Incentive stability
Ten states · statutes and local ordinancesThe exemption is usually the least stable line in a data-center pro forma, and it is the one most trackers record only once. This view pairs what a state enacted with what is currently limiting it: a moratorium, a repeal that passed one chamber, a substitute tax, a county ordinance, or a bill that died. Where a statute carries its own sunset date, that date sits on its row, because it is the stability signal. Arizona is open here as the sample row. Missouri is open in full. The view switcher above reorders the states: the journalist and investor views lead with the states where most records are moving against the exemption and put that column first, the developer view leads with the states carrying the most exemptions still on the books, and the attorney view runs them alphabetically.
Provenance key. two-reviewer a second reviewer checked the record against primary sources with no open disagreement. single-reviewer one careful reviewer built it from primary sources and no second reviewer has re-read it yet. disputed two admissible sources disagree and a re-read did not settle it.
Arizona
1 on the books · 1 limitingStarts here in this viewThe exemption Arizona enacted, next to the bills, ordinances and repeals now limiting it.Whether the Arizona tax break you are counting on is firm, sunsetting, or already under attack.How Arizona treats the tax position of the loads you are being asked to serve.What Arizona gave data centers, and who is now trying to take it back.The Arizona exemption on one side, what is moving against it on the other, with the sunset date where there is one.
On the books
enacted statute two-reviewer effective 2013-08-31 · sunset 2033-12-31
$99 Arizona pass
Limiting it: moratoria, repeals, substitute taxes, failed bills
enacted statute two-reviewer effective 2026-07-01 · sunset 2029-06-30
Summary: verbatim text and sources
Collected text, verbatim from the record
H.B. 4168, an omnibus taxation bill carrying the Legislature's FY2027 budget-implementation tax provisions, was signed by Governor Katie Hobbs on June 13, 2026 as Laws 2026, Chapter 140. Section 31 of the Act imposes a three-year moratorium (July 1, 2026 through June 30, 2029) barring the Arizona Commerce Authority from accepting NEW applications for the computer-data-center TPT/use-tax exemption under A.R.S. § 41-1519 (see companion instrument az-ars-41-1519-cdc-tax-relief) and barring any new computer data center from qualifying for that relief during the moratorium window; the moratorium repeals itself automatically after June 30, 2029 (a 'delayed repeal' per the section's own title) unless further legislative action intervenes. This was the compromise outcome of a fight the Arizona Legislature's own reporting corps (Arizona Capitol Times) described as dominating the 2026 session: Governor Hobbs's executive budget had proposed eliminating the data-center tax exemption entirely, following what the same reporting describes as 'intense backlash in 2025 against proposed data center projects in Tucson, Chandler and Marana'; legislative Republicans opposed outright elimination; the enacted compromise pauses rather than repeals the program. Governor Hobbs, quoted by Arizona Capitol Times taking questions from reporters July 7, 2026: "I think that this pause in the exemption gives us a chance to really examine the policies ... Nobody's talking about a moratorium on data centers themselves. There are places where they make sense, where they provide economic opportunity and where they're not sucking the groundwater and overtaxing the utilities." Separately reported (same Arizona Capitol Times piece, and corroborated by independent aggregator search results not independently re-fetched this tick): a surge in last-minute applications to beat the June 30, 2026 cutoff, which this collector did NOT independently verify against an Arizona Commerce Authority primary count this tick (see notes).
Source row two-reviewer
“Sec. 31. Arizona commerce authority; computer data center tax relief; moratorium; retroactivity; delayed repeal A. Notwithstanding any other law, beginning on July 1, 2026 through June 30, 2029, the Arizona commerce authority may not accept applications for any new computer data center pursuant to section 41-1519, Arizona Revised Statutes, and no new computer data centers qualify for tax relief under section 41-1519, Arizona Revised Statutes. B. This section applies retroactively to from and after June 30, 2026. C. This section is repealed from and after June 30, 2029.”
Sec. 31 (session-law PDF pages 51-52, printed 'H.B. 4168 - 51 -')
https://www.azleg.gov/legtext/57leg/2R/laws/0140.pdfLaws 2026, Chapter 140 (House Bill 4168), enacted session-law text
Source row two-reviewer
“APPROVED BY THE GOVERNOR JUNE 13, 2026. FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF STATE JUNE 13, 2026.”
final page (PDF p.54, printed 'H.B. 4168 - 53 -')
https://www.azleg.gov/legtext/57leg/2R/laws/0140.pdfLaws 2026, Chapter 140 (House Bill 4168), enacted session-law text - enactment stamp
Source row two-reviewer
"I think that this pause in the exemption gives us a chance to really examine the policies," Hobbs said. "Nobody's talking about a moratorium on data centers themselves. There are places where they make sense, where they provide economic opportunity and where they're not sucking the groundwater and overtaxing the utilities."
quote attributed to Gov. Katie Hobbs, July 7, 2026 press remarks
https://azcapitoltimes.com/news/2026/07/09/data-centers-dominated-2026-session-lawmakers-answered-with-3-year-tax-incentive-pause/Data centers dominated 2026 session - lawmakers answered with 3-year tax incentive pause
Georgia
1 on the books · 3 limitingStarts here in this viewThe exemption Georgia enacted, next to the bills, ordinances and repeals now limiting it.Whether the Georgia tax break you are counting on is firm, sunsetting, or already under attack.How Georgia treats the tax position of the loads you are being asked to serve.What Georgia gave data centers, and who is now trying to take it back.The Georgia exemption on one side, what is moving against it on the other, with the sunset date where there is one.
On the books
enacted statute two-reviewer effective 2018-07-01 · sunset 2031-12-31
$99 Georgia pass
Limiting it: moratoria, repeals, substitute taxes, failed bills
withdrawn statute two-reviewer
$99 Georgia passwithdrawn statute two-reviewer
$99 Georgia passwithdrawn statute two-reviewer
$99 Georgia pass
Iowa
1 on the books · 1 limitingStarts here in this viewThe exemption Iowa enacted, next to the bills, ordinances and repeals now limiting it.Whether the Iowa tax break you are counting on is firm, sunsetting, or already under attack.How Iowa treats the tax position of the loads you are being asked to serve.What Iowa gave data centers, and who is now trying to take it back.The Iowa exemption on one side, what is moving against it on the other, with the sunset date where there is one.
On the books
enacted statute two-reviewer
$99 Iowa pass
Limiting it: moratoria, repeals, substitute taxes, failed bills
proposed statute two-reviewer
$99 Iowa pass
Indiana
2 on the books · 0 limitingStarts here in this viewThe exemption Indiana enacted, next to the bills, ordinances and repeals now limiting it.Whether the Indiana tax break you are counting on is firm, sunsetting, or already under attack.How Indiana treats the tax position of the loads you are being asked to serve.What Indiana gave data centers, and who is now trying to take it back.The Indiana exemption on one side, what is moving against it on the other, with the sunset date where there is one.
On the books
enacted statute two-reviewer effective 2025-05-06
$99 Indiana passenacted statute two-reviewer
$99 Indiana pass
Limiting it: moratoria, repeals, substitute taxes, failed bills
No limiting record for this state in the snapshot.
Kansas
2 on the books · 0 limitingStarts here in this viewThe exemption Kansas enacted, next to the bills, ordinances and repeals now limiting it.Whether the Kansas tax break you are counting on is firm, sunsetting, or already under attack.How Kansas treats the tax position of the loads you are being asked to serve.What Kansas gave data centers, and who is now trying to take it back.The Kansas exemption on one side, what is moving against it on the other, with the sunset date where there is one.
On the books
enacted statute single-reviewer effective 2022-02-10
$99 Kansas passenacted statute two-reviewer effective 2025-07-01
$99 Kansas pass
Limiting it: moratoria, repeals, substitute taxes, failed bills
No limiting record for this state in the snapshot.
Missouri
3 on the books · 3 limitingopen stateStarts here in this viewThe exemption Missouri enacted, next to the bills, ordinances and repeals now limiting it.Whether the Missouri tax break you are counting on is firm, sunsetting, or already under attack.How Missouri treats the tax position of the loads you are being asked to serve.What Missouri gave data centers, and who is now trying to take it back.The Missouri exemption on one side, what is moving against it on the other, with the sunset date where there is one.
On the books
enacted statute single-reviewer effective 2015-08-28
Summary: verbatim text and sources
Collected text, verbatim from the record
Mo. Rev. Stat. sec. 144.810 creates a sales-and-use-tax exemption program for 'data storage center' facilities (NAICS 518210 data processing/hosting, or NAICS 519130 internet publishing/web search portals) that is application-based, not automatic. DED's own program guidelines state plainly: 'The Department of Economic Development (DED) is the agency administering the program.' (p.2). Two eligibility tracks exist, each with its own investment and jobs threshold and its own exemption term, per the statute's own definitions: (1) NEW FACILITY -- 'The new facility project investment is at least twenty-five million dollars during a period of up to thirty-six consecutive months from the date of the conditional approval for an exemption under this section' (sec. 144.810.1(11)(c)) and 'At least ten new jobs are created at the new facility during a period of up to thirty-six consecutive months from the date of conditional approval for an exemption under this section if the average wage of the new jobs equals or exceeds one hundred fifty percent of the county average wage' (sec. 144.810.1(11)(d)), entitling the project taxpayers to a 100% state-and-local sales/use tax exemption 'for a project period not to exceed fifteen years from the date of conditional approval' (sec. 144.810.2). (2) EXPANDING FACILITY -- an existing/replacement facility that 'has net new investment related to the expansion of operations in this state of at least five million dollars during a period of up to twelve consecutive months and results in the creation of at least five new jobs during a period of up to twenty-four consecutive months from the date of conditional approval for an exemption under this section, if the average wage of the new jobs equals or exceeds one hundred fifty percent of the county average wage' (sec. 144.810.1(6)), entitling the project taxpayers to the same 100% exemption 'for a period not to exceed ten years' (sec. 144.810.4). Both tracks' exemption amount is capped: 'limited to the net fiscal benefit of the state calculated over a ten-year period' (sec. 144.810.2), determined by DED using a Regional Economic Modeling, Inc. (REMI) dataset (DED guidelines p.4). The exemption covers utilities (electricity, gas, water, telecom/internet), machinery/equipment/computers, and construction materials. Process: applicant files a Notice of Intent + Project Plan with DED; DED issues conditional approval or denial within 30 days (silence = deemed approved); DED verifies compliance and certifies to DOR, which issues refunds and certificates. Sec. 144.810.9 bars double-dipping: no exemption recipient under this section 'shall be eligible for benefits under any business recruitment tax credit, as defined in section 135.800' (statute text); DED's guidelines restate this as 'No recipient of an exemption under the data center program may also receive other business recruitment incentives.' (p.4). The program's statutory history line reads '(L. 2015 S.B. 149, A.L. 2018 S.B. 975 & 1024 Revision)' -- originally enacted by 2015 S.B. 149 (operative date August 28, 2015, which is the date embedded throughout the definitions as the facility-eligibility cutoff), revised by 2018 S.B. 975 & 1024 (the version currently in force, per the Revisor's own site: 'Effective - 28 Aug 2018, 2 histories'). CONFIRMED IN USE: DED's own March 24, 2026 press release on the Metrobloks $1.4B Liberty project states plainly, 'For this expansion, Metrobloks will benefit from the Data Center Sales Tax Exemption Program.' -- the only located instance of the program being invoked by name for a specific MO facility on file in this corpus. It is unconfirmed from the fetched sources whether Metrobloks is using the 'new facility' or 'expanding facility' track, or whether the state exemption stacks with (or substitutes for) the separate City of Liberty real/personal property tax abatement documented at mo-liberty-city-metrobloks-industrial-dev-2025 -- both are recorded, no relationship between them is asserted.
Source row single-reviewer
“The new facility project investment is at least twenty-five million dollars during a period of up to thirty-six consecutive months from the date of the conditional approval for an exemption under this section.”
Sec. 144.810.1(11)(c), definition of 'New facility'
https://revisor.mo.gov/main/OneSection.aspx?section=144.810Missouri Revisor of Statutes -- Revised Statutes of Missouri, RSMo Section 144.810
Source row single-reviewer
“At least ten new jobs are created at the new facility during a period of up to thirty-six consecutive months from the date of conditional approval for an exemption under this section if the average wage of the new jobs equals or exceeds one hundred fifty percent of the county average wage;”
Sec. 144.810.1(11)(d), definition of 'New facility'
https://revisor.mo.gov/main/OneSection.aspx?section=144.810Missouri Revisor of Statutes -- Revised Statutes of Missouri, RSMo Section 144.810
Source row single-reviewer
“has net new investment related to the expansion of operations in this state of at least five million dollars during a period of up to twelve consecutive months and results in the creation of at least five new jobs during a period of up to twenty-four consecutive months from the date of conditional approval for an exemption under this section, if the average wage of the new jobs equals or exceeds one hundred fifty percent of the county average wage”
Sec. 144.810.1(6), definition of 'Expanding facility'
https://revisor.mo.gov/main/OneSection.aspx?section=144.810Missouri Revisor of Statutes -- Revised Statutes of Missouri, RSMo Section 144.810
enacted ordinance single-reviewer effective 2025-12-15
Summary: verbatim text and sources
Collected text, verbatim from the record
Per the City of Liberty's own official Metrobloks FAQ page (libertymissouri.gov/2793/Metrobloks-FAQs, already partially on file in this corpus for the facility row metrobloks-liberty-clay, re-fetched this tick for instrument-level detail): the project was processed as an industrial zoning matter, not a rezoning -- 'As this project was proposed for an industrial zoning district, it was processed as an industrial development... The Planning & Zoning Commission met regarding this project on December 9, 2025. The City Council took up and approved this project on December 15, 2025, both of these meetings included a public hearing for the public to comment.' State-law notice was given: 'Legal Notice printed in Courier Tribune - November 19', letters to property owners within 185 ft. on November 20, and on-site signage November 20. Separately, the FAQ documents a real-and-personal-property tax abatement financed via industrial revenue bonds: 'The project will have abatements on real and personal property taxes. The total cost of the project is estimated to be $1.4 billion, consisting of approximately $543 million in real property improvements and $858 million in personal property... Over the life of the 25-year abatement, taxing jurisdictions will receive approximately $49 million, with Liberty Public Schools receiving approximately $30 million of that. Without this project, this property would only generate a total of $34,000 in taxes for all taxing jurisdictions in the county over the next 25 years.' (two slightly different 'without this project' baseline figures appear on the same FAQ page -- '$35,000... and only $26,000' in one answer, '$34,000' in another -- both recorded verbatim as an internal inconsistency in the city's own page, not resolved by us.) The FAQ also confirms 'the City does not "back" private sector bonds. The developer is solely responsible for the repayment of the bonds' -- i.e., industrial revenue bonds (a standard MO Chapter 100-style vehicle), not general-obligation debt. A related, separately-approved Community Benefits Agreement (a $27.75 million, 25-year contribution to the newly formed Liberty Institute for Science and Ethics, already on file via the City's March 24, 2026 news release in collect-mo-maintenance-2026-08-20.json) is corroborating context, not the subject of this row. DED's own March 24, 2026 press release on the same project corroborates the layered-incentive structure without detailing it: Michelle Hataway (DED Director) credited 'the support of regional, local, and state incentives' -- this City ordinance being the 'local' layer, mo-data-center-sales-tax-exemption-144810 the 'state' layer named explicitly in the same release. The relationship (whether both apply concurrently, and to what value) is not asserted here.
Source row single-reviewer
“As with every application that comes to the City there is an internal review process that considers a variety of factors including zoning, utility impacts and City Codes. Under current Liberty code, data centers are classified similarly to other industrial buildings. As this project was proposed for an industrial zoning district, it was processed as an industrial development. ... The Planning & Zoning Commission met regarding this project on December 9, 2025. The City Council took up and approved this project on December 15, 2025, both of these meetings included a public hearing for the public to comment.”
‘What was the process for approving this project?’ answer
https://www.libertymissouri.gov/2793/Metrobloks-FAQsMetrobloks FAQs | the City of Liberty Official Website!
Source row single-reviewer
“The project will have abatements on real and personal property taxes. The total cost of the project is estimated to be $1.4 billion, consisting of approximately $543 million in real property improvements and $858 million in personal property.”
‘Are tax incentives provided for this development?’ answer
https://www.libertymissouri.gov/2793/Metrobloks-FAQsMetrobloks FAQs | the City of Liberty Official Website!
Source row single-reviewer
“No. The City does not “back” private sector bonds. The developer is solely responsible for the repayment of the bonds. Taxpayers have no responsibility for the repayment of the bonds.”
‘Is the City “backing” the industrial revenue bonds’ answer, and 'Related documents' links under the tax-incentive and Community Benefits Agreement questions
https://www.libertymissouri.gov/2793/Metrobloks-FAQsMetrobloks FAQs | the City of Liberty Official Website!
enacted statute two-reviewer effective 2025-08-28
Summary: verbatim text and sources
Collected text, verbatim from the record
SB4 (2025) amends Mo. Rev. Stat. sec. 393.130 to require large electrical corporations to submit PSC tariff schedules for large-load customers (100 MW threshold for utilities over 250,000 customers, 50 MW for smaller ones) designed to allocate cost responsibility to those customers and shield other customer classes. It also amends sec. 393.135 to permit construction-work-in-progress (CWIP) cost recovery in rate base for new natural gas-generating units only (subject to limits and refund provisions), while a separate new integrated-resource-planning section (393.1900) allows CWIP recovery for commission-approved resource additions without an explicit fuel-type limitation in the language reviewed, and sec. 393.1400 separately excludes new nuclear and new coal generating units from the definition of 'qualifying electric plant' used in that section's rate-base mechanism. The act took effect August 28, 2025.
Source row two-reviewer
“Each electrical corporation providing electric service to more than two hundred fifty thousand customers shall develop and submit to the commission schedules to include in the electrical corporation's service tariff applicable to customers who are reasonably projected to have above an annual peak demand of one hundred megawatts or more. The schedules should reasonably ensure such customers' rates will reflect the customers' representative share of the costs incurred to serve the customers and prevent other customer classes' rates from reflecting any unjust or unreasonable costs arising from service to such customers.”
p.40, Sec. 393.130, subsection 7
https://www.senate.mo.gov/25info/pdf-bill/tat/SB4.pdfSENATE SUBSTITUTE NO. 2 FOR SENATE BILL NO. 4, 103RD GENERAL ASSEMBLY, 2025 [TRULY AGREED TO AND FINALLY PASSED]
Source row two-reviewer
“any charge made or demanded by an electrical corporation for service, or in connection therewith, which is based on the costs of construction in progress upon any existing or new facility of the electrical corporation, or any other cost associated with owning, operating, maintaining, or financing any property before it is fully operational and used for service, is unjust and unreasonable, and is prohibited. 2. (1) An electrical corporation may be permitted, subject to the limitations in this subsection, to include construction work in progress for any new natural gas-generating unit in rate base.”
p.41-42, Sec. 393.135, subsections 1-2(1)
https://www.senate.mo.gov/25info/pdf-bill/tat/SB4.pdfSENATE SUBSTITUTE NO. 2 FOR SENATE BILL NO. 4, 103RD GENERAL ASSEMBLY, 2025 [TRULY AGREED TO AND FINALLY PASSED]
Source row two-reviewer
"Qualifying electric plant", all rate-base additions, except rate-base additions for new coal-fired generating units, new nuclear generating units, [new natural gas units,] or rate-base additions that increase revenues by allowing service to new customer premises
p.70, Sec. 393.1400, subsection 1(3)
https://www.senate.mo.gov/25info/pdf-bill/tat/SB4.pdfSENATE SUBSTITUTE NO. 2 FOR SENATE BILL NO. 4, 103RD GENERAL ASSEMBLY, 2025 [TRULY AGREED TO AND FINALLY PASSED]
Limiting it: moratoria, repeals, substitute taxes, failed bills
proposed statute two-reviewer
Summary: verbatim text and sources
Collected text, verbatim from the record
NEW INSTRUMENT found during 2026-08-20 MO maintenance docket re-read (not previously on file). House Bill 3362, with companion HB 3364 (Sponsor: Costlow, Mike (108); LR No. 7308H.01I; same title and same 3/30/2026 hearing, confirmed from house.mo.gov this gate), sponsored by Rep. Colin Wellenkamp (R-St. Charles) and Rep. Mike Costlow (R-Dardenne Prairie), introduced Feb. 2026; house.mo.gov's own bill-tracking page describes it as creating 'new provisions for industrial utility users.' It would require large-load customers, including data centers, to pay the costs of providing them electricity (grid infrastructure upgrades among them) and would add a DNR permit requirement for large water users; reporting describes it as building off SB4 (mo-sb4-2025). The bill was referred to the House Committee on Conservation and Natural Resources on 3/24/2026 and that committee held its only hearing on it 3/30/2026, 1:00 PM, House Hearing Room 7 (a warm reception per the sponsor -- "We had tremendous testimony, almost exclusively in support of" -- but no committee vote). MO GATE 2026-08-20: CORRECTED: the row previously said the hearing was held by the House Special Committee on Intergovernmental Affairs. The House's own bill-actions and bill-hearings records show the referral and the 3/30/2026 hearing were Conservation and Natural Resources. Intergovernmental Affairs is Rep. Tricia Byrnes's committee, which announced the SEPARATE Sept. 16, 2026 data-center hearing that was later canceled; the two were conflated. Per house.mo.gov as fetched 2026-08-20, the bill did NOT advance in the 2026 regular session: 'Last Action: 03/30/2026 - Public Hearing Completed (H)... Next House Hearing: Hearing not scheduled... Calendar: Bill currently not on a House calendar.' The 2026 regular session closed with zero data-center legislation enacted (St. Louis Public Radio, Jun. 29, 2026: 'Missouri lawmakers passed 100 bills during the 2026 session, but none of them was about data centers'). Sponsors/House Future Caucus have said they intend to reintroduce similar legislation in the 2027 session; a planned Sept. 16, 2026 House Special Committee public hearing on data centers was CANCELED (announced by Rep. Byrnes on Facebook, reported Aug. 11, 2026) in favor of an advocacy rally at the Capitol the same day, which coincides with the annual veto session. SB4 itself (mo-sb4-2025) remains the only enacted MO statute governing large-load/data-center cost allocation as of this maintenance pass; no amendment to it was found.
Source row two-reviewer
“103rd General Assembly, 2nd Regular Session HB 3362 ... Creates new provisions for industrial utility users Sponsor: Wellenkamp, Colin (105) Proposed Effective Date: 8/28/2026 LR Number: 7108H.01I Last Action: 03/30/2026 - Public Hearing Completed (H) Bill String: HB 3362 Next House Hearing: Hearing not scheduled Calendar: Bill currently not on a House calendar”
bill-status summary block
https://house.mo.gov/BillContent.aspx?bill=HB3362&year=2026&code=R&style=newMissouri House of Representatives - Bill Information for HB3362
Source row two-reviewer
“2/19/2026 H 895 Introduced and Read First Time (H) 2/23/2026 H 921 Read Second Time (H) 3/24/2026 H 1380 Referred: Conservation and Natural Resources(H) 3/30/2026 Public Hearing Completed (H)”
Bill Actions table, all four rows
https://house.mo.gov/BillActions.aspx?bill=HB3362&year=2026&code=RMissouri House of Representatives - Bill Actions - HB 3362 (2026)
Source row two-reviewer
“Bill Hearings CONSERVATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES Date: Monday, March 30, 2026 Time: 1:00 PM Location: House Hearing Room 7”
Bill Hearings block
https://house.mo.gov/BillHearings.aspx?bill=HB3362&year=2026&code=RMissouri House of Representatives - Bill Hearings - HB 3362 (2026)
enacted ordinance single-reviewer effective 2026-07-13
Summary: verbatim text and sources
Collected text, verbatim from the record
St. Charles County's own pre-vote news article (sccmo.org, posted July 6, 2026) describes a proposal from County Executive Steve Ehlmann, introduced at the June 29, 2026 council meeting: 'The St. Charles County Council is considering a proposal from County Executive Steve Ehlmann to put a six-month moratorium on large-scale data centers.' The plan 'would use the County Government's environmental and health protection authority to enact the moratorium throughout the entire county -- including inside city boundaries, where County regulations don't usually apply.' Sponsoring council members Mike Elam and Patti York's stated goal, per the same article, was 'to give the County time to study the potential impacts on public health, water resources, electric utility infrastructure, environmental quality, light pollution and noise conditions.' The article defines the moratorium's trigger: 'The proposed moratorium defines "large scale" data centers as having an electrical demand of more than 5 megawatts, occupying more than 100,000 square feet, or having multiple buildings intended to function together as a data center.' The county's article notes 'There are no data center proposals before us, but one could come at any time' (Ehlmann) and states the vote could come 'as soon as the July 13 council meeting.' St. Louis Public Radio's independent July 14, 2026 account confirms passage: 'Applause rang out in the St. Charles County Council's chambers on Monday night as the council approved a six-month ban on large-scale data center developments... The temporary moratorium, as well as a change to the city's senior property tax freeze program, were approved unanimously.' STLPR further reports the enacted ordinance's own definition matches the county's pre-vote description ('a development larger than 100,000 square feet or exceeding an electrical demand of 5 megawatts') and that District 2 Councilman Joe Brazil unsuccessfully sought a longer (12-month) moratorium or an outright ban, arguing 'Six months is nothing.' STLPR also reports St. Charles County 'followed the lead of the City of St. Charles, which passed a yearlong moratorium that eventually led to an outright data center development ban in May [2026]' -- the CITY's separate ban is recorded here as context only, not as its own instrument row (out of this tick's bounded scope; a city-level St. Charles instrument, if pursued, is a future-tick item). No county data-center proposal is on record as of the sources fetched -- consistent with Ehlmann's own quoted rationale that the moratorium is precautionary.
Source row single-reviewer
“The St. Charles County Council is considering a proposal from County Executive Steve Ehlmann to put a six-month moratorium on large-scale data centers. ... The plan, introduced at the June 29 council meeting, would use the County Government’s environmental and health protection authority to enact the moratorium throughout the entire county—including inside city boundaries, where County regulations don’t usually apply. ... The proposed moratorium defines “large scale” data centers as having an electrical demand of more than 5 megawatts, occupying more than 100,000 square feet, or having multiple buildings intended to function together as a data center. ... The proposed moratorium could come up for a vote as soon as the July 13 council meeting.”
paras. 1, 3-4, 6
https://www.sccmo.org/m/newsflash/home/detail/2752County Council Considers Six-Month Moratorium on Big Data Centers • St Charles County, MO
Source row single-reviewer
“Applause rang out in the St. Charles County Council's chambers on Monday night as the council approved a six-month ban on large-scale data center developments. The temporary moratorium, as well as a change to the city’s senior property tax freeze program, were approved unanimously. ... The county’s moratorium prohibits the approval of any new developments or expansions of large-scale data centers, which the ordinance defines as a development larger than 100,000 square feet or exceeding an electrical demand of 5 megawatts.”
paras. 1-2, and the ordinance-definition paragraph
https://www.stlpr.org/government-politics-issues/2026-07-14/st-charles-county-officials-approve-half-year-ban-on-data-center-projects-alter-senior-tax-freezeSt. Charles County officials approve half-year ban on data center projects, alter senior tax freeze
enacted ordinance single-reviewer effective 2026-06-16
Summary: verbatim text and sources
Collected text, verbatim from the record
OCR'd (PyMuPDF 300dpi render + pytesseract; the source PDF is image-only, no text layer) from Webster County's own order document, linked as 'Full text of the Order' from the county's June 16, 2026 press release. Title, per the order's own header: 'AN ORDER AND ORDINANCE ENACTING A TEMPORARY MORATORIUM ON SOLAR ENERGY SYSTEMS, WIND ENERGY CONVERSION SYSTEMS, BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEMS, AND DATA CENTERS WITHIN WEBSTER COUNTY, MISSOURI'. Substance (Section 2, OCR artifacts preserved and flagged -- 'Dats Centers' for 'Data Centers', 'moraiorium'/'moraionum' for 'moratorium', 'mun' for 'run', 'shal]' for 'shall', 'al' for 'at', 'Mgratenum' as the section's OCR'd heading for 'Moratorium'): 'Webster County, Missouri, hereby enacts and establishes a moratorium on the construction, establishment, operation, or expansion of any Solar Energy Systems, Wind Energy Conversion Systems, Battery Energy Storage Systems, and Dats Centers, including the issuance of any permits related thereto, with said moraiorium to mun from the date of passage for a period of six (6) months from the date of adoption of this Ordinance.' A 'Data Center' is defined (Section 3(a)) as 'a building, group of buildings, or facility of 2,500 square feet or more, or with an aggregate information technology power capacity of 250 kilowatts or more, whose primary use is data processing or data storage'. The moratorium 'shall not apply to any Solar Energy System, Wind Energy Conversion System, Battery Energy Storage System, or Data Center which is currently in existence or for which the owner or developer has physically commenced on-site construction activities beyond site grading or preparation prior to the date of adoption of this Ordinance' (Section 2) -- this is the carve-out already on file in this corpus protecting the ARY/Lumon Solutions Rifle Range Road project (facility id ary-rifle-range-webster), which the county's own June 16, 2026 press release separately confirms by name ('The County is aware of the data center development currently under construction in the Rifle Range Road area... the County does not intend to use the proposed moratorium as a basis to halt that project'). The ordinance is also expressly inapplicable to regulated utilities: 'This Ordinance shall not apply to any railroad company, telecommunications or wireless company, public utility, rural electric cooperative, or municipal utility, or other electrical corporation regulated by the Public Service Commission. This Ordinance shall only apply to the unincorporated sections of Webster County.' (Section 4, OCR'd 'telecommunications' rendered 'telecommmunications'/'telecommunications company' rendered oddly -- cleaned only of the accidental accent-mark artifact on 'evaluate'/'e virtual server' elsewhere; the Section 4 text itself OCR'd cleanly). Enforcement is via injunctive relief with fee-shifting to the violator (Section 5). Legal effect: 'This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and approval.' (Section 7). Webster County's own June 16, 2026 press release frames the moratorium as a response to public concern, expressly noting the county 'does not currently have countywide planning and zoning' and that the moratorium is not intended as a long-term regulatory framework. This is the first time this order's own primary text (rather than only the county's press-release description of it, already on file in collect-mo-maintenance-2026-08-20.json) has been fetched and OCR'd for this corpus.
Source row single-reviewer
“AN ORDER AND ORDINANCE ENACTING A TEMPORARY MORATORIUM ON SOLAR ENERGY SYSTEMS, WIND ENERGY CONVERSION SYSTEMS, BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEMS, AND DATA CENTERS WITHIN WEBSTER COUNTY, MISSOURI”
p.1, title block
https://webstercountymo.gov/wp-content/uploads/2026/06/2026-03-Order-Data-Centers-Moratorium-2026-06-16.pdfOrder and Ordinance of County Commission of Webster County, Missouri -- Temporary Moratorium on Solar Energy Systems, Wind Energy Conversion Systems, Battery Energy Storage Systems, and Data Centers
Source row single-reviewer
“Webster County, Missouri, hereby enacts and establishes a moratorium on the construction, establishment, operation, or expansion of any Solar Energy Systems, Wind Energy Conversion Systems, Battery Energy Storage Systems, and Dats Centers, including the issuance of any permits related thereto, with said moraiorium to mun from the date of passage for a period of six (6) months from the date of adoption of this Ordinance.”
p.2, Section 2 ('Moratorium')
https://webstercountymo.gov/wp-content/uploads/2026/06/2026-03-Order-Data-Centers-Moratorium-2026-06-16.pdfOrder and Ordinance of County Commission of Webster County, Missouri -- Temporary Moratorium on Solar Energy Systems, Wind Energy Conversion Systems, Battery Energy Storage Systems, and Data Centers
Source row single-reviewer
“Data Center” shall mean a building, group of buildings, or facility of 2,500 square feet or more, or with an aggregate information technology power capacity of 250 kilowatts or more, whose primary use is data processing or data storage,
p.3, Section 3(a), definition of 'Data Center'
https://webstercountymo.gov/wp-content/uploads/2026/06/2026-03-Order-Data-Centers-Moratorium-2026-06-16.pdfOrder and Ordinance of County Commission of Webster County, Missouri -- Temporary Moratorium on Solar Energy Systems, Wind Energy Conversion Systems, Battery Energy Storage Systems, and Data Centers
Ohio
2 on the books · 0 limitingStarts here in this viewThe exemption Ohio enacted, next to the bills, ordinances and repeals now limiting it.Whether the Ohio tax break you are counting on is firm, sunsetting, or already under attack.How Ohio treats the tax position of the loads you are being asked to serve.What Ohio gave data centers, and who is now trying to take it back.The Ohio exemption on one side, what is moving against it on the other, with the sunset date where there is one.
On the books
enacted statute two-reviewer effective 2025-08-14
$99 Ohio passenacted statute two-reviewer effective 2013-09-29
$99 Ohio pass
Limiting it: moratoria, repeals, substitute taxes, failed bills
No limiting record for this state in the snapshot.
Oregon
2 on the books · 1 limitingStarts here in this viewThe exemption Oregon enacted, next to the bills, ordinances and repeals now limiting it.Whether the Oregon tax break you are counting on is firm, sunsetting, or already under attack.How Oregon treats the tax position of the loads you are being asked to serve.What Oregon gave data centers, and who is now trying to take it back.The Oregon exemption on one side, what is moving against it on the other, with the sunset date where there is one.
On the books
enacted statute two-reviewer effective 2025-06-16
$99 Oregon passenacted statute two-reviewer
$99 Oregon pass
Limiting it: moratoria, repeals, substitute taxes, failed bills
enacted statute two-reviewer effective 2026-06-05 · sunset 2029-01-02
$99 Oregon pass
Texas
4 on the books · 0 limitingStarts here in this viewThe exemption Texas enacted, next to the bills, ordinances and repeals now limiting it.Whether the Texas tax break you are counting on is firm, sunsetting, or already under attack.How Texas treats the tax position of the loads you are being asked to serve.What Texas gave data centers, and who is now trying to take it back.The Texas exemption on one side, what is moving against it on the other, with the sunset date where there is one.
On the books
enacted statute single-reviewer effective 2024-01-01
$99 Texas passenacted statute two-reviewer effective 2025-06-20
$99 Texas passenacted statute two-reviewer effective 2013-09-01
$99 Texas passenacted statute two-reviewer effective 2015-06-10
$99 Texas pass
Limiting it: moratoria, repeals, substitute taxes, failed bills
No limiting record for this state in the snapshot.
Virginia
3 on the books · 2 limitingStarts here in this viewThe exemption Virginia enacted, next to the bills, ordinances and repeals now limiting it.Whether the Virginia tax break you are counting on is firm, sunsetting, or already under attack.How Virginia treats the tax position of the loads you are being asked to serve.What Virginia gave data centers, and who is now trying to take it back.The Virginia exemption on one side, what is moving against it on the other, with the sunset date where there is one.
On the books
enacted statute two-reviewer effective 2010-07-01 · sunset 2035-06-30
$99 Virginia passenacted statute two-reviewer
$99 Virginia passenacted ordinance single-reviewer effective 2025-03-18
$99 Virginia pass
Limiting it: moratoria, repeals, substitute taxes, failed bills
withdrawn statute single-reviewer
$99 Virginia passenacted statute single-reviewer effective 2026-07-01 · sunset 2028-07-01
$99 Virginia pass