[flagged]
If a real estate developer already owns land and wants to build at their expense on their own land, quite a few people think that, in general, they should be permitted to do so as long as they comply with applicable laws.
But this set of tax breaks is modifying the effect of the applicable laws (namely sales and use tax, according to the article) for the benefit of a landowner. That seems rather different.
Incidentally, that same $3.3 billion could build around 10,000 accessory dwellings in Baton Rouge.
I actually would support giving tax breaks to housing developers on the same scale as those being given to tech companies building data centers, for exactly the same reason that it encourages construction of those buildings and I think that is a good thing. And NIMBYs, whether for housing or for data centers, are straightforwardly opposed to these structures existing at all, regardless of the way they are taxed. I want them to lose in both cases, which means that I'm in the position of wanting local government authorities to ignore the demands of a vocal set of their constituents and allow private industry to build.
There's a huge difference between extremely publically pushing for laws that allow buildings to be built vs private negotiating tax breaks that only affect a singular building.