Richmond’s impasse

The debate has become so contentious that the state legislature is risking missing its June 30 budget deadline. State Senate lawmakers are vying to end tax incentives for data centers, while the state House and governor are defending the industry, arguing the centers are key economic drivers. 

No state has embraced data centers more than Virginia, which houses more than 200 operational facilities. The global epicenter is “Data Center Alley” in Northern Virginia, spanning Loudoun, Fairfax, and Prince William counties.

In Virginia, qualifying data centers, generally those investing at least $150 million and creating at least 50 high-paying jobs, can buy equipment such as servers, routers, and cooling systems without paying sales tax. The exemption first took effect in 2010 and is set to expire in 2035. 

While Spanberger indicated she believes data centers should contribute more to the state, she also maintains that Virginia must honor the commitments it made to businesses that invested under the existing tax structure.

“Data centers will employ very few permanent jobs for a sizable tax giveaway,” Lucas said Tuesday. “This is imperative to encourage responsible growth in the commonwealth to protect our electric grid and natural resources, while also ensuring hardworking Virginians are not asked to pick up higher utility costs to fund a higher share of our existing core services.”

Now, local officials and communities are questioning whether the incentives that helped establish dominance are worth the cost. 

The pro-growth case

In Loudoun County, the epicenter of the data center industry, Executive Director for Economic Development Buddy Rizer said the state’s success stems from long-term planning and a stable policy environment that attracted massive private investment.

“It didn’t happen by accident,” Rizer told the Washington Examiner. “We had the right combination of fiber and power and land and proximity to customers and speed to market.”

Rizer has been dubbed the “Godfather of the Data Centers” for his crucial role in driving Virginia’s data center supremacy.

Rizer acknowledged that tax incentives played a role in early growth but argued they are only one piece of a broader competitiveness strategy that lawmakers risk undermining.

“Tax incentives were really important, especially in the early stages,” he said, noting that Virginia competes with “33 other states” offering similar programs.

Rizer said the issue before lawmakers is not simply tax policy but Virginia’s broader reputation as a predictable place to do business.

“If the Commonwealth changes the rules abruptly,” he said, echoing Spanberger’s argument. “The issue isn’t just this tax exemption, it’s whether Virginia can still be viewed as a predictable place to invest your money.”

He also pointed to the fiscal benefits used to justify the policy in Richmond.

“For us, the primary benefit has been local tax revenue, commercial tax base growth,” Rizer said, citing investments in schools, libraries, and infrastructure.

The legislative pressure

At the same time, lawmakers are increasingly hearing warnings that Virginia’s current approach to data center expansion is creating downstream costs for energy infrastructure and ratepayers. Chris Miller, president of the Piedmont Environmental Council, said the scale of projected electricity demand is unlike anything the state has previously managed.

“Dominion has publicly stated that it has requests for up to 70 gigawatts of electricity,” Miller told the Washington Examiner, describing what he called a “tripling of the total electrical system.”

He argued that legislators are now confronting the possibility that infrastructure expansion driven by data centers could cost hundreds of billions of dollars.

“That comes with the risk of huge subsidies by residential ratepayers,” he said, adding that transmission expansion is already reshaping communities.

Miller’s argument aligns with growing concern in Richmond over how to allocate infrastructure costs, particularly as utilities, regulators, and lawmakers debate who should pay for new generation and transmission capacity.

Incentives vs. system costs

The General Assembly has become the central arena for this conflict, with lawmakers split between protecting Virginia’s competitive advantage through tax incentives and responding to constituents’ concerns about energy costs, land use, and infrastructure expansion.

Miller said the current policy framework effectively functions as a subsidy for large technology firms at the expense of broader public systems.

“Why would you give sales tax exemptions to the richest five corporations in the world,” he said, “so they can continue to make the problems worse?”

He argued that lawmakers should consider pausing further expansion until the state better understands long-term impacts on the grid, environment, and local communities.

“We don’t need to build a single new data center right now,” Miller said. “We need a pause to plan.”

The environmental leader said that a pause would protect residents from direct impacts such as air quality, excessive noise, and drains on the water supply. That position reflects a growing faction in Richmond that has pushed for tighter oversight of large-load energy customers and greater scrutiny of transmission planning and cost allocation.

“Data centers will employ very few permanent jobs for a sizable tax giveaway,” Sen. Lucas said Tuesday. “This is imperative to encourage responsible growth in the commonwealth to protect our electric grid and natural resources, while also ensuring hardworking Virginians are not asked to pick up higher utility costs to fund a higher share of our existing core services.”

Competing interpretations of the same growth

Miller said residents are already experiencing the effects of rapid expansion through transmission projects, land-use conflicts, and infrastructure buildout.

“You’re talking about building 10 new super highways through communities,” he said, referring to new transmission lines and substations.

He also pointed to increased public opposition at local meetings and hearings, arguing that frustration has been driven by visible impacts not fully anticipated in earlier planning cycles.

“The public understands,” he said. “They’re saying: turn the tap off.”

Rizer, however, rejected the idea that the industry is operating outside of planning frameworks, arguing instead that growth is being managed through evolving standards and community-dependent principles.

“We’re not saying there needs to be unlimited growth,” he said. “It’s disciplined planning, better siting, [and] stronger design standards.”

The political question now driving Richmond

At the center of the debate in the General Assembly is whether Virginia’s existing incentive structure and regulatory framework can absorb continued data center expansion, or whether lawmakers will need to impose new limits, cost allocations, or planning requirements.

Miller argued that current policy fails to account for long-term system costs and warned that delaying action will only intensify future impacts.

Rizer countered that removing incentives would weaken Virginia’s competitive position and undermine future investment.

“If you tell someone they can invest a billion dollars and then you rip it out from under them,” Rizer said, “it sends a really poor message about your business environment.”

Rural America was told ‘learn to code’ — Now it must power AI

As lawmakers weigh those competing warnings, the debate is increasingly less about whether data centers should exist in Virginia and more about how much of the cost should be borne by industry, ratepayers, and local communities.

Time is running short for Virginia’s politicians to decide which path they will take.