Anthropic
Control of this organisation’s compute: the terms, the constraints, and what the public record does not show, with every claim carrying the disclosure it came from.
7 control relations on record for Anthropic — all 7 by contract
Every claim below carries the document it came from, who disclosed it, and the date that disclosure speaks to. Where the record holds nothing, the page states whether the public record was searched and what was searched — an unsearched layer and an empty one are different facts.
Control
Control here means one of three things the substrate keeps apart: holding title to a facility, operating one, or holding capacity by contract. The three are recorded separately because an organisation can hold any one without the others, and a model built on ownership alone cannot see an organisation whose compute is entirely leased.
Receipt
“Anthropic and Google have a longstanding partnership and this latest expansion will help us continue to grow the compute we need to define the frontier of AI.”
Google Cloud press release, 2025-10-23; Anthropic's own mirror at anthropic.com/news/expanding-our-use-of-google-cloud-tpus-and-services carries the identical CFO (Krishna Rao) quote. Capacity language ('up to one million TPU chips', 'well over a gigawatt ... in 2026') rendered with minor wording variance across the two fetches — no single numeric sentence certified verbatim, so capacity_mw stays null (E36). Deal value stated only as 'tens of billions of dollars'.
@misc{scrutica-ctrl-anthropic-alphabet-org-level-capacityreservation-2025-03eb2d,
title = {Press release disclosing Anthropic capacity reservation with Alphabet},
year = {2025},
howpublished = {\url{https://www.googlecloudpresscorner.com/2025-10-23-Anthropic-to-Expand-Use-of-Google-Cloud-TPUs-and-Services}},
note = {Compiled in the Scrutica control ledger, claim ctrl-anthropic-alphabet-org-level-capacity_reservation-2025-03eb2d; disclosure dated 2025-10-23}
}Press release disclosing Anthropic capacity reservation with Alphabet (2025). Retrieved via the Scrutica control ledger (claim ctrl-anthropic-alphabet-org-level-capacity_reservation-2025-03eb2d): https://www.googlecloudpresscorner.com/2025-10-23-Anthropic-to-Expand-Use-of-Google-Cloud-TPUs-and-Services
Receipt
“Anthropic to secure up to 5 gigawatts (GW) of current and future generations of Amazon's Trainium chips to train and power their advanced AI models. ... Anthropic to spend more than $100 billion over the next ten years on AWS technologies.”
Org-level ceiling ('up to 5 GW' — is_estimated). Same release discloses $5B immediate + up to $20B milestone-tied Amazon equity investment (equity excluded from this substrate's scope).
@misc{scrutica-ctrl-anthropic-amazon-org-level-capacityreservation-2026-d46307,
title = {Press release disclosing Anthropic capacity reservation with Amazon.com, Inc.},
year = {2026},
howpublished = {\url{https://www.aboutamazon.com/news/company-news/amazon-invests-additional-5-billion-anthropic-ai}},
note = {Compiled in the Scrutica control ledger, claim ctrl-anthropic-amazon-org-level-capacity_reservation-2026-d46307; disclosure dated 2026-04-20}
}Press release disclosing Anthropic capacity reservation with Amazon.com, Inc. (2026). Retrieved via the Scrutica control ledger (claim ctrl-anthropic-amazon-org-level-capacity_reservation-2026-d46307): https://www.aboutamazon.com/news/company-news/amazon-invests-additional-5-billion-anthropic-ai
Receipt
“Anthropic is actively using Project Rainier to build and deploy its industry-leading AI model, Claude.”
Amazon 'AWS activates Project Rainier' (date corroborated via same-day CNBC). ~500K Trainium2 chips scaling to 1M+; no MW figure in the document — chip counts deliberately NOT converted. The 2.4 GW figure often associated with Rainier belongs to Amazon's separate Nov 2025 Northern Indiana expansion release, which does NOT name Anthropic (verified this sweep).
@misc{scrutica-ctrl-anthropic-amazon-anthropic-amazon-new-carlisle-capacityreservation-2025-2a40c7,
title = {Press release disclosing Anthropic capacity reservation with Amazon.com, Inc.},
year = {2025},
howpublished = {\url{https://www.aboutamazon.com/news/aws/aws-project-rainier-ai-trainium-chips-compute-cluster}},
note = {Compiled in the Scrutica control ledger, claim ctrl-anthropic-amazon-anthropic-amazon-new-carlisle-capacity_reservation-2025-2a40c7; disclosure dated 2025-10-29}
}Press release disclosing Anthropic capacity reservation with Amazon.com, Inc. (2025). Retrieved via the Scrutica control ledger (claim ctrl-anthropic-amazon-anthropic-amazon-new-carlisle-capacity_reservation-2025-2a40c7): https://www.aboutamazon.com/news/aws/aws-project-rainier-ai-trainium-chips-compute-cluster
Receipt
“Broadcom, Google and Anthropic PBC (“Anthropic”) have expanded their current strategic collaboration under which Anthropic, beginning in 2027, will access through Broadcom approximately 3.5 gigawatts as part of the multiple gigawatts of next generation TPU-based AI compute capacity committed by Anthropic.”
Broadcom 8-K Ex. 99.1 (CIK 1730168, filed 2026-04-06) naming Broadcom, Google LLC and Anthropic PBC; access begins 2027, horizon to 2031. Read via a filings aggregator (sec.gov 403; Broadcom IR timed out) — tier 3 despite the primary instrument. Anthropic's own same-day announcement (anthropic.com/news/google-broadcom-partnership-compute, tier-2 corroboration, fetched): 'We have signed a new agreement with Google and Broadcom for multiple gigawatts of next-generation TPU capacity that we expect to come online starting in 2027.' Trilateral structure — Google side of the relationship carried by the 2025-10-23 row. — Provenance re-derived 2026-08-12 from Broadcom's own Form 8-K (CIK 1730168, filed 2026-04-06) rather than the filings aggregator previously cited. The filing frames the arrangement as tripartite (Broadcom, Google and Anthropic) and makes consumption conditional: 'dependent on Anthropic's continued commercial success.'
@misc{scrutica-ctrl-anthropic-broadcom-org-level-capacityreservation-2026-ec7e72,
title = {SEC Form 8-K disclosing Anthropic capacity reservation with Broadcom Inc.},
year = {2026},
howpublished = {\url{https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1730168/000119312526144028/d87999d8k.htm}},
note = {Compiled in the Scrutica control ledger, claim ctrl-anthropic-broadcom-org-level-capacity_reservation-2026-ec7e72; disclosure dated 2026-04-06}
}SEC Form 8-K disclosing Anthropic capacity reservation with Broadcom Inc. (2026). Retrieved via the Scrutica control ledger (claim ctrl-anthropic-broadcom-org-level-capacity_reservation-2026-ec7e72): https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1730168/000119312526144028/d87999d8k.htm
Receipt
“For example, in May 2026, we entered into Cloud Services Agreements with Anthropic PBC (“Anthropic”), an AI research and development public benefit corporation, with respect to access to compute capacity across COLOSSUS and COLOSSUS II. Pursuant to these agreements, the customer has agreed to pay us $1.25 billion per month through May 2029, with capacity ramping in May and June 2026 at a reduced fee. The agreements may be terminated by either party upon 90 days' notice.”
Disclosed in SpaceX's S-1 (CIK 1181412, File No. 333-296070, filed 2026-05-20 — filing existence independently confirmed; every EDGAR fetch 403'd, so the S-1 text is quoted via TechCrunch's direct quotation). ~$1.25B/month through May 2029 (~$45B); 'allows us to monetize unused compute capacity' per the filing. Counterparty recorded as SpaceX — the contracting party the filing names (xAI is its subsidiary per the same filing context); EXPECTED TO QUEUE until org-spacex exists (DQP §11 — the queue is the mechanism, not a failure). Colossus 1's MW is not stated in the accessed text. — Provenance re-derived 2026-08-12 from SpaceX's own Form S-1 (CIK 1181412) rather than the press report previously cited. SCOPE CORRECTION: the filing covers capacity 'across COLOSSUS and COLOSSUS II', which is broader than the 'Colossus 1' the press paraphrase named - the facility_name is left as the press framing only where the site is separately identified, and the filing's own wording governs.
@misc{scrutica-ctrl-anthropic-spacex-xai-colossus-1-capacityreservation-2026-1e361a,
title = {SEC Form S-1 disclosing Anthropic capacity reservation with Space Exploration Technologies Corp.},
year = {2026},
howpublished = {\url{https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1181412/000162828026036936/spaceexplorationtechnologi.htm}},
note = {Compiled in the Scrutica control ledger, claim ctrl-anthropic-spacex-xai-colossus-1-capacity_reservation-2026-1e361a; disclosure dated 2026-05-20}
}SEC Form S-1 disclosing Anthropic capacity reservation with Space Exploration Technologies Corp. (2026). Retrieved via the Scrutica control ledger (claim ctrl-anthropic-spacex-xai-colossus-1-capacity_reservation-2026-1e361a): https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1181412/000162828026036936/spaceexplorationtechnologi.htm
Receipt
“Executed 401 MW Anthropic Lease at Justified Data Campus”
site: Justified Data Campus, Hawesville, KY — TeraWulf Q2 2026 earnings call (Paul Prager, Chairman/CEO, 2026-08-05) — adds the ~$19B contracted-revenue figure absent from the 8-K text. Third-party transcript host, tier 3. Transcript also once says 'Muskie Data Campus' (transcription anomaly, flagged not asserted). — Provenance re-derived 2026-08-12 from the registrant's own furnished exhibit (TeraWulf EX-99.2 to its Q2 2026 results 8-K, CIK 1083301, filed 2026-08-05) rather than the third-party transcript previously cited; the same exhibit lists 'Hawesville (401 MW, 2H27 - 1H28)' in its delivery pipeline.
@misc{scrutica-ctrl-anthropic-terawulf-org-level-lease-2026-982303,
title = {SEC Form 8-K disclosing Anthropic lease with TeraWulf},
year = {2026},
howpublished = {\url{https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1083301/000108330126000162/terawulfq22026investorpr.htm}},
note = {Compiled in the Scrutica control ledger, claim ctrl-anthropic-terawulf-org-level-lease-2026-982303; disclosure dated 2026-08-05}
}SEC Form 8-K disclosing Anthropic lease with TeraWulf (2026). Retrieved via the Scrutica control ledger (claim ctrl-anthropic-terawulf-org-level-lease-2026-982303): https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1083301/000108330126000162/terawulfq22026investorpr.htm
Receipt
“approximately 401 MW of critical IT load for high-performance computing ('HPC') operations ... Delivery of the leased capacity is expected to occur in phases beginning in late 2027 and concluding in early 2028. ... Anthropic's obligation to pay rent under the Justified Data Campus Lease will commence upon the delivery of the applicable leased premises and continue for a term of 20 years”
site: Justified Data Campus, Hawesville, KY — TeraWulf Form 8-K Item 8.01 (CIK 1083301, accession 0001104659-26-080583), tenant Anthropic PBC; landlord subsidiary Raylan Data LLC. Two 5-year renewal options could extend to 30 years. Delivery begins late 2027 — contracted, not yet energized. Cited via TeraWulf's own IR hosting of the filing (sec.gov 403s WebFetch in this environment). KY PSC Case 2026-00115 (Big Rivers) shows 482 MW Maximum Contract Demand for TeraWulf sub Justified DataPower LLC — a utility-interconnection quantity, NOT the same measure as the 401 MW critical IT (E36); Anthropic is not named in the docket.
@misc{scrutica-ctrl-anthropic-terawulf-org-level-lease-2026-b13da9,
title = {SEC Form 8-K disclosing Anthropic lease with TeraWulf},
year = {2026},
howpublished = {\url{https://investors.terawulf.com/sec-filings/all-sec-filings/content/0001104659-26-080583/tm2619468d1_8k.htm}},
note = {Compiled in the Scrutica control ledger, claim ctrl-anthropic-terawulf-org-level-lease-2026-b13da9; disclosure dated 2026-07-06}
}SEC Form 8-K disclosing Anthropic lease with TeraWulf (2026). Retrieved via the Scrutica control ledger (claim ctrl-anthropic-terawulf-org-level-lease-2026-b13da9): https://investors.terawulf.com/sec-filings/all-sec-filings/content/0001104659-26-080583/tm2619468d1_8k.htm
None of the disclosures behind those terms states a contract start date, so the figure draws duration and prints the disclosure date rather than placing bars on a calendar. 1 of 1 term-carrying positions are in that state.
Across the 16 organisations carrying control relations in this substrate, 7 hold contractual capacity without a single titled facility on record. That pattern is what the three-way split exists to make visible: an attribution model keyed on ownership records the 7 as holding nothing.
Constraint
What regime the organisation sits under, and whether any export-control designation in the Federal-Register-anchored list held here reaches it. A quiet result is reported as a check with its date rather than left as silence.
The organization record places this company’s headquarters in the United States, on the strength of the company’s own published statements cited there.
No export-control designation is linked to this organization. The cross-reference that would carry such a link resolves 50 organizations to entries on the Federal-Register-anchored lists; this organization is not among them.
The denominator is printed because a zero on its own cannot be told from a check that never ran. The lists themselves last moved on Nov 10, 2025, so a quiet result here reflects the record rather than a stalled feed.
Disclosure posture
What the organisation itself has put on the record with the registries that ask, and which registries reach it at all. Each regime asks a different question of a different population, so each finding carries what that regime counts; nothing here is divided by anything else.
Global LEI index searched by legal name and fuzzy completion on 2026-08-12: the registry returns records under this name, none of which has been adjudicated to this organization in the platform’s identity layer, so no identifier is cited here. Name agreement alone is not an identity finding.
Registration of the entity itself in the global LEI system.
as of Aug 12, 2026 · registry record ↗
No SEC registrant record is attributed to this organization: it does not file its own periodic reports, so the SEC disclosure regime reaches it only through counterparties that do.
Whether the entity itself files with the SEC as a registrant.
With no registrant record of its own, this subject’s compute arrangements enter the public record through counterparties that do file: 7 of the 7 control claims here were disclosed by the counterparty to the relation.
Capacity
Facilities this organisation is linked to in the substrate. Frontier-site capacity figures come from Epoch AI’s data-center catalog and are cited to them per record; where Epoch records who owns the AI hardware at a site, that is rendered as what it is — hardware ownership per Epoch — and not as facility ownership or operation.
Supply
This layer publishes what is known about the completeness of the supply picture, not the picture itself. Some supply records here were established with reference to subscription corporate-data sources that cannot be republished, so what renders is the epistemic state — position in a distribution, a corroboration class, whether a contradiction was found — and never a relationship, a counterparty, or a count from those sources.
Some records behind this layer were established with reference to subscription corporate-data sources that cannot be republished. What renders here is the epistemic state — position in a distribution, a corroboration class, whether a contradiction was found — and never a relationship, a counterparty or a count from those sources.
This organization’s supply-relationship count sits above the 50th percentile of the 5,088 organizations in the tracked supply graph. The underlying counts and distribution ride subscription-licensed rows and are not published; the percentile band is the disclosure (see the sourcing note below).
Not covered — the tracked supply corpus connects few or none of the 5 subject–counterparty pairs on the control ledger. Compute-supply arrangements are not what that corpus is built to record, so this says more about the corpus than about the subject. The class is coarse by design: which pairs, and how the licensed rows describe them, is not published.
No contradiction between the subscription-licensed corpus and the public-record claims rendered on this page was found in the review of Aug 12, 2026. Where such a contradiction is found, the public claim renders here with a flag that conflicting subscription evidence exists — the flag is the maximum disclosure.
Working detail — grades, sources, and what is withheld
1 · How claims are graded
No confidence value is stored anywhere. Each grade is derived when the page renders from three recorded facts — the authority tier of the source, who disclosed it, and whether the value is flagged as an estimate — so a grade cannot disagree with the claim it sits beside.
Attested Stated in a primary or research-grade record by the subject, a counterparty to the relation, or a regulator.
Reported Carried by press or third-party reporting rather than a party’s own record.
Inferred Derived or estimated — including ceilings a party states as “up to” figures.
An estimate outranks its source: a ceiling stated in a counterparty’s own press release (“up to 5 GW”) grades inferred, because the number is a bound and not a measurement.
2 · Where each layer reads
Control. control_relations only — never a facility’s owner or operator column. Those columns carry, for catalog rows, a copy of the hardware-owner field whose own published definition disclaims facility ownership and operation, so they were retired as attribution sources.
Constraint. Export-control designations anchored to Federal Register citations, the platform’s designation-to-organisation cross-reference, and rule-derived country access classifications.
Disclosure posture. The Global LEI Foundation golden copy — registration, parent-reporting declarations, and consolidation records — read by the organisation’s own identifier, plus its SEC registrant record where one exists.
Capacity. The facilities substrate, with Epoch AI cited per record for catalog rows.
3 · How absence is recorded
Three states, kept apart everywhere on this page. Rows: the record holds claims. Searched, nothing admissible: a search was run, its method and date are printed, and what it found could not be reduced to a citable primary. Not swept: no search is on file.
Collapsing the last two would let a budget limit read as a finding about the world. A lead that cannot be traced to a document is recorded as a lead, never as a row.
4 · What is not published, and why
Some records here were established with reference to subscription corporate-data sources that cannot be republished. Where that applies, the published record cites the public primary that establishes it; the subscription source informed only which records to seek and how complete we believe the result to be. No subscription-sourced record, identifier or value is served by this site.
That is why the supply layer publishes a percentile band rather than a count, and a corroboration class rather than a list. Those forms cannot be inverted back into the underlying rows, which is the property that makes them publishable at all.
Everywhere else on this page, a derived figure prints the operands it was computed from.
The four records in this instrument were chosen to span the cases the substrate has to handle: compute held only by contract, compute held by title, compute held by operation, and an organisation the public record barely reaches. Other organisations have directory entries; a record like this one exists where the control layer has been swept.