you to build a $10B datacenter (or any other business) you are shaken down for over $3.3B.

bnycum• 2 months ago

After Meta in Louisiana, Amazon is currently building 3 separate data centers across Shreveport-Bossier. Have to imagine they are receiving the same treatment. I’ve driven by the Bossier Parish grounds and the cleared land alone is massive. Each are expected to be 2-3 million sqft.

arjie2• 2 months ago

Interesting. I think the county isn't getting much in value in return for the datacenter, though the numbers stated in the headline can easily confuse a headline-reader. The $3.3b in tax breaks is on the $30+b of GPU purchases for that location which would normally encounter sales tax and so on. The coverage for that tax break is a state law, it seems[0]:

The company is expected to take advantage of a new Louisiana incentive program, established by Act 730, that offers qualifying projects a state and local sales and use tax rebate on the purchase or lease of data center equipment. Meta is also expected to participate in the state’s Quality Jobs program.

So it is entirely normal that the county officials wouldn't know or really get a say, and the county is the one that's missing out on sales tax. The Louisiana governor isn't hiding the fact that they're going to give them tax breaks, though. It's right in their announcement.

0: https://gov.louisiana.gov/news/4697

gibspaulding• 2 months ago

Thank you for that context.

I’m probably going to get down voted for this, but that doesn't sound like a bad deal. They’re giving up tax dollars that the region wouldn’t have received anyway without the project in exchange for a big (admittedly temporary) economic stimulus while the data center is built.

I live in a relatively small rust belt town that’s seen several data center projects recently, and while they have slightly increased the cost of electricity, they’re also employing a ton of people at well above market wages, plus bringing in out of town labor who are spending their checks at local businesses and paying taxes on those checks locally.

Make hay while the sun shines.

arjie2• 2 months ago

The common dangers are:

* you offer a tax break to a guy who was going to come anyway

* you give away the entire surplus - i.e. the sales tax is how you were going to see things anyway

* you don't capture any of the non-tax surplus (i.e. not many jobs, or jobs are all across county lines)

Some of these are fine because states should make cross-county decisions but the others are a matter of negotiation and I think states find they see more money if they advertise willingness a priori with a durable promise. Overall, I think it's hard to be in the position. I would probably also do what they did, but if someone used any of those justifications to not do it, I would probably also understand.

burnt-resistor• 2 months ago

Corporate welfare that will never be recouped. It's totally corrupt.

rybosworld4• 2 months ago

Lots of American cities and towns are being taken advantage of by the companies building data centers.

Question: why are these huge data centers being built in remote regions and small towns?

Answer: because the companies building the data centers are essentially getting free power and water at the expense of the area's citizens. The only locals who benefit from these projects are the politicians giving the land away.

Meta to receive $3.3B in tax breaks for its $10B Louisiana data center

Related Stories