- The Trump administration is developing a policy to require major tech companies to fully cover the electricity, water, and grid infrastructure costs of their expanding AI data centers.
- The move aims to prevent these costs from being passed on to utility ratepayers amid rising national energy prices.
- A draft voluntary "compact" has been circulated to companies like Microsoft, Google, Amazon, and Meta, outlining commitments to protect consumers from price hikes.
- The initiative follows state and federal pressure on the nation's largest grid operator to make tech firms finance new power generation.
- The policy reflects growing political concern over the economic burden of AI infrastructure and its impact on household affordability.
As the artificial intelligence boom triggers an unprecedented expansion of power-hungry data centers across the United States, the Trump administration is formulating a response to a critical question: Who should pay to keep the lights on? With electricity prices climbing and regional grids straining under new demand, White House officials are advancing a policy framework designed to ensure the technology companies driving this growth—not American households—absorb the full financial burden of their infrastructure’s utility and resiliency costs.
A Policy to "Internalize" Costs
The administration’s point man on the issue, Senior Trade and Manufacturing Adviser Peter Navarro, outlined the approach in a recent television appearance. He stated that data center builders, from Meta on down, must be made to “pay for all, all of the costs,” including not only their direct electricity and water consumption but also the broader costs of ensuring grid reliability. “They need to pay for the resiliency that they’re affecting as well,” Navarro said, indicating the White House is evaluating measures to force companies to “internalize” these expenses. The goal is explicit: to prevent corporate power usage from inflating consumer utility bills.
This administrative push aligns with actions already taken at the state level. In January, the White House joined several states in urging PJM Interconnection, the grid operator for data-center-heavy regions like Northern Virginia and New Jersey, to require large technology firms to finance billions in new power generation capacity. Energy Secretary Chris Wright emphasized the urgency, noting, “Perhaps no region in America is more at risk than in PJM.”
The Compact: A Voluntary Pact with Teeth
Behind the scenes, the administration has been circulating a draft voluntary agreement, or “compact,” for major AI firms like Microsoft, Google, Amazon, and Meta to sign. According to documents obtained by POLITICO, the pact would bind companies to a set of principles ensuring their expansion does not raise household electricity prices, strain water resources, or undermine grid reliability. Core commitments include:
- Paying 100% of the cost for new power generation and transmission upgrades required for their facilities.
- Working to establish rates that protect, or ideally reduce, residential electricity prices in their operating areas.
- Committing to being “water positive” and mitigating community impacts like noise and traffic.
The compact represents a strategic effort to shape the AI infrastructure boom without formal regulation, while addressing a growing political vulnerability. President Trump has touted early cooperation, announcing a deal with Microsoft and promising more agreements are forthcoming.
Industry Pushback and Political Stakes
Technology companies have been quick to assert they are already responsible corporate actors. A Meta spokesperson stated, “Meta pays the full costs for energy used by our data centers so they aren’t passed onto consumers — and we go beyond that by paying for new and upgraded local infrastructure.” Industry groups argue that well-structured agreements can make data centers a net positive for grid stability and costs.
However, the political context is charged. With electricity prices rising significantly and “affordability” becoming a central theme for the opposition, the administration faces pressure to demonstrate it is protecting consumers from the downstream effects of corporate expansion. Navarro attempted to link current price pressures to the policies of the previous Biden administration, but polls show voters increasingly holding the current leadership accountable for economic conditions.
A Historical Crossroads for Infrastructure
The clash echoes historical moments when rapid technological advancement collided with public infrastructure limits. The expansion of the electrical grid itself in the early 20th century required navigating who financed growth—utilities, industrial users, or the public. Today’s data center surge presents a modern parallel, testing how the costs of foundational digital infrastructure are socialized. The administration’s policy leans toward a user-pays model, placing the onus squarely on the private sector beneficiaries.
Securing the Grid’s Future
As the 2026 midterm elections approach, the administration’s maneuvering on data center costs is more than a utility dispute; it is a political imperative and a test of industrial policy. The outcome will influence whether the AI revolution strengthens the nation’s energy grid as a byproduct of private investment or exacerbates the financial strain on American consumers. The White House’s compact, and any stronger measures that may follow, seek to ensure that the power needed to fuel the next generation of technology does not dim the economic security of the average citizen.
Sources for this article include:
Please contact us for more information.
