More than 100 rural data-centre projects under development could qualify for an expanded federal tax incentive, according to research reviewed by WIRED. The finding comes as opportunity-zone rules change to attract more investment outside urban areas, with newly eligible rural projects entering the programme next year. It identifies a potential advantage for developers, not a list of companies already receiving it. The distinction matters because the programme rewards investment without requiring a project to create jobs, leaving open how much a large computing facility would contribute to its surrounding community.
A project map shows potential eligibility, not claimed benefits
The Searchlight Institute compared data centres in development with rural census tracts eligible for the expanded programme. WIRED reviewed the research and found more than 100 projects at different stages that could qualify. Searchlight worked with a database of fewer than 700 planned or under-construction facilities, described as conservative relative to datasets containing closer to 1,500 projects. The result is therefore not a complete national count of possible beneficiaries.
Separate Pew research cited by WIRED found that rural areas contain around 13 percent of operating data centres but roughly 67 percent of planned facilities. Those figures describe different groups: the existing estate and proposed development. They help explain why a rural investment incentive could become relevant to many more projects without establishing that the incentive caused their location decisions.
The opportunity-zone programme originally offered tax advantages for investment in selected low-income census tracts. Changes in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act broadened its rural reach. Ways and Means Committee chair Jason Smith has argued that the expanded rules strengthen the economic case for hyperscale data centres. That is an argument for the policy’s attractiveness to developers, rather than evidence of its eventual effects on residents.
Major developers deny using the programme
A facility’s location within an eligible zone does not automatically produce a tax benefit. A company needs to establish a specialised investment vehicle. WIRED also notes that claims can be confidential IRS information, making it difficult to identify actual participants unless they disclose their use. Mapping possible eligibility consequently answers a different question from tracking benefits that have been claimed.
WIRED contacted Microsoft, Meta, Amazon and Google about projects in potentially qualifying areas. Microsoft, Meta and Amazon denied using the programme. Microsoft said it does not use opportunity zones to finance the purchase or construction of its data centres. Google did not respond. A lack of response should not be interpreted as confirmation that it is participating.
Amazon said it had not claimed the benefit and did not actively seek opportunity-zone land. Its explanation was that ordinary site-selection considerations can overlap with locations governments have designated for development. University of Texas-Austin government professor Nathan Jensen nevertheless told WIRED he would be surprised if some developers were not considering eligible zones. His expectation concerns possible incentives across the industry; it does not contradict a particular company’s denial with verified evidence of a claim.
Investment alone does not settle the local-benefit question
Searchlight tax-policy analyst Emily Kraschel stresses that the programme requires capital investment, not job creation. A data centre can involve substantial construction expenditure while leaving a different long-term employment footprint from a traditional factory. WIRED describes an ongoing debate about whether construction jobs translate into a lasting workforce. The research does not establish a guaranteed employment outcome for each of the identified projects.
The programme’s earlier record is also contested. WIRED reports evidence that some supported projects would have proceeded without the incentive and that investment has not necessarily reached disadvantaged areas as intended. The government estimates that the rural expansion will cost $40.9 billion over the next decade. That is an estimate for the programme’s expansion, not a calculated subsidy bill for the data centres in Searchlight’s map.
Senator Josh Hawley introduced legislation last month seeking to remove data centres from opportunity-zone funding. The report does not say that proposal has become law. It highlights a policy conflict: federal incentives can encourage investment while other authorities and communities try to restrict it. Searchlight’s work supplies a clearer picture of which projects might benefit, but the central unanswered questions remain participation and outcomes—who actually claims the incentive, and what the investment produces beyond the facility itself.
