Nebraska lawmakers have just passed Bill 526 (LB526), and although there is no clear anti-countercoin, its impact may be only neutral. By a 49-0 unanimous vote, the Legislature sent the bill to the desk of Governor Jim Pillen, which is expected to be signed into law. Supporters call it the Common Sense Infrastructure Act. Bitcoin miners call it slow movement in manufacturing.
On paper, LB526 is about large energy users. But in reality, it can pick out Bitcoin mining facilities at a megawatt (MW) or greater load and level, while in operational constraints it looks more like a punishment than a policy.
Cost transfer, public humiliation and cuts
At the heart of LB526 is a task: miners must bear the cost of any infrastructure upgrades needed to support their needs. After a “load study” is conducted, the utility has the right to claim direct payment or letter of credit. Although the law pays for oral services to “fair” and non-discriminatory, it is clear who the target is. Bitcoin miners are the only industry named.
In addition, mining operators must inform the utility in advance, submit their interconnection requirements, and critically accept interrupted services. This means that when the grid becomes tight, it is the miner that turns black first. Is voluntary demand response a sign of the grid-friendly posture of Bitcoin mining? Instead, ruling and utility discretion are sanctions.
and kickers: Publicly disclose energy consumption. Utilities must publish annual energy use for each mining operation. For other data-heavy sectors, there is no such requirement – not for cloud computing, not for AI clusters, not for Amazon data centers. Just Bitcoin. This is not only monitoring, but also signal.
Taxes that do not exist and fees that still exist
To its credit, the Legislature abandoned an early rule that would increase the mining tax of 2.5 cents/kWh. This punitive tax will increase the typical industrial tax rate by 50%. This tax will be a public statement of hostility. Delete this is necessary. But it’s not enough.
Because what still exists in LB526 is not very obvious, but equally effective deterrent: uncertainty. Miners are already operating on razors and seek jurisdictions with predictable electricity costs and clear rules. Instead, Nebraska provides infrastructure tolls, reducing and regulatory focus as appropriate.
Market response: Miners’ warning
Industry leaders are not silent. Marathon Digital Holdings, one of the largest public mining companies, testified that it has invested nearly $200 million in Nebraska and paid more than $6.5 million in taxes, warning that further expansion could be cancelled if LB526 passes.
Their message is clear: Nebraska is a pro-mining, affectionate jurisdiction. But the signal from LB526 indicates that miners are unpopular, or at best, second-class citizens in the energy economy. As one executive said, “If the same rules do not apply to other energy-intensive industries, it has nothing to do with infrastructure, but about discrimination.”
Others warned that mandatory cuts replaced cooperating grid services with coercion. Bitcoin miners can and can provide real-time load shedding to stabilize the grid during peak demand. However, this value proposition only works when there is a market signal. LB526 turns it into responsibility.
Politics, Power and Utilities
Mike Jacobson, the sponsor of the bill, insists that LB526 is agnostic about Bitcoin. “It’s about electricity,” he said. But it’s hard to align with bills that target surgery.
Jacobson pointed at Kearney, half of the city’s power entered a mining facility. However, instead of seeing dispatchable industrial customers willing to expand or expand downward according to grid demand, the Legislature chose risk aversion and central planning.
In Nebraska’s public power model, it’s important. With all utilities in utilities, the state’s regulatory posture is not consulting, but exists. There are no retail competitions. If Nebraska’s authority starts treating Bitcoin miners like unreliable freeloaders instead of willing partners, miners have no recourse. Just an exit.
Currently, LB526 is only waiting for the governor’s signature. Given that LB526 was introduced at the request of the Governor, it is likely to be signed. Once formulated, it will come into effect on October 1, 2025. Before this, the miner must decide: adapt, relocate or fold.
States such as Texas, Wyoming and North Dakota are moving in the opposite direction, providing tax clarity, grid integration and legal protection. Nebraska has been shortlisted and may find itself falling off the radar.
Bitcoin mining does not require handouts. But it does require an equal basis. LB526 imposes costs, limiting flexibility and broadcast suspicion. If the goal is to strike a balance between innovation and infrastructure, there are many shortcomings in execution.
Because when one industry bears the burden and others are exempted, when voluntary partnerships are replaced by authorization, and when there is no clear reason to make operational data public, it is not difficult to see why miners think that LB526 is not regulation, but retaliation.
This is a guest post by Colin Crossman. The opinions expressed are entirely their own and do not necessarily reflect BTC, Inc. or Bitcoin Magazine.
