Where AI’s Power Boom Meets Tech Workers’ Tax Bills

Gas has a leading role in supplying U.S. data centers. The next challenge is adding power without handing the bill to households.

By Sharif Matar, Founder, Fieldvest

People at some of the biggest technology companies are asking me about oil and gas. The questions are practical: could an investment reduce the tax on a high salary or a stock sale, and does AI’s growing need for electricity make the investment itself more attractive?

I work in technology, so I understand the appeal of investing in the infrastructure behind it. But I want to follow the connection beyond the headline. A gas well, a pipeline and a power plant earn money in different ways. Recognizing demand for electricity is the beginning of that work.

My product-design background shapes how I think about AI demand. An agent completing a task may search, run software, check its work and try again. Measuring the first prompt misses much of that activity. Efficiency is improving quickly, while the amount and complexity of work we ask AI to perform are also changing. www.iea.org

The timetable matters. Berkeley Lab’s June 2026 report projects that data centers could consume roughly 12% of U.S. electricity in 2030 in its reference case. Its scenarios vary widely, but the infrastructure decisions fall within this decade. The power has to be available where the servers are being built. www.energy.gov

Natural gas has a leading role in that near-term U.S. picture. The IEA’s 2025 analysis estimated that gas supplied more than 40% of U.S. data-center electricity, making it the largest single source. It also projected gas would provide the largest addition to that supply through 2030, with renewables close behind. Gas generation’s ability to supply power when required helps explain its importance. IEA

The IEA’s October 2026 report describes numerous proposed onsite gas projects in the United States, with some advancing alongside technology customers. Many are still proposals, and equipment delivery times remain a constraint. IEA

Then comes the question of who pays. Where a data center requires new generation or grid upgrades, spreading those costs across all utility customers can raise other people’s bills. The IEA’s latest analysis makes that distinction clear. Adding supply matters; so does making the customer responsible for the capacity built to serve it. IEA

On March 4, 2026, Amazon, Google, Meta, Microsoft, OpenAI, Oracle and xAI signed the Ratepayer Protection Pledge. They committed to securing new or additional generation for their demand and paying for the necessary power-delivery upgrades. The pledge also calls for payments even when the companies do not use the power reserved for them. It is a corporate pledge, not a nationwide requirement to build gas plants. The White House

Binding requirements are taking shape locally. AEP Ohio’s approved data-center tariff includes minimum capacity payments, initial contracts lasting eight to 12 years, and protection against abandoned projects. These terms address a basic problem: a utility can spend money preparing for a large customer that later uses less power or never arrives. aepohio.com

This is the connection I find most compelling. The AI buildout increasingly involves financing the energy system around the data center. For gas-fired generation, that includes dependable fuel supply. Additional domestic gas production can be part of meeting that need, alongside pipeline capacity, power plants and grid upgrades. Additional fuel supply can ease pressure on fuel costs. Contracts and tariffs determine who pays for the infrastructure serving the new demand.

For an individual investor, the next step is tracing how a particular project benefits. Where will the gas be sold? Can it reach the relevant market? What price does the project need to earn an acceptable return? An oil-heavy project needs a separate case: petroleum supplies only a small fraction of U.S. electricity. The broad label “oil and gas” can hide that difference. www.eia.gov

The tax questions are real, too. Under IRS rules, an oil or gas working interest held directly, or through an entity that does not limit the investor’s liability, can be nonpassive without material participation. Eligible deductions may therefore reduce taxable income that includes wages, subject to other limits. That ownership and liability structure is essential to the analysis. www.irs.gov

Qualifying intangible drilling and development costs may be deductible in the current year. Suppose a hypothetical $100,000 investment includes $75,000 of those costs, all deductible that year against income otherwise taxed at 35%. The simplified regular federal income-tax reduction would be $26,250, before alternative minimum tax, state taxes and other interactions. The investor still commits $100,000; the project’s cash flow determines what comes back from that investment. www.irs.gov

Someone selling company shares needs a separate calculation. The benefit of an allowable deduction depends on the mix of ordinary income and capital gains on the return. An oil and gas investment does not create a special exclusion for stock gains. The tax savings in a salary example cannot simply be carried over to a stock sale. www.irs.gov

Basis, at-risk and business-loss limits can restrict or delay deductions. Alternative minimum tax can change the benefit, and a later taxable sale at a gain can trigger recapture of earlier deductions. I would want an independent tax professional to work through the actual investment documents and my full return. www.irs.gov

I would also want to see the project’s cash flow before tax benefits, the operator’s record, fees, production assumptions and any obligation to contribute more capital. For people in tech, there is another consideration: a salary, company shares and an energy investment tied to AI can all depend on the same growth story. Buying a different asset does not necessarily spread that risk.

I see a serious reason for people in technology to understand American energy. The companies building AI need dependable power on a demanding schedule, and they are increasingly being asked to finance the supply and infrastructure that make it possible. That is the opportunity I would investigate first. Then I would calculate what the tax treatment changes.