How much tax does Texas give up for data centers?

Two estimates for the same year

The Comptroller’s January 2025 tax-expenditure report estimated $1.016 billion for fiscal 2025. The later financial report put the year at $617.614 million, a difference of about $398 million. The public tables do not reconcile the two. The earlier report also includes large data centers in its main estimate, so adding the large-project estimate would count some relief twice. January 2025 Tax Exemptions and Tax Incidence report, Table 2.

The investment floors and job commitments are eligibility thresholds. The Comptroller must certify a facility, and a facility covered by a Chapter 313 agreement is ineligible for either sales-tax exemption. To price a particular incentive, look for the certification, executed agreement, actual payments or forgone taxes, and any required compliance reports. A proposed facility or a company name on a development announcement is insufficient to assign a dollar amount. Comptroller’s data-center program. Large-project certification form AP-236. Texas Tax Code, Chapter 312. Comptroller’s Chapter 313 records.

Fort Worth disclosed cumulative grants

Fort Worth’s fiscal 2025 disclosure reports $92.5 million in cumulative Chapter 380 grants and $1.96 billion in reported investment for Winner, the Facebook data-center project. The grant figure describes the city agreement only. Adding county abatements, hospital district abatements or state sales-tax relief would require records from each jurisdiction and care over different cutoffs. A credible grant-per-job ratio would also need a job count covering the same project and period. Fort Worth’s fiscal 2025 Chapter 380 workbook, Facebook row.

In Midlothian, the Sharka agreement spells out what staffing commitments mean. It requires annual employment and tax documentation, and staffing shortfalls can reduce the abatement. Other specified defaults can lead to termination or recapture. Read the executed text before treating an empty field in a government spreadsheet as evidence that a deal has no enforcement terms. Sharka agreement, pages 2–7.

A $244 million change without a check being written

Two VPN4420 projects in Reeves County combine data-center and semiconductor activities. Their original school tax models forecast $801.5 million of combined gross relief. Updated filings project $557.4 million. Both numbers describe future relief, and each phase has a different schedule. The newer combined forecast also sits before about $94.6 million in listed payments to the school district, which affect the applicant’s net benefit. Phase 1 original certificate. Phase 2 original certificate. Phase 1 updated model. Phase 2 updated model.

Phase 1 shows how the estimate moves. The 2028 forecast applies a $0.67 tax rate per $100 to roughly $1.555 billion of value above the agreement’s $30 million limit. That gives $10.42 million in projected gross relief, down from $14.98 million under the original model. The underlying value and the applicable rate both matter. Phase 1 updated model, columns J–M.

Method and limits

The dates distinguish fiscal years from agreement periods. The state’s abatement estimates use statewide program totals. The project examples use named disclosures, with estimates and future models identified as such. Project-level state claims and a statewide count of permanent operating jobs were unavailable, so the records do not support a statewide cost per permanent job.