By Rep. REBECCA SCHWANKE
May 31, 2026 – Does the Alaska LNG project need property tax breaks? This is the sole focus of the Alaska State Legislature’s current special session.
I’m hearing Alaskans compare this project to the Trans-Alaska Pipeline built in the late 1970s.
Fact: Alaska North Slope crude was a high value, low supply commodity in the 1970s.
Fact: Alaska Natural Gas is currently a low value, high supply commodity.
Fact: Many Alaskans in Anchorage, Kenai, and Fairbanks heat their homes with natural gas, though Alaskan Cook Inlet supply is declining. Harvest LNG is now trucking gas down the Haul Road, but this is expensive, volume limited, and time intensive.
To best craft Alaska’s natural gas property tax legislation, we need to look at recent LNG projects in the Gulf states. Tax incentives, including state and local property tax abatements were clear in the development of every new Louisiana and Texas LNG export project in recent years.
Tax abatement can make or break the bottom line of LNG projects, either attracting or repelling investment interest. Alaska needs to be competitive if we are to attract the needed large capital investment necessary to build the AKLNG pipeline and an export terminal. Combined, this is a mega-project with an incredibly high capex, and plainly, we are not the only LNG game in town right now.
Recent Louisiana LNG projects have moved forward because of their Industrial Tax Exemption Program (ITEP) which offered an 80% abatement on local property taxes for up to 10 years (initial 5 years with an option to renew for 5 years) on new manufacturing investments. “Mega-projects” such as large LNG expansions with $500M+ capex qualify for up to 93–100% exemptions. Louisiana has nine LNG facilities that have been offered or received roughly $21 billion+ in combined property tax breaks over 10 years.
Look no further than the ~$4.9B tax break for Cheniere’s Sabine Pass, the ~$3.7B break for Cameron LNG, and the ~$2.8B break estimated for Woodside’s Louisiana LNG. Additionally, they adopted a Quality Jobs Program that provides payroll tax rebates of up to ~6% on new jobs for 10 years among other incentives.
All new Texas LNG projects receive property tax abatement, many at 100% for 10 years. In some cases, they do payments-in-lieu-of-taxes at a reduced rate (~23–40% of full taxes) specifically paid to school districts which have their own taxing authority. Examples include full or near-full abatements for Rio Grande LNG, Texas LNG in Cameron County, Golden Pass/Port Arthur LNG in Jefferson County, and Freeport LNG in Brazoria County. On the docket, are five new Texas LNG export facilities. It is not advisable to ignore this competition.
Is it fair though to compare AKLNG to these Gulf export facilities? Plainly, they are on wrong side of the Panama Canal to service Asian markets, so we do hold some cards here. Unfortunately, British Columbia is one step ahead of us with a newly minted LNG export facility in Kitimat, with Phase 2 expansion in the works with FID scheduled for late 2026.
Canada is currently signing export deals. We need to get with the program.
Natural gas is a global commodity, and Alaska finally has an opportunity to enter this market providing hundreds of millions to the Alaska treasury once gas starts flowing. If this was all we gained, it may be enough. However, we have so much more to gain than just selling another Alaskan resource. Hundreds of thousands of Alaskans directly rely on natural gas to heat their homes, while some of our largest utilities rely on gas to produce electricity. Demand is going up while our current in-state supply is going down. The window for finding a solution is closing.
Add in the benefit that rural Alaskans will receive from the Power Cost Equalization program, the Affordable Energy Fund (rural energy infrastructure funded via LNG royalty), and the abundance of high paying jobs, and I find myself very concerned we have yet to ink a deal.
In listening to AKLNG public testimony Saturday, I heard from Alaskans extremely knowledgeable about O&G development, energy and national security. They said now is our time, work hard to get this deal done. Then I heard from Alaskans deeply concerned about energy needs and inflation affecting them daily – some were excited about the long-term availability of Alaskan natural gas, some were hesitant because they realize our energy crises is already upon us. Most moving, I heard from Alaskans that said we need AKLNG jobs to pay bills and keep our young people right here at home. I am solidly in this camp.
We have an opportunity of a lifetime right here, right now. We are not going to get this deal done if one or two boroughs hold this up for a little bigger piece of the pie.
If we can come together, I am confident that we can craft a clean Alternative Volumetric Tax bill that will benefit all Alaskans without burdening our communities. I’m ready and willing to do what it takes to complete this job. We are in the race of our lives. A runner is headed our way, but will we grab the baton?
Rep. Rebecca Schwanke is the representative for Alaska State House District 36. She is a former wildlife biologist with the Alaska Department of Fish and Game. Her background is in natural resource management and small business development. Schwanke also served several years as a school board member for her district.
11 thoughts on “Rep. Rebecca Schwanke: Does Alaska LNG need property tax breaks?”
Alaska LNG needs the North Slope oil Companies to support Phase 2 of the Gas line which would build a exporting plant in Nikiski so Alaska can sell LNG because without that exporting plant there’s no money because domestic rate payers could never come up with the money to build a phase 1 or 2 LNG gas line. Glenfarne does not have the investors or the capitol .
Whether or not this legislature develops Alaska’s natural resources, it’ll get developed . Eventually. Whether or not Alaska collects royalties and benefits from it. Today’s generations of Alaskans have a chance to benefit from this project and not China owning it.
Seeing how many legislators we have elected since Walker/Mallott that many of these legislators are being hold outs for China until they get another president and Governor who’ll just hand over Alaska’s natural resources
I’m getting the understanding that China is in the back pockets and pocketbooks of many of Alaska’s current community leaders
There is no such thing as a good tax.
Reduced or delayed property taxes with LNG vs. no property taxes without LNG. I’m probably oversimplifying it.
I cant believe a word she says. Ive called and wanted to speak to Becky Schwanke about an issue that affects a large swath of her constituents. She doesnt call. Left my number again on a public forum and still …nothing. So when I spoke openly about the issue of the theft of PILT money from the people of TOK (FACTS) all she could muster was a shitty “Whats in this for you Sherman ?”. What kind of response is this from a public official ? Also Becky Schwanke PROMOTES the hoarding her her communities PILT money inside the school district when she knows that the Copper River School district is supposed to act as a fiduciary for the community of its $650,000 annual PILT payment. Copper River EMS suffers, The local fire volunteer fire departments suffer and she loves to make a constituent out to be a bad guy. Still waiting on my phone call Becky…..
I’m impressed by this analysis of our situation. I say we are sitting on a resource that has almost zero value at the wellhead. And then someone comes along trying to finance an $80 Billion project which would provide a vast amount of jobs during construction and continuing operation. THEN the State receives royalty revenue and a reliable source of energy for generations to come. All they are asking from us is property tax abatement? Seems like a no-brainer to me.
However, the feasibility of the project is still constrained by our project cost compared against other world sources. That leads me to believe that it will take a “finding of a national security interest” in developing the project for us and our allies around the Pacific Rim.
I still am waiting to see how a pipeline creates large costs to the local government. I get during construction there is need for services, but after a pipeline is there, how is it a burden to the local government? It’s just a money grab because it’s there. Everyone in the State is in trouble if we have to import gas.
Does Alaska LNG need property tax breaks?
.
No.
.
Remind again why taxpayers should care about taxing a company operating as described in: “A quick tour around the network of Glenfarne, the company agreeing to build Alaska LNG project”
(https://mustreadalaska.com/a-quick-tour-around-the-network-of-glenfarne-the-company-agreeing-to-build-alaska-lng-project/).
.
That piece came out a year ago, Rebecca. Remind again what you said about Glenfarme after reading it back then? Oh, nothing? But now you’re Glenfarme’s cheerleader? Bad optics!
.
If, as it seems, the bulk of product’s going to Asia, including communist China, why not tax it to the max, get some benefit out of it, like full PFD’s, maybe even tax breaks on our own inflated property taxes? You believe we’re that dumb to believe the Asian market’s going elsewhere for better prices and more product, if Glenfarme has to pay property taxes?
.
What are we, the Alaska LNG Charity?
.
Like gravity, one immutable law governs Alaska’s legislature: Legislators, your esteemed self included, won’t jeopardize their collective self-interest or job security by taxing natural gas to a level that annoys Important People overseas or here at home.
.
What they do in Texas or Louisiana is irrelevant.
.
Neither state government is as openly corrupt, incompetent, and inaccessible as Alaska’s. You can drive to their capitals, watch them in action, and amazingly, many of their elected officials act like they care what you think, which let’s face it, isn’t the case here.
.
Incompetent? Let’s start with the state of our election and grand jury systems, our education industry, PFD’s …things which you lot could fix if you wanted to, but somehow can’t, haven’t, or won’t. But somehow you know enough about the Glenfarme thing to do what, exactly?
.
You’re outnumbered nearly 9 to 1 by the lobbyist half of your team. Not your fault, but leads us to ask whether what they want comes first because you want to keep your job and be Somebody in the Holy Party City of Juneau
.
Fuel’s this expensive, you’d think everyone, your esteemed self included, would be enacting state and city fuel-tax holidays or, dare we suggest, property-tax holidays!
.
But no one’s doing that, apparently because you mob are too busy getting your piece of the pipeline pie.
.
You want your adoring public on side, stop lamenting Glenfarme’s property taxes, answer our FAQ’s which languish unanswered at “Secretary of Interior Burgum calls out the Legislature”?
(https://thealaskastory.com/secretary-of-interior-burgum-calls-out-the-legislature/)
.
As a Republican resource-management expert/legislator, you must know the answers, you know corporate investors know the answers. Without answers you, our representative, can’t make rational, informed decisions on our behalf. So, what gives?
.
You could be a heroine, ask these questions on the legislative floor, get them, plus your colleagues’ and Glenfarme’s non-answers on the record.
.
But what we get instead is desperation to convince constituents who are forced to pay property taxes or lose their stuff that Glenfarme should not be forced to pay property taxes or lose their stuff.
.
You mob have a record of doing what you’re going to do, public opinion be damned. So, why not cut to the chase, get on with taxing what you want to tax?
.
Or maybe your schtick’s more about signalling restive corporate sponsors that legislators are working really hard to carve out a chunk of the pie big enough for themselves, but small enough not to annoy corporate donors, who knows …we don’t.
.
Sure and a BOHICA alert would be nice, but really, what’s John Q. gonna do, get mad, say no, not pay gas bills, not vote for you, play loud music?
.
Holding out faint hope, Rebecca, that you’re our representative, not Glenfarme’s lobbyist, we thank you for your attention to this matter.
Holy smokes, Kamala! That’s a lot of words. What was the point? I think you’re opposed to tax breaks.
The commenters with the most to say are never the ones with actual knowledge, They don’t know what they don’t know, but they are real believers in what they think they know.