Thursday, August 6, 2026

Why $370bn tech group Palantir pays 1.4 percent tax rate: Report

Why $370bn tech group Palantir pays 1.4 percent tax rate: Report

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/8/6/why-370bn-tech-group-palantir-pays-just-1-4-percent-tax-report 

Why $370bn tech group Palantir pays 1.4 percent tax rate: Report

The AI group’s technology is used by Israeli military and Trump administration’s ICE.

Peter Thiel, who owns a significant stake in Palantir Technologies.
Peter Thiel, who owns a significant stake in Palantir Technologies [File: Ben Margot/AP]

Palantir Technologies, the United States data analytics and artificial intelligence company which has contracts with the country’s military and intelligence apparatus, has “engineered its corporate structure” to pay no US federal corporate income tax, according to a new report.

The study by the Centre for International Corporate Tax Accountability and Research (CICTAR) comes as Palantir reports soaring revenues, driven partly by government contracts, while it faces continued criticism for providing technology to the Israeli military amid the genocide in Gaza.

Recommended Stories

list of 4 itemsend of list

Here’s what we know.

What does the report show?

Earlier this week, Palantir reported second-quarter revenue of $1.94bn, up 93 percent from a year earlier. But despite its rapid growth, CICTAR said its global effective tax rate was just 1.4 percent in 2025.

CICTAR’s report also identifies what it describes as a pattern of profits arising from contracts in the United Kingdom and Europe being shifted to the company’s US parent company, leaving relatively little taxable profit in the locations where the work is carried out.

In the UK, Palantir recorded a corporate tax charge of about two million pounds ($2.7m) in 2024, despite securing more than 670 million pounds ($900m) in government contracts in recent years.

CICTAR claims its investigation shows that Palantir shifts profits to the US, where earlier losses and tax breaks help it pay little or no federal corporate income tax.

Palantir has also benefitted from tax changes introduced under US President Donald Trump, including the reduction of the federal corporate rate from 35 percent to 21 percent in 2017.

The report does not allege that any of the arrangements identified are illegal. But they have raised ethical questions about whether a company receiving billions of dollars in public contracts worldwide should be able to contribute so little in tax.

A spokesperson for Palantir told the UK’s Guardian newspaper that it fully complies with all tax regimes. “Transfer pricing, which allocates a company’s profits among entities within the Palantir group of companies, is an entirely standard practice that is virtually universal for large multinational companies,” the spokesperson said.

Privacy Policy

Al Jazeera has contacted Palantir for comment about this story, but has not received a response.

What is Palantir?

The company was founded in 2003 by a group that included chief executive Alex Karp and billionaire technology investor Peter Thiel. Palantir initially received backing from In-Q-Tel, a nonprofit venture capital fund created in 1999 by the CIA to support high-tech startups developing technology for US intelligence and national security.

Palantir’s market value was around $370bn during early trading on the Nasdaq stock exchange on Thursday, making it one of the world’s biggest 50 publicly listed companies.

Palantir has faced growing controversy over its work with the Trump administration’s immigration authorities, including providing technology used by the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency. More than 60 people have died in ICE custody or been shot and killed during federal immigration enforcement operations since Donald Trump returned to office

According to the CICTAR report, Palantir technology enables agencies like ICE and the Department of Homeland Security “to merge vast datasets, including financial, immigration, and health records, without adequate transparency or consent, raising alarms over privacy violations, algorithmic bias, and the rise of the surveillance state”.

How is Palantir linked to Israel?

Palantir has said it has a “strategic partnership” with Israel. The company opened offices in Israel in 2015.

The CICTAR report states: “There was a ‘surge’ of investment into Israel in response to increased demand for Palantir software following the October 7 attacks, and a major strategic partnership was signed between Palantir and the Israeli Ministry of Defence in [January] 2024 for data analytics and AI.”

Open Intel, a research platform tracking corporate involvement in Israel’s war on Gaza, has found that Palantir has recruited former members of Unit 8200, the Israeli military’s elite cyberintelligence division.

Open Intel has also reported that Palantir’s software can combine intercepted communications, satellite imagery and other intelligence to help Israeli forces produce military targeting lists.

CEO Karp has defended the company’s support for Israel. “I am the most publicly supportive CEO of Israel,” he told CNBC earlier this year, adding: “I think Israel is on the side of good.”

Palantir has also faced scrutiny over its vision for the future of artificial intelligence.

In The Technological Republic, a book co-written by Karp and Palantir executive Nicholas W Zamiska, the pair argue that Silicon Valley has abandoned its responsibility to develop technology that strengthens Western military power alongside advanced AI capabilities.

Some critics have described the ideology as a form of “techno-fascism”.

2:40
  • Now Playing
    02:40
    From Gaza to ICE raids, why is US firm Palantir under scrutiny?

    From Gaza to ICE raids, why is US firm Palantir under scrutiny?

  • Next
    02:58
    War on Iran: Iran and Oman agree on Strait of Hormuz deal

    War on Iran: Iran and Oman agree on Strait of Hormuz deal




How much tax does Palantir pay in the US?

Palantir paid no US federal corporate income tax in 2025 and just $2.5m in state income taxes, according to the CICTAR report. It was the third consecutive year in which the company paid no federal corporate income tax in the US.

CICTAR says Palantir has built up more than $3.5bn in deferred tax assets through previous losses, research and development credits and deductions linked to shares awarded to employees. In simple terms, these tax benefits can be used to cancel out tax due on future profits.

The report estimates these could shelter Palantir’s next $16.5bn in profits, allowing it to avoid federal corporate income tax for many years.

Palantir has also benefitted from the 2017 corporate rate changes introduced under Trump.

“The current 21% US federal corporate income tax rate (reduced from 35% in 2017 during the first Trump administration) should have seen Palantir incurring a $348 million US federal income tax expense in 2025. However, it paid zero in US federal income tax and only $2.5 million in US state income taxes,” the report states.

24:15
Killing by remote control

How much tax does Palantir pay elsewhere?

Palantir paid less than $21.7m in income taxes globally in 2025, net of refunds, despite recording pretax profits of $1.66bn.

Its global tax expense was only $22.7m, meaning that both the tax it recorded in its accounts and the cash tax it actually paid amounted to little more than 1 percent of its pretax profit.

Outside the US, its largest disclosed cash tax payments were $5.8m in South Korea and $4.8m in Japan. It paid $2.8m in France, $1.7m in Germany and a combined $4.1m across all its other foreign markets.

The UK, Palantir’s largest market outside the US, was not listed among the countries where it made its largest tax payments, despite generating $427m in revenue there in 2025.

In its UK accounts for 2024, Palantir recorded a corporation tax charge of about 2 million pounds ($2.7m).

How does Palantir reduce its tax bill in Europe?

CICTAR says its investigations show that Palantir reduces its European taxes by leaving relatively little taxable profit in the countries where its staff operate and its contracts are delivered.

In 2025, 26 percent of Palantir’s revenue was generated outside the US, but only 4 percent of its pretax profit was recorded overseas. By contrast, 96 percent of its profits were booked in the US, where its accumulated tax benefits meant it paid no federal corporate income tax.

In several European countries, local Palantir subsidiaries operate largely as service providers to the US parent. This leaves them with narrow reported profit margins and correspondingly small tax bills.

Why do Palantir’s government contracts matter?

The CICTAR report states that Palantir’s tax arrangements are particularly significant because much of its rapid growth has been driven by public contracts.

In the US, the company holds multibillion-dollar contracts with government agencies, including the military, intelligence services and immigration authorities. More than half of Palantir’s revenue now comes from government customers, according to the report.

In the UK, Palantir holds at least 670 million pounds ($901m) in government contracts, including a 330 million-pound ($444m) agreement to build the National Health Service (NHS) Federated Data Platform and a 240 million-pound ($323m) Ministry of Defence contract awarded without a competitive tender.

The NHS contract has attracted criticism from health workers and digital rights groups, who have questioned the decision to entrust sensitive patient data to a company that has faced scrutiny over allegations that its technology has been used to aid Israel’s genocide in Gaza.

Although tax avoidance strategies can be legal and the report does not allege that Palantir has broken the law, CICTAR says Palantir “appears to do everything it can to avoid corporate income tax payments – the backbone of national economic security – which pay for the services it seeks to deliver, and many other essential public services”.

Duncan McCann, tech and data lead at the Good Law Project in the UK, told Al Jazeera the findings were “a slap in the face to ordinary taxpayers and local businesses who play by the rules”.

“It is completely unacceptable that multinational tech giants like Palantir are happy to extract huge profits from the UK market while allegedly exploiting accounting loopholes to dodge their corporate responsibilities,” he said.

Meanwhile, the UK Treasury’s own procurement guidance states that public bodies should not “engage in, or connive at, tax evasion, tax avoidance or tax planning” and should be vigilant not to facilitate tax arrangements that are “detrimental or disadvantageous to the Exchequer”.

Amnesty International has called on the UK government to reconsider Palantir’s government contracts. Both the UK government and NHS England should “cease the purchase of equipment and services from the company” until it can demonstrate it is “not contributing to Israel’s genocide, apartheid, unlawful occupation or other crimes under international law”, Amnesty said.

25:00
How Silicon Valley giants are turning into war contractors | All Hail the Military


 

Trump’s Gaza Board of Peace issues first building contract – for a military base

 

Trump’s Gaza Board of Peace issues first building contract – for a military base

 https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/aug/06/trump-gaza-board-of-peace-first-building-contract-military-base

In Gaza City, an excavator and workers search rubble of buildings destroyed in Israeli attacks
Palestinians use a digger to recover bodies under the rubble in devastated Gaza City earlier this year. The Board of Peace is no longer talking of reconstructing the whole strip. Photograph: Anadolu/Getty Images

Trump’s Gaza Board of Peace issues first building contract – for a military base

Exclusive: Louisiana firm awarded tender to build rudimentary outpost to house Moroccan troops

Donald Trump’s Board of Peace, which was set up in January to oversee the reconstruction of Gaza, has finally issued its first construction contract in the devastated territory: a project to build a rudimentary 150-person military outpost to house Moroccan troops, a source familiar with the matter told the Guardian.

The contract, which has not yet been finalised, was awarded to Arkel International, a Louisiana-based firm that has previously carried out work with the US government in countries such as Iraq.

The Board of Peace is chaired by the US president and led by a team that includes his son-in-law Jared Kushner and friend Steve Witkoff.

In an email, a Board of Peace official said the board and a group of Palestinian technocrats installed to oversee Gaza “are in the final stages of preparing several contract awards. None have been finalised.” The Palestinian group is known as the National Committee for the Administration of Gaza.

The official said “one prospective contract concerns facilities to support the international stabilisation force (ISF), which will assist in implementing the roadmap’s security and governance arrangements”.

They added: “This contract will be one of many that are essential for the future of Gaza.”

The award comes just days after Trump announced that Hamas had agreed to disarm, though there are considerable questions about how the group would give up its guns. Israel has opposed the plan, and increased airstrikes in Gaza after Trump’s announcement.

The Guardian reported in July that the board’s original Gaza reconstruction had shrunk dramatically from an ambitious blueprint to rebuild the whole territory to a small pilot project in the south of the strip.

The base now being planned is just 100 metres by 120 metres and is intended to house a contingent of Moroccan troops, who would rotate from a base in Israel, the source said. It would lie in the 60% of Gaza’s territory that the Israeli army directly controls. Israeli forces have also created a buffer zone beyond that area.

The source said the base was about a mile from the Israeli border and would have a “quick extraction route” in case the small force came under attack.

Screen showing glitzy buildings under title New Gaza
Donald Trump’s original grandiose vision of a reconstructed Gaza is displayed by the president at the World Economic Forum meeting at Davos on 22 January.

The UN resolution authorising the Board of Peace had approved establishing an “international stabilisation force” for Gaza, and there have been varying reports on which country would provide these troops. Morocco has promised a small contingent, but the legal framework for the ISF has yet to be finalised, and it is not clear when the deployment would begin.

In earlier contract plans seen by the Guardian, the 150-person base was the first phase of a plan to build a 5,000-person military base in Gaza for the ISF.

This base would have included “vehicle fighting positions” and a perimeter berm – or raised defensive bank – and would have rudimentary facilities suitable for short-term deployments. The earlier contract said the first phase would consist of “tents and cots for forces to sleep, as well as chemical toilets and handwashing stations. At this phase, this is what we would consider habitable.”

Trump announced in February 2025 that the US would “take over” and “own” Gaza, although the agreement that set up the Board of Peace fell short of that.

At the board’s first meeting in January, Kushner unveiled a “master plan” to build “New Gaza” with an expansive waterfront city with gleaming mixed-use towers. “It could be a hope, it could be a destination. A lot of industry,” he said.

At least 80% of Gaza’s buildings were damaged or destroyed in the war. Ten months after the ceasefire, most of the territory’s 2 million people are still living in makeshift and unsanitary camps.

Congratulations on being one of our top readers globally – you've read 278 articles in the last year
Article count

At this dangerous time

We hope you appreciated this article. Before you close this tab, we want to ask if you could support the Guardian at this dangerous time for journalism in the US. Until August 9th, you can get 50% off our most impactful monthly support options.

According to a leading global watchdog, American democracy is now more imperiled than at any point since the 1960s, marked by a precipitous decline in press freedom – driven by mounting pressure from the Trump administration in the form of threats, criminal investigations, politicized regulation, frivolous lawsuits and, for public media, catastrophic funding cuts. 

Meanwhile, organizations that are supposed to be independent like the FBI and the FCC, our radio and television regulator, have also been targeting press freedom under Trump-aligned leadership, with the FBI raiding a reporter’s home and the FCC threatening ABC’s TV licenses after Jimmy Kimmel made a joke about Melania Trump.

The response from some ultra-wealthy and corporate media owners, keen to appease the president, has been chilling: CBS News has been taken over by a Trump ally; CNN may be taken over by the same billionaire; Jeff Bezos has continued to impose cuts and editorial interventions at the Washington Post; and multiple outlets have settled multimillion-dollar lawsuits from the administration to protect their business interests.

Democracy is best served by a robust, thriving free press. But when that freedom is under attack, it falls to a determined few news organizations to ensure the full truth still reaches the public. Owned neither by a billionaire nor a corporation, the Guardian remains dedicated to covering this administration with uncompromising moral and factual clarity – and to keeping trustworthy journalism paywall-free for the world.

Despite the risks of maintaining our fierce independence, what sustains us – and fills us with deep gratitude – is the unwavering support we’ve seen from readers. It is no exaggeration to say that we are here because of you: a majority of our funding comes directly from people like you responding to messages like this. Your support not only powers our work, but more importantly, it safeguards the financial independence that underpins our editorial freedom and courage.

We know our requests for support are not as welcome as our reporting, but without them, it’s simple: our reporting wouldn’t exist. Of course, we understand that some readers are not in a position to support us, and if that is you, we value your readership no less.

But if you are able, please support us today. All gifts are gratefully received, but until August 9th, we are offering a 50% discount for six months off our most impactful monthly support options. (Among the great benefits you get in return: you’ll see far fewer annoying fundraising messages like this.) It takes just 37 seconds to set up. Thank you for considering.

50% off

Related stories

  • Trump says ‘complete disarmament’ of Hamas agreed in Gaza but Israel yet to accept

  • Trump’s Board of Peace drops full Gaza recovery plan in favour of tiny pilot scheme

  • Trump’s Board of Peace plans to grant itself sweeping immunity, documents show

  • Troops for Gaza and money top agenda as Trump’s Board of Peace meets

  • Major European allies decline to join first meeting of Trump’s Board of Peace

  • Trump claims world ‘richer, safer’ than year ago at launch of his ‘board of peace’

  • Netanyahu flies home without a Gaza peace deal but still keeps Trump onside

  • Phase one of US Middle East peace plan greeted with scepticism

More from News

  • Anthony Fauci
    US Senate panel votes to hold Fauci in contempt of Congress over Covid hearing

  • Exclusive
    Emails reveal Palmer Luckey’s political fundraising as his company wins sole-source contracts

  • Washington state
    Firefighters start to contain Washington state wildfires as tens of thousands remain displaced

  • US
    The mRNA technology behind Moderna’s Covid vaccine reaches the flu

  • Economy
    Most Americans view rising living costs as biggest barrier to a better life, survey finds

  • Florida
    Florida Democrat switches districts after DeSantis redistricting shake-up

  • Media
    Perez Hilton ‘able to communicate’ after hospitalization following live stream

  • North Carolina
    Miss North Carolina USA stripped of title after alleged racist posts resurface

 

How to Fight a Cloud

How to Fight a Cloud

https://slate.com/technology/2026/08/ai-data-centers-protests-maryland.html 

 

How to Fight a Cloud

Communities across the country are trying to keep data centers out. A victory in Maryland shows a blueprint—but no guarantees.

A state capitol building with protesters on the steps making a huge sign that spells out No Data Centers.
Natalie Behring/Getty Images

Sign up for the Slatest to get the most insightful analysis, criticism, and advice out there, delivered to your inbox daily.

When the Qualified Data Center Task Force for Prince George’s County, Maryland, held its fourth public meeting on a rainy morning last September, dozens of people gathered for the occasion and lined up around the block—an uncommon audience size for this government-sanctioned group. “I’d decided to host a rally prior to it, and so many people turned out,” Taylor Frazier McCollum, who lives in the town of Landover, told me. She’d been looking for some space, any space, to register her community’s concerns around a data center campus that had been proposed for their small, majority-Black town, in a plan that encompassed five buildings, 87 acres, 820 megawatts of power—and, bafflingly, little public awareness effort.

The task force meeting—featuring local elected officials, union leaders, tech-company representatives, business advocacy orgs, and a few activists—seemed like a place where residents could raise objections. But the task force had arranged the meeting in a manner where public comment was restricted to Post-it notes, on which attendees could only pen their thoughts and stick them up on whiteboards. “What we didn’t realize was that the public can watch, but there’s no talking allowed,” Michael Lavina, a protest organizer and volunteer with the local chapter of the Party for Socialism and Liberation, told me. “Some of those people told me, ‘I live across the street from this Landover site, and I had no idea they were building this data center there.’ ”

But what the attendees couldn’t say out loud was at least conveyed by their massive presence: They would not let a data center go up without their input. Just after that mobilization, Prince George’s County Executive Aisha Braveboy halted the Landover groundbreaking and imposed a temporary pause on all new hyperscale data center permits in the area (referring specifically to computing facilities that require large amounts of land for establishment, water for cooling, and power for operation). Last month, following months of feedback and organizing actions by McCollum, Lavina, and the broader Prince George’s community, the County Council extended that permit pause for two years. That such an initiative got consistent governmental support in the second-largest county in Maryland, an already data center–dense state that was vying for even more tech infrastructure barely a year ago, is a remarkable tell as to how the A.I. tides are shifting. That it got passed in the same week that saw New York’s governor sign the country’s first-ever statewide data center moratorium—and saw capital cities like Lansing, Michigan, and Jackson, Mississippi, approve their own pauses—likewise demonstrates how widespread this popular opposition really is.

In many ways, it feels like an inflection point in which more community leaders and elected officials are listening to their concerned constituents and hitting the pause button on development for now. But an even bigger fight is at hand: whether these halts on buildouts will eventually lead to permanent bans, or whether elected officials are just kicking the clankers down the road. The saga of Prince George’s County will be a telling preview of that next battlefront.

It was hard enough even getting to this point. The Landover data center site was proposed by Lerner Enterprises, a D.C.-based real estate firm that’s operated by the family that owns the Washington Nationals and has rights to that fallow lot. After failing to persuade the FBI to site its new headquarters on that land back in 2023, the company decided to capitalize on the A.I. data center rush, announcing the following year that it would transform the demolished mall into an artificial intelligence “tech park.” The Landover plan earned the quick approval of the PGC Planning Department, which cited the region’s desperate need for tax revenue. Construction was scheduled for January 2026.

One problem was that the location is not exactly remote; the torn-down mall once served families who live in an apartment complex right next door, with a school, a hospital, and a childcare center nearby. Another was that few in Landover seemed to even know about the development plan, much less have the chance to weigh in on it.

McCollum had only heard about the tech park from a neighbor in February 2025—and immediately grew concerned, having already seen reports about big data centers’ impacts in residential Georgia, from water use to noise pollution. “I saw a video showing how noise and light pollution was affecting the people daily, and how they couldn’t sleep,” she said.

Inspired to dig up more details around the Lerner Enterprises project, McCollum found out that the firm could evade substantive public feedback, thanks to a law the PGC Council passed in 2021 designating data centers as an appropriate land use under existing zoning regulations. In a pre-ChatGPT, post-pandemic moment when PGC was looking at ways to revive economic growth without raising taxes, data centers seemed a reasonable bet: They were already a feature of the country landscape, had not yet garnered political controversy, and were not yet at consistent hyperscale size. The council thus gave the county’s Planning Department broader discretion over the approval of data center proposals so as to “fast-track” their construction.

“We worked with various agencies on incentivizing these centers in the county because we realized they were such an economic driver, and there were a lot of financial benefits” like tax revenue and local employment opportunities, James Hunt, acting deputy director of the PGC Planning Department, told me. “We reached out to Loudoun County in Virginia, whose budget was in the red before they started welcoming more data centers. Now they’re operating in the black.” (Loudoun recently began considering a pause on data center expansion, thanks to constant complaints from residents now disgruntled with the constant noise.)

As for the Landover proposal, Hunt insists that “we did give public notice, and the only speakers who weighed in on the project were from the town of Glenarden. It was after approval that more of the public seemed to get wind.”

That recognition came about thanks in significant part to McCollum’s efforts. Throughout 2025, she contacted her council reps, started a Change.org petition, and posted Facebook videos about the campus, warning that sizable data centers in other states had led to environmental pollution, costlier utility bills, and lower property values. This put her on the radar of the local Party for Socialism and Liberation chapter, which asked if it could include her in an Instagram reel about the Landover project. “They had a much bigger following, so I knew it would help get more signatures,” McCollum said. “But when we posted it that September, it just went viral. People posted it on TikTok. We ended up getting over 20,000 signatures.” McCollum thus became the face of the burgeoning data center backlash in Landover.

At first, this motley crew of activists took care to insist they were not against data centers writ large. “Data centers, while necessary in a digital age, are industrial facilities that demand substantial electrical power and cooling resources,” McCollum wrote in her petition. “It’s imperative that the community has a voice in such significant changes.” Likewise, Michael Lavina, who’s also a Hyattsville-based software engineer, told me he’s “not anti-tech.”

“I build A.I. applications, I like Netflix, and I think networks of data centers have value,” he said. To Lavina, however, hyperscale campuses like the Landover park are not comparable to a standard Maryland data center that may consume a few dozen megawatts of power at most. “We’re talking about two different pieces of technology,” he added. “I’ve heard officials say, ‘We had data centers before,’ And I’m like, ‘Landover would be bigger than any of the others.’ ”

The skepticism also extended beyond data centers, factoring in previous economic development promises that never quite lived up. “People approached us to say, ‘They promised the same with the MGM Casino, that it would get built here and solve all our problems with revenue. All I see is traffic, roads are still unbuilt, and I’m still having an affordability crisis,’ ” Lavina said.

These messages seemed to get through to the PGC government. After McCollum’s video gained widespread attention, Braveboy issued a six-month pause on data center permits by executive order, calling the government’s 2021 decision to fast-track data center approval “a huge mistake,” because “residents have a stake in where these data centers are located.” She still praised computing facilities themselves as a “really good economic tool” and noted that the Qualified Data Center Task Force was working to outline recommendations on how PGC should approach hyperscale centers going forward.

“The council wanted to get more insight and information on data centers, because they were being told by constituents about their impacts to water quality, noise, air, other pollutants,” said Hunt, explaining how the task force came to be. The group also included members like County Council member Wala Blegay, who was elected after the 2021 fast-track legislation passed and had joined other newer, younger local lawmakers in largely voting against incentives for Big Business. “We have a lot of development throughout this county. Frankly, not every development in this county is quality,” she told Maryland Matters early in her tenure.
When it came to hyperscale data centers, Blegay likewise emphasized the need for countywide standards instead of deciding key matters, such as clean vs. dirty energy sources, on a project-by-project basis.

Such a sympathetic ear on the task force allowed for activists to push for an extra meeting in October; McCollum made sure to spread the word and ensure an even bigger community turnout. Yet again, they found their voices stymied, their input limited to Post-it notes. (Hunt explained that the task force made a decision not to change the usual format of their meetings.) “We were able to get almost 500 people to that meeting, and they still would not let us say anything. One person decided to start demanding that we speak, banging on the tables, and the rest of the room erupted in the same chant,” McCollum said. “That finally gave some of us the opportunity to address the crowd.” It also gave them a spotlight on local news.

“I think the community outpouring really got officials to change their mind because they have not seen something of this magnitude done in Prince George’s County,” said McCollum. “At least in my lifetime, I haven’t seen so many people organize for one effort.” Government representatives finally appeared to understand the depth of opposition. Council member Jolene Ivey, who’d originally favored the fast-track legislation, came out against the Landover proposal and told the Maryland Daily Record that she supported “strict guidelines” on data center approvals. The task force released a final report.

Such turnabouts among pro–data center politicians aren’t limited to PGC. In Michigan, where Gov. Gretchen Whitmer controversially appeared for a data center groundbreaking alongside OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, outright data center opponents have won Democratic primaries; for her part, Whitmer has come to demand concessions from data center builders, including commitments to covering energy costs and employing people within the Mitten. In deep-red Utah, state Senate President Stuart Adams was ousted from his longtime district by a GOP primary challenger who’d opposed a Kevin O’Leary–sponsored A.I. campus that Adams helped initially approve. (His belated requests for O’Leary to reduce the planned acreage taken up by the data center clearly weren’t enough, and came much too late.) Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, who’s running for a fourth term, had boasted last year about planning more Google data centers than any other state; this week, he sent a letter to his electricity regulators instructing them to pause approvals on new centers until they can complete a thorough energy audit.

Other A.I.-boosting politicians have begun adapting their messages to the times—albeit with some caveats. New York Gov. Kathy Hochul, a techno-optimistic moderate Democrat, passed an executive order pausing hyperscale permits for a year after the Legislature sent an anti-data-center bill to her desk. While Hochul’s action has been celebrated, it’s not lost on anyone that she sidestepped a bill with more aggressive data center constraints, including renewable energy sourcing requirements, from New York lawmakers. State Sen. Liz Kruger, a co-sponsor of that measure, wrote to me that it “has clearer and stronger requirements to protect ratepayers, water resources, clean air, the climate, and grid reliability, as well as community input” than the executive order. She still referred to the governor’s action as a “good first step.”

Meanwhile, activists like McCollum have expanded their focus to opposing all hyperscale data centers, taking Lavina’s perspective that bigger facilities are not worth the potential economic payoff. But as the PGC moratorium bill neared a council vote, these activists were soon facing opposition from locals like Ursula Franklin, former program manager for the Pride Center of Maryland, who’d show up to county meetings and anti–data center rallies with countering messages of their own. “They’re everywhere in the U.S. and other countries, and we have to know technology is going to move forward,” Franklin told a local ABC7 station. “Why not bring something to the county that can be long-lasting?” Franklin added that she wasn’t against a moratorium, but very much wanted to ensure it was temporary, not permanent.

That clash of both public and governmental priorities meant that the final two-year moratorium came with some inconvenient carveouts. “There’s a clause that if the county passes a reform bill that has some regulation on data centers, then this ban is lifted,” Lavina explained. That may already be on the way, via a newly introduced council amendment that would allow bigger data centers to be sited in rural and agricultural areas instead of residential corners—a move the organizers oppose.

Plus, Lavina and McCollum and the community members they organized don’t just want hyperscale centers out of all PGC land; they also want the Landover proposal to be killed for good. “The county executive order that paused the Landover park expires on Sept. 30, and if it’s not renewed, Lerner can go ahead and build because they got the permits before this moratorium was passed,” said Lavina. In other words, the mall site that launched the entire movement could see the tech park go ahead if the county executive fails to follow her own rhetoric, even if the two-year moratorium otherwise lasts.

The Prince George’s County moratorium is thus a testament to how community resistance can hold elected officials to account—but also a note of caution. It’s one thing to impose a pause for a period of time. It’s another to actually make use of that time and figure out where to go next. So far, only one American city—Monterey Park, California—has passed a permanent data center ban of the kind McCollum would prefer; it’s unlikely that too many other municipalities, which generally need to maintain balanced budgets, will go so far. New moratoriums rarely tend to address extant data center projects, as seen in Landover’s case, and are even fuzzier when it comes to future policy. If data centers will continue to be permitted down the line, how big can they be, where will they get built, what sorts of tax and revenue and community benefits will be arranged, where will the power come from, and who will be on the hook for that cost? And what happens if a developer comes in and starts a project anyway, only to ultimately back out? For now, politicians of all ideological stripes in just about every state—Wisconsin, Oregon, Florida—are seeing favorability boosts from rhetorical data center opposition. But the details will be all the more important, as activists may not be pacified by temporary measures. It’s so meaningful to them that many are risking arrest.

In McCollum’s case, she’s now taking this fight to a higher authority that could stop all of this once and for all, if it wants to: the Maryland Legislature. “The next step is to take this momentum and work toward a statewide ban,” she said. “I want people to know that data centers aren’t just going to come to their backyard.”