293M+
Public land and water acreage that the tax bill would offer up for oil industry drilling in just its first rounds of mandated lease sales
If passed, this bill would be the largest successful attack by Congress on U.S. lands and waters in modern American history. It would give the oil industry free reign over more than 293 million acres of public lands and waters—an area larger than Texas and California combined—for drilling through its first rounds of mandated lease sales alone.* Factoring in expected tax cuts and other legal changes that would benefit fossil fuel CEOs, the tax bill would be a massive win for Big Oil and a massive loss for the American public.
This column details just some of the ways the tax bill sells out public lands and waters to benefit industry at the expense of American taxpayers.
Selling out American public lands and coasts to Big Oil
Expanding oil and gas leasing on public lands and waters through mandated lease sales would turn parks, coasts, wildlife refuges, and sacred landscapes into drilling and mining zones. The tax bill’s mandate of quarterly onshore oil and gas lease sales would give oil companies the ability to lease more than 208 million acres of national public lands across the country at their discretion. Furthermore, the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM), the agency managing these lands, would have no option to reject leases proposed by oil companies or add measures to protect water, wildlife, or other resources.
In addition to selling out public lands to the oil industry, the bill mandates at least 30 massive offshore lease sales in the Gulf of Mexico, with 80 million acres offered each time, plus more leasing in Alaska’s Cook Inlet. It also includes provisions to bail out the coal industry by mandating coal leasing, at rock-bottom prices, on at least 4 million acres of public lands.
Mandating reckless lease sales on public lands and waters will not to lower gasoline or energy prices or increase American energy security. But it will ensure that U.S. public lands and waters are prioritized for oil and gas while sacrificing public health and displacing recreation, wildlife habitat, renewable energy, and other uses.
See also
Selling out America’s Arctic
America’s Arctic—both the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and Western Arctic, also known as the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska (NPR-A)—is home to iconic wildlife, from endangered beluga whales and polar bears to migratory birds, bears, and caribou. This wildlife also supports the way of life and livelihoods of the Gwich’in and Iñupiaq peoples throughout the region. But the tax bill mandates numerous sales of these treasured landscapes to the oil and gas industry.
Mandating four massive lease sales in the Arctic Refuge, in particular, is a terrible deal for taxpayers. In 2017, Congress authorized drilling in the Arctic Refuge with the promise of offsetting $2 billion in tax cuts. Instead, the program generated less than 1 percent of what was promised, and the most recent congressionally mandated Arctic lease sale, in January, received no bids.
The new bill also requires unprecedented leasing in the Western Arctic, offering up an astonishing 4 million acres every other year and imperiling sensitive habitat and subsistence resources. Elsewhere in the Arctic, the bill would push through the development of a 211-mile private road through the Brooks Range and the Gates of the Arctic National Park and Preserve—a project widely opposed by Indigenous, Alaskan, and national interests. Notably, the minerals reported at the proposed Ambler Mining District are speculative in nature and would not make Alaska or America richer.
Selling out the Boundary Waters
The watershed that feeds Minnesota’s Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness—a land of interconnected lakes and streams that attracts more visitors than any other U.S. wilderness area—should be the last place for destructive mining. Yet the tax bill would override existing protections for this 225,000 acre watershed and reinstate canceled leases for the proposed Twin Metals mine. These actions push aside years of scientific analysis about the clear environmental and economic harms of proposed sulfide-ore copper mining at the very edge of this wilderness.
Minnesotans oppose copper-sulfide mining in this region by wide margins, and analysis by economists at Harvard finds that the proposed Twin Metals mine would have a clear, net negative impact on the region’s employment and economy. Legislating this destructive mine would simply enrich Chilean mining company Antofagasta PLC—a company with a track record of toxic spills and other destruction—at the expense of America’s public lands legacy and the local economy.
Cutting special deals for fossil fuel corporations at the expense of taxpayers
On top of selling out vast amounts of public lands and waters to Big Oil, the tax bill rolls back long-overdue reforms to the federal oil and gas leasing process, cutting special deals such as below-market-rate prices for fossil fuel corporations. These commonsense reforms—many of which hadn’t been updated for 100 years—include rightsizing the rates paid by companies to drill and reducing speculation. Importantly, they increase the money that goes to local and state governments, benefiting hardworking taxpayers and families. If the bill passes, though, taxpayers stand to lose at least $300 million in revenue each year, on average, for the next 17 years.
The bill also reinstates the wasteful practice of noncompetitive leasing, whereby oil and gas companies can purchase leases for just $1.50 per acre. In the past, this practice has encouraged speculation and stockpiling while very rarely leading to actual oil and gas production, hurting taxpayers and locking up land from being managed for other purposes, including conservation and outdoor recreation.
![]()
Allowing corporations to buy the environmental review process
The bill offers a “pay-to-play” scheme under a section titled “opt-in fees for environmental reviews” that would enable wealthy corporations to pay the government to conduct and expedite environmental reviews for their own projects, such as large mines and oil pipelines. These payments would trigger arbitrary time limits on environmental reviews. Amid staff layoffs at key agencies and an executive order upending National Environmental Policy Act implementation, proper review of high-impact projects or meaningful public engagement would be impossible under these timelines.
Not only would big corporations be able to buy their own rushed environmental reviews, but those reviews would also be granted immunity from legal challenges, according to a provision in that same section under “administrative and judicial review.” This would prevent communities from challenging even the most severely flawed, inadequate, and potentially illegal environmental reviews.
Short-circuiting public involvement in public land management
In one fell swoop, the tax bill would invalidate six recently completed BLM management plans for Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, and Wyoming, throwing out years of public engagement, science, and land management expertise. Among the nullified plans is the Rock Springs plan, which adopted community-proposed conservation measures for several areas relied on by migrating wildlife in Wyoming, including the Greater Little Mountain area. Although an estimated 92 percent of public comments supported the Rock Springs plan’s conservation measures, it stirred opposition from the fossil fuel industry. By invalidating the plan, Congress would open sensitive lands to drilling and mining while throwing out collaboratively developed conservation protections.
Recklessly accelerating logging on public lands
The tax bill would adopt arbitrary mandates for increasing the amount of timber harvested from most national forests and forested BLM lands, harvesting 25 percent above fiscal year 2024 levels year after year. Combined with recent and anticipated staffing cuts as well as a push by the Trump administration to sidestep environmental requirements to boost timber production, these mandates are a recipe for impaired forest health and contaminated drinking water. The mandates are also likely to shift scarce resources away from critical work to address the wildfire crisis that increasingly threatens communities.
Cutting land and water funding and endangering coastal communities
The tax bill also makes deep cuts to already-dedicated funding for conservation and coastal communities. This includes rescinding unspent funds from the Inflation Reduction Act for conservation and habitat restoration projects in national parks and on BLM lands; for National Park staff hiring; and for conservation of America’s rare old-growth forests.
The bill would also rescind coastal restoration funds aimed at helping communities withstand and bounce back from natural disasters. These critical funds support coastal states, Tribes, and local leaders to conserve habitats, restore coastlines, and prepare for extreme storms. Coastal resilience investments are a good deal for the American people, with a recent National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration study finding a 2.4 times return on investment for every $1 spent on coastal resilience, including almost 14 jobs created for every million dollars spent.
Read more
Conclusion
The natural resources section of the Trump tax bill is one big handout to corporate developers at the expense of American public lands and waters. To be clear: Its provisions will not lower costs, increase energy independence, or significantly raise revenue. Instead, they will allow unchecked oil and gas development to steamroll outdoor recreation opportunities, local businesses, healthy land, wildlife, and our air and water, all while creating massive loopholes and subsidies for Big Oil.
The natural resources section of the Trump tax bill is one big handout to corporate developers at the expense of American public lands and waters.
The authors would like to thank Alia Hidayat, Sam Zeno, Nicole Gentile, Steve Bonitatibus, and Audrey Juarez for their contributions to this column.
* Authors’ note: The Center for American Progress analyzed mandated leasing acreage identified in the bill text for the Gulf and Cook Inlet offshore, the Arctic Refuge, and the Western Arctic. This figure also includes onshore leasing acreage made available for immediate nomination and required leasing within the contiguous United States, which was estimated using data from The Wilderness Society. Where the bill mandates multiple sales, CAP’s analysis only counts acreage for the first sale.