> I'm not seeing how they benefit even in the short term. The businesses would all be owned by people outside the tribe, the entire point is to have low/no taxe

> I'm not seeing how they benefit even in the short term. The businesses would all be owned by people outside the tribe, the entire point is to have low/no taxes, and the infrastructure built is unlikely to be useful after the business is gone. For Tesla at least, taxes are not so much an issue as the regulatory regime prohibiting them from operating outside of reservation altogether. They are happy to pay higher tax, if the alternative is inability to sell cars at all. But, in general, even if the tax rates on tribal lands are lower than on regular state lands, the tribes still benefit, because it is them who collect the tax, rather than the State. Many polities would rather have a smaller bite of a cake rather than no cake at all. Look at Ireland, for example, which is greatly benefiting exactly from being a EU tax haven: sure, it collects less from Google or Apple than, say, France or Italy would, but they still benefit from their low tax policy. > and the infrastructure built is unlikely to be useful after the business is gone If you read the casino, you’ll find that Tesla is actually renovating and using a former casino facility. > Besides, it's entirely possible the way the state fixes this "loophole" puts them in a worse position than currently. The history of renegotiating often doesn't end well for the Natives. Yeah, that’s sadly correct: the governments tend to screw small people over when it sees its power and revenues diminished.