Research article · Updated 28 September 2026

Two Public Stakes, Two Different Instruments

Eksfin’s share of the Norwegian data-centre financing announced in May 2026 was 30.6%. Andhra Pradesh’s incentive ceiling is 25.1% of a proposed investment. Reconstructing the documents shows why those percentages answer different questions.

The easiest thing to locate in an AI investment is the building. The money is harder. A data centre can stand in one country, use financing arranged elsewhere and sell computing to an international customer while its shareholders change during construction. Giving the whole arrangement one national label conceals more than it explains.

Google’s hub in Visakhapatnam and Nscale’s campus near Narvik offer a concrete comparison. Both involve a public financial commitment. In one case it is a ceiling on incentives; in the other it is participation in commercial financing. Their documents reveal different things about ownership, risk and the eventual claim on public money.

Four amounts, four meanings

Google announced approximately $15 billion for its Indian hub over 2026–2030, spanning data-centre operations, energy sources and fibre infrastructure. The Aker–Nscale venture’s September 2025 Microsoft agreement had an estimated five-year contract value of $6.2 billion. Nscale then announced $790 million of committed Norwegian financing in May 2026, plus a separate $790 million uncommitted expansion feature. [1] [2] [3]

Those are planned investment, contracted customer business, committed debt and potential additional debt. They cannot be added into a project budget. In particular, the uncommitted expansion feature does not mean the extra money has been lent or is assured.

Ownership percentages need equally precise labels. Stargate Norway was announced in July 2025 as a proposed 50:50 Aker–Nscale venture, with OpenAI described as an intended initial customer rather than an equity partner. Aker subsequently exchanged its venture interest for shares in Nscale. At June 2026 it reported 22.76% of that parent company on a fully diluted basis. [4] [5] A share of a project venture and a share of a wider parent company describe different claims.

A third company, Nordscale Operations AS, was announced in July 2026 to operate the facility. It is 51% owned by Nscale Norway AS and 49% by Nordkraft AS. [6] Those percentages do not divide the whole campus’s profits between Norway and the rest of the world. The operating contract, other subsidiaries, creditors and customers also matter. Similarly, AdaniConneX’s 50:50 ownership by Adani Enterprises and EdgeConneX does not establish the ownership of Google’s entire Indian hub. [7]

What Norway’s 30.6% measures

In May 2026, Norway’s Minister of Trade and Industry told Parliament that Eksfin’s participation was $241.7 million of an approximately $790 million facility. Dividing those amounts gives 30.6%. The minister described Eksfin as participating on the same terms as the private banks. [8]

This is a share of announced committed financing, not a grant rate or an estimate of public loss. The minister says the agency expects repayment and a return if the project develops as expected. Whether that return adequately compensates the state for risk depends on the financing terms and the borrower’s prospects. [9]

The June parliamentary answer names interest margin and security requirements as examples of equal treatment, without publishing their terms. [9] Nscale’s 18 September IPO filing goes further: it identifies Nscale Norway DC DA as borrower under a July agreement, a $725 million senior term facility and a $65 million revolving VAT facility, with Eksfin among the arrangers and lenders. It also reports a parent guarantee and security provisions. [16]

The filed agreement sets the term-loan margin above the Term SOFR benchmark at 3.50 percentage points before completion, then 3.00–3.75 points across the following six years; the VAT margin is 2.00 points. Its original-lender schedule and other schedules are omitted from the public exhibit. [17] Those disclosures permit a more concrete assessment of the bargain, while leaving lender-specific participation and recoveries incompletely observable.

Nscale also reports August drawings of $88.1 million from the term facility and $19.1 million from the VAT facility: $107.2 million in total. These are facility-wide drawings, not an identified payment by Eksfin. [16] The 30.6% figure still describes the May announcement; applying it mechanically to those drawings would manufacture a public-disbursement estimate.

The applicable Eksfin rules give a market benchmark for pricing comparable loans with comparable security, with a syndicate’s rate serving as the first reference where available. The May 2025 rules were in force when the agency’s board considered the project in April 2026; the June 2026 replacement retains that pricing approach. [10] Private participation and common terms are relevant evidence of market pricing. They are not a public, independent estimate of this borrower’s default risk or the state’s expected recovery.

Another parliamentary answer puts the commitment in perspective. On 1 June, the minister identified only one other Norwegian data centre financed by Eksfin: Lefdal Mine Datacenter, with €67.5 million of guarantees, approximately NOK727 million. Using the minister’s rounded NOK2.2 billion figure for Nscale, its committed financing participation was about three times that other project’s disclosed guarantee amount. [11] This compares stated amounts without establishing that the instruments are identical; it is not three times the expected loss or a measure of the agency’s entire outstanding portfolio.

The June response dates the board’s consideration to 21 April 2026 and explains the project’s export connection, but does not publish the requested case file. [9] The later contractual disclosure therefore changes what an outside reader can establish. It does not, by itself, calculate an expected public loss or prove that the state’s return is adequate.

Andhra Pradesh’s published ceiling

Andhra Pradesh’s Government Order G.O.Ms.No.40, dated 11 October 2025, records Raiden Infotech India Private Limited’s proposal for investment of ₹87,520 crore in roughly 1,000 MW of capacity on 480 acres. The order sets an overall incentive cap of ₹22,002 crore. That ceiling is 25.1% of the proposal’s stated investment. [12]

The ratio is useful only with both labels attached. The numerator is a nominal package ceiling covering concessions and support over time. It is neither an amount already disbursed nor a discounted fiscal cost. The denominator is the applicant’s stated project investment, not verified completed spending. The ratio should not be substituted for a subsidy rate on Google’s separate dollar-denominated hub announcement.

The order also permits a more specific reconstruction. Eleven components have explicit rupee limits, adding to ₹21,588 crore. Two further concessions (a 25% land discount and exemption from stamp duty and registration charges) are stated without rupee values. The difference between the eleven quantified caps and the overall ceiling is ₹414 crore. The order does not reconcile that difference. [12]

Source: G.O.Ms.No.40. Figures are nominal caps and a proposed investment, not a disbursement account. The two unpriced concessions prevent the component sum from being treated as a complete valuation.

The useful question for the state is how its overall ceiling relates to the valued components, the unpriced concessions and the conditions for receiving them. Arithmetic identifies where clarification is needed; it cannot assign the difference to a particular benefit.

Subsequent orders expand the land allocation and alter how incentives may be claimed. G.O.Ms.No.2 increased the land area to 601.4 acres in February 2026; G.O.Ms.No.4 allocated it among three wholly owned subsidiaries of Adani Infra, including specified parcels routed through APIIC on thirty-year leases. G.O.Ms.No.20 permits flexibility across incentive categories and departments while preserving the total quantum. It also ties power-subsidy claims to actual consumption. [13] Those amendments change implementation, not evidence of actual payment.

Different ways for the public to bear risk

Eksfin’s 30.6% uses committed financing as its denominator. Andhra Pradesh’s 25.1% uses a proposed investment. One participation concerns financing with repayment obligations; the other consists of incentives such as concessions and reimbursements. A larger percentage in this pair does not establish a larger subsidy, risk or national benefit.

If Narvik underperforms, the state’s outcome depends on the financing structure, borrower performance and applicable payment, security and recovery rights. If Visakhapatnam underperforms, Andhra Pradesh’s fiscal outcome depends on which concessions were actually used, which support was paid and what performance conditions or recovery provisions apply. It would be wrong to assume the full incentive cap has already been lost.

This compares disclosure, not equivalent fiscal exposures. Neither column supplies a complete public return or loss calculation.

The strongest case for public participation is that finance and infrastructure support can help coordinate a productive investment that otherwise faces delays or funding constraints. Private lenders in the Norwegian syndicate provide a relevant market test. Published limits in Andhra Pradesh bound elements of the package. Neither feature, by itself, proves that the project generates benefits exceeding its public opportunity cost.

The outcomes still to be measured

Scarce infrastructure sharpens that opportunity-cost question. Norway’s energy minister described a pause on further large-consumption grid reservations from Svartisen northwards, while preserving existing reservations. The thresholds differ across the region. [14] That is not a cancellation of Narvik’s allocation, but it makes competing uses of network capacity relevant to judging the investment.

Power procurement is also distinct from operation. Vattenfall’s May 2026 agreement covers a significant part of the first phase’s electricity needs for 2027–2031. [15] It is not evidence that the whole campus is operating or that all its energy needs are covered. Aker’s half-year report describes material Nscale projects as under development. [5]

For both projects, the useful comparisons are commissioned capacity against announcements, receipts against customer contracts, and incentives paid or financing drawn against the relevant commitments. Local procurement and employment need their own benchmarks. The public documents already establish more than a national label can: who holds particular claims, which instruments finance the project and which terms remain unavailable. They do not yet establish who will receive the eventual profit or whether each country’s public commitment will have paid off.

Sources and calculation notes

1. Google, Indian AI hub announcement, 14 October 2025. Planned five-year investment, not completed expenditure.
2. Microsoft, Norwegian AI hub, 17 September 2025. Customer-contract announcement.
3. Nscale, Norwegian financing, 11 May 2026. Committed facility and separate uncommitted expansion feature.
4. Nscale, Stargate Norway, 31 July 2025. Original proposed venture and intended customer roles.
5. Aker, Q2 and half-year report, 16 July 2026. Parent-company holding and development-stage disclosure; issuer report distributed through MFN.
6. Nscale, Nordscale Operations, 6 July 2026. Operating-company stakes, not a campus-wide income split.
7. Adani Enterprises, Google partnership, 14 October 2025. AdaniConneX ownership.
8. Norwegian parliamentary answer 15:2715, 19 May 2026. Minister’s response, distinguished from allegations in the question. Calculation: 241.7/790 × 100 = 30.6%.
9. Parliamentary answer 15:2864, 3 June 2026. Board date, export rationale and categories of parity, not disclosed numerical margins or a security schedule.
10. Ministry of Trade and Industry, Eksfin rules: May 2025 and June 2026, pricing provisions. The rules set a general pricing benchmark; they do not identify Eksfin’s individual allocation or cash disbursement in this financing.
11. Parliamentary answer 15:2847, 1 June 2026. Lefdal guarantee amount. Scale comparison uses rounded NOK figures: 2,200/727 ≈ 3.0; identical instruments are not established.
12. Andhra Pradesh, G.O.Ms.No.40, ITE&C, 11 October 2025, official GOIR download. Quantified caps in ₹crore: 2,129 + 282 + 2,245 + 1,745 + 12 + 175 + 500 + 4,800 + 1,200 + 4,000 + 4,500 = 21,588; 22,002 − 21,588 = 414. Ceiling/proposed investment: 22,002/87,520 × 100 = 25.1%. No discounting or actual disbursement is inferred.
13. Andhra Pradesh official orders: G.O.Ms.No.2, 18 February 2026; G.O.Ms.No.4, 27 February 2026; G.O.Ms.No.20, 17 April 2026. Land expansion and allocation, incentive fungibility and claim conditions; some implementation arrangements remained to be finalised in the April order.
14. Parliamentary answer 15:2702, 19 May 2026. Regional grid reservation limits and treatment of existing reservations.
15. Vattenfall, Nscale power agreement, 26 May 2026. Partial first-phase coverage, 2027–2031.
16. Nscale, Form S-1, filed 18 September 2026, “Description of Certain Indebtedness”, subsection “Kvandal South DC Facility”, p150, and subsequent-events notes, ppF-41 and F-64. Facility-wide August drawings: 88.1 + 19.1 = $107.2 million; no allocation to Eksfin is inferred.
17. Nscale, S-1 Exhibit 10.21, Senior Facilities Agreement dated 7 July 2026, borrower preamble, “Margin” definition pp39–40, clause9 and p209 omission notice. The exhibit omits Schedules1–13; contractual security provisions are not a valuation of recoveries.