No Secrets for Data Centers Act of 2026
- Sponsor
- Rep. Landsman, Greg [D-OH-1]
- Committees
- Ways and Means Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Sep 24, 2026
Bottom line
The bill aims to increase transparency around the development of large data centers, especially concerning their interactions with public entities and resources, by limiting the use of secrecy clauses in contracts.
What it actually does
This bill voids and makes unenforceable certain predispute nondisclosure clauses related to the construction of large data centers, particularly when public officials or public funds, land, or incentives are involved. It also prohibits data center operators from receiving public incentives if those incentives are conditioned on restricting disclosure of information related to data center building.
Proponents argue
Supporters argue that the rapid expansion of large data centers, often subsidized by public incentives, occurs with insufficient public oversight due to restrictive nondisclosure agreements. This bill would empower communities, local governments, and the public to access crucial information about the environmental, infrastructure, and economic impacts of these developments, ensuring greater accountability and informed decision-making.
Opponents contend
Opponents might contend that such a limitation on nondisclosure clauses could compromise proprietary information, trade secrets, and competitive strategies of data center operators, potentially deterring investment and innovation in the sector. They may argue that existing regulatory frameworks are sufficient and that this bill could create unnecessary burdens or expose sensitive project details prematurely.
The bill is very short and can be read quickly, allowing ample time for stakeholders to understand its provisions.
Section 2(a)
Limitation on Enforceability of Nondisclosure Clauses
This section makes any "covered predispute nondisclosure clause" invalid and unenforceable in court or arbitration proceedings, specifically when it relates to the building of a data center. This means that if a contract includes a clause designed to keep information secret before a dispute arises, and that contract involves public officials or public resources for a data center project, that secrecy clause cannot be legally enforced.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue this provision is crucial for public accountability, allowing communities and their representatives to openly discuss and scrutinize data center projects that often rely on public subsidies or land, and have significant local impacts on infrastructure, energy, and water.
Critics contend
Opponents might argue that this provision could expose sensitive business information, such as construction techniques, supply chain details, or future expansion plans, which are vital for competitive advantage and could be exploited by rivals.
Tradeoffs
The provision balances the public's right to information and governmental transparency against the private sector's need to protect proprietary business information and maintain competitive advantages in a rapidly evolving industry.
Section 2(b)
Public Incentives and Disclosure Conditions
This section prevents data center operators from receiving any public incentives (like tax breaks, grants, or loans) if those incentives are contingent on the operator agreeing to prohibit, restrict, or penalize the disclosure of information related to the data center's construction. It aims to ensure that public money is not used to enforce secrecy around projects.
Section 2(c)(4)
Scope of "Data Center"
This section defines "data center" as any facility (or group of facilities) primarily used for processing, storing, and transmitting digital information, with a maximum rated power capacity or projected peak power load greater than 50 megawatts. This specific power threshold is critical for determining which facilities fall under the bill's purview.
This section clarifies that the Act does not override State or local laws that offer greater protection for free speech regarding nondisclosure clauses. It also explicitly permits the confidential filing of data center building information with public utility commissions or similar state agencies, provided such filing is not for the purpose of receiving a public incentive.
Section 2(e)
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice for clarifying the scope and interaction with existing laws, ensuring the bill doesn't inadvertently create conflicts or overreach.
Case for: Supporters would argue this provision is essential to prevent federal preemption of stronger state transparency laws and to preserve necessary confidential filings with regulatory bodies, ensuring the bill targets secrecy related to public incentives and public officials, not legitimate regulatory processes.
Case against: Critics might argue that the carve-out for confidential filings with utility commissions could still allow some information to remain hidden from the public, even if not directly tied to public incentives, potentially undermining the bill's overall transparency goals.
Estimated impact: Ensures state and local governments retain authority for stronger transparency measures and allows for legitimate confidential regulatory filings, potentially narrowing the scope of information made public compared to a blanket disclosure requirement.