Nebraska lawmakers have just passed legislative bill 526 (LB526) and are not expressly anti-Bitcoin, but their effects may be non-neutral. With a unanimous 49-0 vote, Congress will send the bill to Gov. Jim Pillen’s desk, where the law will be signed. Supporters call it a common sense infrastructure bill. Bitcoin Miner calls it a slow escape in manufacturing.
On paper, the LB526 is about large energy users. But in reality, they use one megawatt (MW) or a larger load and layer of operational constraints that appear to be more punishment than policy to pick out Bitcoin mining facilities.
Cost shifts, public shame, and reductions
At the heart of the LB526 is a mission. Miners must pay for the costs of upgrading the infrastructure needed to support demand. The utility is authorized to request direct payments or letters of credit after conducting a “load survey.” And while the law pays lip service to “fairness” and non-discrimination, it’s clear who the target is. Bitcoin miners are the only industry to be named.
Additionally, mining operators must notify the utility in advance, submit it to interconnection requirements, and accept critically disruptive services. So, when the grid gets tight, the first thing that gets dark is the miners. Characteristics of voluntary demand response and a friendly attitude towards the Bitcoin mining grid? It was replaced by mandatory reductions and utility discretion.
Kicker: Energy consumption disclosure. The utility must disclose annual energy usage for each mining operation. Such requirements are not present in other > taxes and remaining costs
For its credit, Congress removed the previous provisions that added a 2.5¢/kWh tax to mining. This punitive collection takes 50% into a typical industrial rate. The tax would have been an open declaration of hostility. I had to remove it. But it’s not enough.
Because what remains in the LB526 is invisible, but is such a powerful deterrent, which means uncertainty. Miners are already operating at thin razor margins, seeking jurisdictions with predictable electricity costs and clear rules. Instead, Nebraska offers infrastructure tolls, discretionary reductions and a regulatory spotlight.
Market responds: warning shot from miners
Industry leaders were not silent. Marathon Digital Holdings, one of the largest public mining companies, testified that it invested nearly $200 million in Nebraska and paid more than $6.5 million in taxes, warning that further expansion would likely be eliminated if LB526 passes.
Their message was clear. Nebraska was mined, growing-up jurisdiction. However, LB526 signals that miners are not welcome or at best a second-rate citizen of the energy economy. As one executive said, “If the same rules do not apply to other energy-intensive industries, this is not about infrastructure, it is about discrimination.”
Others warned that forced cuts would replace cooperative grid services. Bitcoin miners can provide real-time load limits that stabilize the grid during peak demand. But that value proposition only works if there is a market signal. The LB526 turns it into responsibility.
Politics, power, public utilities
Senator Mike Jacobson, sponsoring the bill, argued that LB526 was agnostic towards Bitcoin. “This is about using electricity,” he said. However, it is difficult to square with a bill that surgically targets one user class.
Jacobson pointed at Kearney, where half of the city’s electricity went to a single mining facility. However, rather than viewing it as an opportunity, Congress chose risk aversion and central planning because it is a customer that is likely to expand industrial customers that can be scaled based on the needs of the grid.
And that’s what matters in Nebraska’s public power model. With all the utilities open to the public, the national regulatory stance is existential, not recommendations. There is no retail competition. Miners can’t rely on Nebraska’s authority to start working with Bitcoin miners like unreliable freeloaders rather than aspiring partners. Just an exit.
For now, LB526 is only waiting for the governor’s signature. It could be signed given that LB526 was introduced at the Governor’s request. Once established, it will come into effect on October 1, 2025. Until then, miners will have to decide to adapt, relocate, or fold.
States such as Texas, Wyoming and North Dakota are heading in the opposite direction, offering tax clarity, grid integration and legal protection. Nebraska may find herself falling off the radar if she was on that list.
No handouts are required for Bitcoin mining. But that requires an equal position. The LB526 imposes costs, limits flexibility, and releases doubt. If the goal is to balance innovation and infrastructure, implementation is often desired.
Because when a certain industry is burdened while exempt, if a voluntary partnership is replaced by a power of attorney and operational data is made public for clear reasons, it is not difficult to see why miners view LB526 as retaliation rather than as a regulation.
This is a guest post by Colin Crossman. The opinions expressed are entirely unique and not necessarily BTC, Inc. or Bitcoin Magazine.
New Mining Rules in Nebraska: Infrastructure Safeguards or Disguised Soft Prohibitions? It first appeared in Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Colin Crosman.
