Statutorily Mandated Designation of Difficult Development Areas for Section 42 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, 49140-49151 [05-16605]
Download as PDF
49140
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 161 / Monday, August 22, 2005 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND
URBAN DEVELOPMENT
[Docket No. FR–4889–N–05]
Statutorily Mandated Designation of
Difficult Development Areas for
Section 42 of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986
Office of the Secretary, HUD.
Notice.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: This document designates
‘‘Difficult Development Areas’’ (DDAs)
for purposes of the Low-Income
Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) under
Section 42 of the Internal Revenue Code
of 1986 (the Code) (26 U.S.C. 42). The
United States Department of Housing
and Urban Development (HUD) makes
new Difficult Development Area
designations annually. The designations
of ‘‘Qualified Census Tracts’’ (QCTs)
under Section 42 of the Internal
Revenue Code published December 12,
2002, as supplemented on December 19,
2003, remain in effect.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
questions on how areas are designated
and on geographic definitions, contact
Kurt G. Usowski, Associate Deputy
Assistant Secretary for Economic
Affairs, Office of Policy Development
and Research, Department of Housing
and Urban Development, 451 Seventh
Street, SW., Washington, DC 20410–
6000, telephone (202) 708–2770, or send
e-mail to Alastair_McFarlane@hud.gov.
For specific legal questions pertaining to
Section 42, contact Branch 5, Office of
the Associate Chief Counsel,
Passthroughs & Special Industries,
Internal Revenue Service, 1111
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington,
DC 20224, telephone (202) 622–3040,
fax (202) 622–4524. For questions about
the ‘‘HUB Zones’’ program, contact
Michael P. McHale, Assistant
Administrator for Procurement Policy,
Office of Government Contracting,
Small Business Administration, 409
Third Street, SW., Suite 8800,
Washington, DC 20416, telephone (202)
205–8885, fax (202) 205–7167, or send
e-mail to hubzone@sba.gov. A text
telephone is available for persons with
hearing or speech impairments at (202)
708–9300. (These are not toll-free
telephone numbers.) Additional copies
of this notice are available through HUD
User at (800) 245–2691 for a small fee
to cover duplication and mailing costs.
Copies Available Electronically: This
notice and additional information about
DDAs and QCTs are available
electronically on the Internet at https://
www.huduser.org/datasets/qct.html.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
VerDate jul<14>2003
17:03 Aug 19, 2005
Jkt 205001
This Document
This notice designates DDAs for each
of the 50 states, the District of Columbia,
Puerto Rico, American Samoa, Guam,
the Northern Mariana Islands, and the
U.S. Virgin Islands. The designations of
DDAs in this notice are based on final
Fiscal Year (FY) 2005 Fair Market Rents
(FMRs), 2005 income limits, and 2000
Census population counts as explained
below. The designations of QCTs under
Section 42 of the Internal Revenue Code
published December 12, 2002 (67 FR
76451), as supplemented on December
19, 2003 (68 FR 70982), remain in effect.
2000 Census
Data from the 2000 Census on total
population of metropolitan areas and
nonmetropolitan areas are used in the
designation of DDAs. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB)
published new metropolitan area
definitions incorporating 2000 Census
data in OMB Bulletin No. 03–04 on June
6, 2003, as updated in OMB Bulletin No.
04–03 on February 18, 2004, and OMB
Bulletin No. 05–02 on February 22,
2005. The FY2005 FMRs and 2005
income limits used to designate Difficult
Development Areas are based on the
Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) and
Primary Metropolitan Statistical Area
(PMSA) definitions established by OMB
in OMB Bulletin No. 99–04 on June 30,
1999. Therefore, for the purposes of
designating DDAs, ‘‘metropolitan areas’’
will continue to be defined according to
the MSA/PMSA definitions established
in OMB Bulletin No. 99–04 on June 30,
1999, until further notice.
Background
The U.S. Department of the Treasury
(Treasury) and its Internal Revenue
Service (IRS) are authorized to interpret
and enforce the provisions of the Code,
including the LIHTC found at Section
42 of the Code. The Secretary of HUD
is required to designate DDAs and QCTs
by Section 42(d)(5)(C) of the Code. In
order to assist in understanding HUD’s
mandated designation of DDAs and
QCTs for use in administering Section
42, a summary of the section is
provided. The following summary does
not purport to bind Treasury or the IRS
in any way, nor does it purport to bind
HUD, as HUD has authority to interpret
or administer the Code only in instances
where it receives explicit delegation.
Summary of Low-Income Housing Tax
Credit
The LIHTC is a tax incentive intended
to increase the availability of lowincome housing. Section 42 provides an
income tax credit to owners of newly
constructed or substantially
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
rehabilitated low-income rental housing
projects. The dollar amount of the
LIHTC available for allocation by each
state (credit ceiling) is limited by
population. Each state is allowed a
credit ceiling based on a statutory
formula indicated at Section 42(h)(3).
States may carry forward unallocated
credits derived from the credit ceiling
for one year; however, to the extent
these unallocated credits are not used
by then, the credits go into a national
pool to be redistributed to states as
additional credit. State and local
housing agencies allocate the state’s
credit ceiling among low-income
housing buildings whose owners have
applied for the credit. Besides Section
42 credits derived from the credit
ceiling, states may also provide Section
42 credits to owners of buildings based
on the percentage of certain building
costs financed by tax-exempt bond
proceeds. Credits provided under the
tax-exempt bond ‘‘volume cap’’ do not
reduce the credits available from the
credit ceiling.
The credits allocated to a building are
based on the cost of units placed in
service as low-income units under
certain minimum occupancy and
maximum rent criteria. In general, a
building must meet one of two
thresholds to be eligible for the LIHTC:
Either 20 percent of the units must be
rent-restricted and occupied by tenants
with incomes no higher than 50 percent
of the area median gross income (AMGI)
or 40 percent of the units must be rent
restricted and occupied by tenants with
incomes no higher than 60 percent of
AMGI. The term ‘‘rent-restricted’’ means
that gross rent, including an allowance
for utilities, cannot exceed 30 percent of
the tenant’s imputed income limitation
(i.e., 50 percent or 60 percent of AMGI).
The rent and occupancy thresholds
remain in effect for at least 15 years, and
building owners are required to enter
into agreements to maintain the lowincome character of the building for at
least an additional 15 years.
The LIHTC reduces income tax
liability dollar for dollar. It is taken
annually for a term of ten years and is
intended to yield a present value of
either: (1) 70 percent of the ‘‘qualified
basis’’ for new construction or
substantial rehabilitation expenditures
that are not federally subsidized (i.e.,
financed with tax-exempt bonds or
below-market federal loans), or (2) 30
percent of the qualified basis for the cost
of acquiring certain existing buildings or
projects that are federally subsidized.
The actual credit rates are adjusted
monthly for projects placed in service
after 1987 under procedures specified in
Section 42. Individuals can use the
E:\FR\FM\22AUN2.SGM
22AUN2
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 161 / Monday, August 22, 2005 / Notices
credits up to a deduction equivalent of
$25,000 (the actual maximum amount of
credit that an individual can claim
depends on the individual’s marginal
tax rate). Individuals cannot use the
credits against the alternative minimum
tax. Corporations, other than S or
personal service corporations, can use
the credits against ordinary income tax.
They cannot use the credits against the
alternative minimum tax. These
corporations can also deduct losses from
the project.
The qualified basis represents the
product of the building’s ‘‘applicable
fraction’’ and its ‘‘eligible basis.’’ The
applicable fraction is based on the
number of low-income units in the
building as a percentage of the total
number of units, or based on the floor
space of low income-units as a
percentage of the total floor space of
residential units in the building. The
eligible basis is the adjusted basis
attributable to acquisition,
rehabilitation, or new construction costs
(depending on the type of LIHTC
involved). These costs include amounts
chargeable to a capital account that are
incurred prior to the end of the first
taxable year in which the qualified lowincome building is placed in service or,
at the election of the taxpayer, the end
of the succeeding taxable year. In the
case of buildings located in designated
DDAs or designated QCTs, eligible basis
can be increased by up to 130 percent
from what it would otherwise be. This
means that the available credits also can
be increased by up to 30 percent. For
example, if a 70 percent credit is
available, it effectively could be
increased to as much as 91 percent.
Section 42 of the Code defines a DDA
as any area designated by the Secretary
of HUD as an area that has high
construction, land, and utility costs
relative to the AMGI. All designated
DDAs in metropolitan areas (taken
together) may not contain more than 20
percent of the aggregate population of
all metropolitan areas, and all
designated areas not in metropolitan
areas may not contain more than 20
percent of the aggregate population of
all nonmetropolitan areas.
Explanation of HUD Designation
Methodology
A. Difficult Development Areas
In developing the list of DDAs, HUD
compared housing costs with incomes.
HUD used 2000 Census population data
and the metropolitan area (MSA/PMSA)
definitions as published in OMB
Bulletin No. 99–04 on June 30, 1999. In
keeping with past practice of basing the
coming year’s DDA designations on data
VerDate jul<14>2003
17:03 Aug 19, 2005
Jkt 205001
from the preceding year, the basis for
these comparisons was the 2005 HUD
income limits for Very Low-Income
households (Very Low Income Limits,
or VLILs) and final FY2005 FMRs used
for the Section 8 Housing Choice
Voucher program. The procedure used
in making the DDA calculations follows:
1. For each MSA/PMSA and each
nonmetropolitan area, a ratio was
calculated. This calculation used the
final FY2005 two-bedroom FMR and the
2005 four-person VLIL.
a. The numerator of the ratio was the
area’s final FY2005 FMR. In general, the
FMR is based on the 40th percentile rent
paid by recent movers for a twobedroom apartment. In metropolitan
areas granted a FMR based on the 50th
percentile rent for purposes of
improving the administration of HUD’s
Housing Choice Voucher program (see
66 FR 162), the 40th percentile rent was
used for nationwide consistency of
comparisons.
b. The denominator of the ratio was
the monthly LIHTC income-based rent
limit calculated as 1⁄2 of 30 percent of
120 percent of the area’s VLIL (where
the VLIL was rounded to the nearest $50
and not allowed to exceed 80 percent of
the AMGI in areas where the VLIL is
adjusted upward from its 50 percent of
AMGI base).
2. The ratios of the FMR to the LIHTC
income-based rent limit were arrayed in
descending order, separately, for MSAs/
PMSAs and for nonmetropolitan areas.
3. The DDAs are those with the
highest ratios cumulative to 20 percent
of the 2000 population of all
metropolitan areas and of all
nonmetropolitan areas, respectively.
B. Application of Population Caps to
Difficult Development Area
Determinations
In identifying DDAs, HUD applied
caps, or limitations, as noted above. The
cumulative population of metropolitan
DDAs cannot exceed 20 percent of the
cumulative population of all
metropolitan areas and the cumulative
population of nonmetropolitan DDAs
cannot exceed 20 percent of the
cumulative population of all
nonmetropolitan areas.
In applying these caps, HUD
established procedures to deal with how
to treat small overruns of the caps. The
remainder of this section explains the
procedure. In general, HUD stops
selecting areas when it is impossible to
choose another area without exceeding
the applicable cap. The only exceptions
to this policy are when the next eligible
excluded area contains either a large
absolute population or a large
percentage of the total population, or
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
49141
the next excluded area’s ranking ratio as
described above was identical (to four
decimal places) to the last area selected,
and its inclusion resulted in only a
minor overrun of the cap. Thus, for both
the designated metropolitan and
nonmetropolitan DDAs, there may be
minimal overruns of the cap. HUD
believes the designation of these
additional areas is consistent with the
intent of the legislation. As long as the
apparent excess is small due to
measurement errors, some latitude is
justifiable because it is impossible to
determine whether the 20 percent cap
has been exceeded. Despite the care and
effort involved in a decennial census,
the Census Bureau and all users of the
data recognize that the population
counts for a given area and for the entire
country are not precise. The extent of
the measurement error is unknown.
Thus, there can be errors in both the
numerator and denominator of the ratio
of populations used in applying a 20
percent cap. In circumstances where a
strict application of a 20 percent cap
results in an anomalous situation,
recognition of the unavoidable
imprecision in the census data justifies
accepting small variances above the 20
percent limit.
C. Exceptions to OMB Definitions of
MSAs/PMSAs and Other Geographic
Matters
As stated in OMB Bulletin 99–04
defining metropolitan areas:
‘‘OMB establishes and maintains the
definitions of the [Metropolitan Areas] solely
for statistical purposes * * * OMB does not
take into account or attempt to anticipate any
nonstatistical uses that may be made of the
definitions * * * We recognize that some
legislation specifies the use of metropolitan
areas for programmatic purposes, including
allocating Federal funds.’’
HUD makes exceptions to OMB
definitions in calculating FMRs by
deleting counties from metropolitan
areas whose OMB definitions are
determined by HUD to be larger than
their housing market areas.
The following counties are assigned
their own FMRs and VLILs and
evaluated as if they were separate
metropolitan areas for purposes of
designating DDAs.
Metropolitan Area and Counties Deleted
Chicago, Illinois: DeKalb, Grundy, and
Kendall Counties.
Cincinnati-Hamilton, Ohio-KentuckyIndiana: Brown County, Ohio;
Gallatin, Grant, and Pendleton
Counties, Kentucky; and Ohio
County, Indiana.
Dallas, Texas: Henderson County.
E:\FR\FM\22AUN2.SGM
22AUN2
49142
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 161 / Monday, August 22, 2005 / Notices
Flagstaff, Arizona-Utah: Kane County,
Utah.
New Orleans, Louisiana: St. James
Parish.
Washington, DC-Maryland-VirginiaWest Virginia: Clarke, Culpeper, King
George, and Warren Counties,
Virginia; and Berkely and Jefferson
Counties, West Virginia.
Affected MSAs/PMSAs are assigned
the indicator ‘‘(part)’’ in the list of
Metropolitan DDAs. Any of the
excluded counties designated as DDAs
separately from their metropolitan areas
are designated by the county name.
In the New England states
(Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts,
New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and
Vermont), OMB defined MSAs/PMSAs
according to county subdivisions or
minor civil divisions (MCDs), rather
than county boundaries. Thus, when a
New England county is designated as a
Nonmetropolitan DDA, only that part of
the county (the group of MCDs) not
included in any MSA/PMSA is the
Nonmetropolitan DDA. Affected
counties are assigned the indicator
‘‘(part)’’ in the list of Nonmetropolitan
DDAs.
For the convenience of readers of this
notice, the geographical definitions of
designated Metropolitan DDAs and the
MCDs included in partial-county
Nonmetropolitan DDAs in the New
England states are included in the list of
DDAs.
Future Designations
DDAs are designated annually as
updated income and FMR data become
available.
Effective Date
The 2006 lists of DDAs are effective:
(1) For allocations of credit after
December 31, 2005; or (2) for purposes
of Section 42(h)(4)(B) of the Code, if the
bonds are issued and the building is
placed in service after December 31,
2005. If an area is not on a subsequent
list of DDAs, the 2006 lists are effective
for the area if (1) the allocation of credit
to an applicant is made no later than the
end of the 365-day period after the
submission to the credit-allocating
agency of a complete application by the
applicant, and the submission is made
before the effective date of the
subsequent lists; or (2) for purposes of
Section 42(h)(4)(B) of the Code, the
bonds are issued or the building is
placed in service no later than the end
of the 365-day period after the applicant
submits a complete application to the
bond-issuing agency, and the
submission is made before the effective
date of the subsequent lists, provided
that both the issuance of the bonds and
VerDate jul<14>2003
17:03 Aug 19, 2005
Jkt 205001
the placement in service of the building
occur after the application is submitted.
An application is deemed to be
submitted on the date it is filed if the
application is determined to be
complete as certified in writing by the
credit-allocating agency or bond-issuing
agency. A ‘‘complete application’’
means that no more than de minimis
clarification of the application is
required for the agency to make a
decision about the allocation of tax
credits or issuance of bonds requested
in the application.
The designations of QCTs under
Section 42 of the Internal Revenue Code
published December 12, 2002 (67 FR
76451), as supplemented on December
19, 2003 (68 FR 70982), remain in effect.
The above language regarding calendar
year 2006 and subsequent designations
of DDAs also applies to the designations
of QCTs published December 12, 2002
(67 FR 76451), as supplemented on
December 19, 2003 (68 FR 70982), and
subsequent designations of QCTs.
Interpretive Examples of Effective Date
For the convenience of readers of this
notice, interpretive examples are
provided below to illustrate the
consequences of the effective date in
areas that gain or lose DDA status. The
examples are equally applicable to
future QCT designations.
(Case A) Project ‘‘A’’ is located in a
2006 DDA that is NOT a designated
DDA in 2007. An application for tax
credits for Project ‘‘A’’ is filed with the
allocating agency November 15, 2006,
which the credit-allocating agency
certifies in writing as complete. Credits
are allocated to Project ‘‘A’’ on October
30, 2007. Project ‘‘A’’ IS eligible for the
increase in basis accorded a project in
a 2006 DDA because the application was
filed BEFORE January 1, 2007 (the
assumed effective date for the 2007 DDA
lists), and tax credits were allocated no
later than the end of the 365-day period
after the filing of the complete
application for an allocation of tax
credits.
(Case B) Project ‘‘B’’ is located in a
2006 DDA that is NOT a designated
DDA in 2007. An application for tax
credits for Project ‘‘B’’ is filed with the
allocating agency December 1, 2006,
which the credit-allocating agency
certifies in writing as complete. Credits
are allocated to Project ‘‘B’’ on March
30, 2008. Project ‘‘B’’ IS NOT eligible for
the increase in basis accorded a project
in a 2006 DDA because, although the
application for an allocation of tax
credits was filed BEFORE January 1,
2007 (the assumed effective date of the
2007 DDA lists), the tax credits were
allocated later than the end of the 365-
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
day period after the filing of the
complete application.
(Case C) Project ‘‘C’’ is located in a
2006 DDA that was not a DDA in 2005.
Project ‘‘C’’ was placed in service
November 15, 2005. An application for
tax-exempt bond financing for Project
‘‘C’’ is filed with the bond-issuing
agency on January 15, 2006, which the
bond-issuing agency certifies in writing
as complete. The bonds that will
support the permanent financing of
Project ‘‘C’’ are issued September 30,
2006. Project ‘‘C’’ IS NOT eligible for the
increase in basis otherwise accorded a
project in a 2006 DDA because the
project was placed in service BEFORE
January 1, 2006.
(Case D) Project ‘‘D’’ is located in an
area that is a DDA in 2006, but IS NOT
a DDA in 2007. An application for taxexempt bond financing for Project ‘‘D’’
is filed with the bond-issuing agency on
October 30, 2006, which the bondissuing agency certifies in writing as
complete. Bonds are issued for Project
‘‘D’’ on April 30, 2007, but Project ‘‘D’’
is not placed in service until January 30,
2008. Project ‘‘D’’ is eligible for the
increase in basis available to projects
located in 2006 DDAs because the first
of the two events necessary for
triggering the effective date for buildings
described in Section 42(h)(4)(B) of the
Code (the two events being bonds issued
and buildings placed in service) took
place on April 30, 2007, within the 365day period after a complete application
for tax-exempt bond financing was filed,
and the application was filed during a
time when the location of Project ‘‘D’’
was in a DDA.
Findings and Certifications
Environmental Impact
In accordance with 40 CFR 1508.4 of
the regulations of the Council on
Environmental Quality and 24 CFR
50.19(c)(6) of HUD’s regulations, the
policies and procedures contained in
this notice provide for the establishment
of fiscal requirements or procedures that
do not constitute a development
decision affecting the physical
condition of specific project areas or
building sites and, therefore, are
categorically excluded from the
requirements of the National
Environmental Policy Act, except for
extraordinary circumstances, and no
Finding of No Significant Impact is
required.
Federalism Impact
Executive Order 13132 (entitled
‘‘Federalism’’) prohibits an agency from
publishing any policy document that
has federalism implications if the
E:\FR\FM\22AUN2.SGM
22AUN2
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 161 / Monday, August 22, 2005 / Notices
document either imposes substantial
direct compliance costs on state and
local governments and is not required
by statute, or the document preempts
state law, unless the agency meets the
consultation and funding requirements
of section 6 of the executive order. This
notice merely designates ‘‘Difficult
VerDate jul<14>2003
17:03 Aug 19, 2005
Jkt 205001
Development Areas’’ and ‘‘Qualified
Census Tracts’’ as required under
Section 42 of the Internal Revenue
Code, as amended, for the use by
political subdivisions of the states in
allocating the Low-Income Housing Tax
Credit. This notice also details the
technical methodology used in making
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
49143
such designations. As a result, this
notice is not subject to review under the
order.
Dated: August 12, 2005.
Roy A. Bernardi,
Deputy Secretary.
BILLING CODE 4210–62–P
E:\FR\FM\22AUN2.SGM
22AUN2
VerDate jul<14>2003
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 161 / Monday, August 22, 2005 / Notices
17:03 Aug 19, 2005
Jkt 205001
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\22AUN2.SGM
22AUN2
EN22AU05.008
49144
VerDate jul<14>2003
17:03 Aug 19, 2005
Jkt 205001
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\22AUN2.SGM
22AUN2
49145
EN22AU05.009
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 161 / Monday, August 22, 2005 / Notices
VerDate jul<14>2003
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 161 / Monday, August 22, 2005 / Notices
17:03 Aug 19, 2005
Jkt 205001
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\22AUN2.SGM
22AUN2
EN22AU05.010
49146
VerDate jul<14>2003
17:03 Aug 19, 2005
Jkt 205001
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\22AUN2.SGM
22AUN2
49147
EN22AU05.011
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 161 / Monday, August 22, 2005 / Notices
VerDate jul<14>2003
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 161 / Monday, August 22, 2005 / Notices
17:03 Aug 19, 2005
Jkt 205001
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\22AUN2.SGM
22AUN2
EN22AU05.012
49148
VerDate jul<14>2003
17:03 Aug 19, 2005
Jkt 205001
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\22AUN2.SGM
22AUN2
49149
EN22AU05.013
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 161 / Monday, August 22, 2005 / Notices
VerDate jul<14>2003
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 161 / Monday, August 22, 2005 / Notices
17:03 Aug 19, 2005
Jkt 205001
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4725
E:\FR\FM\22AUN2.SGM
22AUN2
EN22AU05.014
49150
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 161 / Monday, August 22, 2005 / Notices
49151
[FR Doc. 05–16605 Filed 8–19–05; 8:45 am]
VerDate jul<14>2003
17:03 Aug 19, 2005
Jkt 205001
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\22AUN2.SGM
22AUN2
EN22AU05.015
BILLING CODE 4210–62–C
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 161 (Monday, August 22, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 49140-49151]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-16605]
[[Page 49139]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part V
Department of Housing and Urban Development
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Statutorily Mandated Designation of Difficult Development Areas for
Section 42 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986; Notice
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 161 / Monday, August 22, 2005 /
Notices
[[Page 49140]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
[Docket No. FR-4889-N-05]
Statutorily Mandated Designation of Difficult Development Areas
for Section 42 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986
AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, HUD.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document designates ``Difficult Development Areas''
(DDAs) for purposes of the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) under
Section 42 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (the Code) (26 U.S.C.
42). The United States Department of Housing and Urban Development
(HUD) makes new Difficult Development Area designations annually. The
designations of ``Qualified Census Tracts'' (QCTs) under Section 42 of
the Internal Revenue Code published December 12, 2002, as supplemented
on December 19, 2003, remain in effect.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For questions on how areas are
designated and on geographic definitions, contact Kurt G. Usowski,
Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary for Economic Affairs, Office of
Policy Development and Research, Department of Housing and Urban
Development, 451 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, DC 20410-6000,
telephone (202) 708-2770, or send e-mail to Alastair--
McFarlane@hud.gov. For specific legal questions pertaining to Section
42, contact Branch 5, Office of the Associate Chief Counsel,
Passthroughs & Special Industries, Internal Revenue Service, 1111
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20224, telephone (202) 622-
3040, fax (202) 622-4524. For questions about the ``HUB Zones''
program, contact Michael P. McHale, Assistant Administrator for
Procurement Policy, Office of Government Contracting, Small Business
Administration, 409 Third Street, SW., Suite 8800, Washington, DC
20416, telephone (202) 205-8885, fax (202) 205-7167, or send e-mail to
hubzone@sba.gov. A text telephone is available for persons with hearing
or speech impairments at (202) 708-9300. (These are not toll-free
telephone numbers.) Additional copies of this notice are available
through HUD User at (800) 245-2691 for a small fee to cover duplication
and mailing costs.
Copies Available Electronically: This notice and additional
information about DDAs and QCTs are available electronically on the
Internet at https://www.huduser.org/datasets/qct.html.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
This Document
This notice designates DDAs for each of the 50 states, the District
of Columbia, Puerto Rico, American Samoa, Guam, the Northern Mariana
Islands, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. The designations of DDAs in this
notice are based on final Fiscal Year (FY) 2005 Fair Market Rents
(FMRs), 2005 income limits, and 2000 Census population counts as
explained below. The designations of QCTs under Section 42 of the
Internal Revenue Code published December 12, 2002 (67 FR 76451), as
supplemented on December 19, 2003 (68 FR 70982), remain in effect.
2000 Census
Data from the 2000 Census on total population of metropolitan areas
and nonmetropolitan areas are used in the designation of DDAs. The
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) published new metropolitan area
definitions incorporating 2000 Census data in OMB Bulletin No. 03-04 on
June 6, 2003, as updated in OMB Bulletin No. 04-03 on February 18,
2004, and OMB Bulletin No. 05-02 on February 22, 2005. The FY2005 FMRs
and 2005 income limits used to designate Difficult Development Areas
are based on the Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) and Primary
Metropolitan Statistical Area (PMSA) definitions established by OMB in
OMB Bulletin No. 99-04 on June 30, 1999. Therefore, for the purposes of
designating DDAs, ``metropolitan areas'' will continue to be defined
according to the MSA/PMSA definitions established in OMB Bulletin No.
99-04 on June 30, 1999, until further notice.
Background
The U.S. Department of the Treasury (Treasury) and its Internal
Revenue Service (IRS) are authorized to interpret and enforce the
provisions of the Code, including the LIHTC found at Section 42 of the
Code. The Secretary of HUD is required to designate DDAs and QCTs by
Section 42(d)(5)(C) of the Code. In order to assist in understanding
HUD's mandated designation of DDAs and QCTs for use in administering
Section 42, a summary of the section is provided. The following summary
does not purport to bind Treasury or the IRS in any way, nor does it
purport to bind HUD, as HUD has authority to interpret or administer
the Code only in instances where it receives explicit delegation.
Summary of Low-Income Housing Tax Credit
The LIHTC is a tax incentive intended to increase the availability
of low-income housing. Section 42 provides an income tax credit to
owners of newly constructed or substantially rehabilitated low-income
rental housing projects. The dollar amount of the LIHTC available for
allocation by each state (credit ceiling) is limited by population.
Each state is allowed a credit ceiling based on a statutory formula
indicated at Section 42(h)(3). States may carry forward unallocated
credits derived from the credit ceiling for one year; however, to the
extent these unallocated credits are not used by then, the credits go
into a national pool to be redistributed to states as additional
credit. State and local housing agencies allocate the state's credit
ceiling among low-income housing buildings whose owners have applied
for the credit. Besides Section 42 credits derived from the credit
ceiling, states may also provide Section 42 credits to owners of
buildings based on the percentage of certain building costs financed by
tax-exempt bond proceeds. Credits provided under the tax-exempt bond
``volume cap'' do not reduce the credits available from the credit
ceiling.
The credits allocated to a building are based on the cost of units
placed in service as low-income units under certain minimum occupancy
and maximum rent criteria. In general, a building must meet one of two
thresholds to be eligible for the LIHTC: Either 20 percent of the units
must be rent-restricted and occupied by tenants with incomes no higher
than 50 percent of the area median gross income (AMGI) or 40 percent of
the units must be rent restricted and occupied by tenants with incomes
no higher than 60 percent of AMGI. The term ``rent-restricted'' means
that gross rent, including an allowance for utilities, cannot exceed 30
percent of the tenant's imputed income limitation (i.e., 50 percent or
60 percent of AMGI). The rent and occupancy thresholds remain in effect
for at least 15 years, and building owners are required to enter into
agreements to maintain the low-income character of the building for at
least an additional 15 years.
The LIHTC reduces income tax liability dollar for dollar. It is
taken annually for a term of ten years and is intended to yield a
present value of either: (1) 70 percent of the ``qualified basis'' for
new construction or substantial rehabilitation expenditures that are
not federally subsidized (i.e., financed with tax-exempt bonds or
below-market federal loans), or (2) 30 percent of the qualified basis
for the cost of acquiring certain existing buildings or projects that
are federally subsidized. The actual credit rates are adjusted monthly
for projects placed in service after 1987 under procedures specified in
Section 42. Individuals can use the
[[Page 49141]]
credits up to a deduction equivalent of $25,000 (the actual maximum
amount of credit that an individual can claim depends on the
individual's marginal tax rate). Individuals cannot use the credits
against the alternative minimum tax. Corporations, other than S or
personal service corporations, can use the credits against ordinary
income tax. They cannot use the credits against the alternative minimum
tax. These corporations can also deduct losses from the project.
The qualified basis represents the product of the building's
``applicable fraction'' and its ``eligible basis.'' The applicable
fraction is based on the number of low-income units in the building as
a percentage of the total number of units, or based on the floor space
of low income-units as a percentage of the total floor space of
residential units in the building. The eligible basis is the adjusted
basis attributable to acquisition, rehabilitation, or new construction
costs (depending on the type of LIHTC involved). These costs include
amounts chargeable to a capital account that are incurred prior to the
end of the first taxable year in which the qualified low-income
building is placed in service or, at the election of the taxpayer, the
end of the succeeding taxable year. In the case of buildings located in
designated DDAs or designated QCTs, eligible basis can be increased by
up to 130 percent from what it would otherwise be. This means that the
available credits also can be increased by up to 30 percent. For
example, if a 70 percent credit is available, it effectively could be
increased to as much as 91 percent.
Section 42 of the Code defines a DDA as any area designated by the
Secretary of HUD as an area that has high construction, land, and
utility costs relative to the AMGI. All designated DDAs in metropolitan
areas (taken together) may not contain more than 20 percent of the
aggregate population of all metropolitan areas, and all designated
areas not in metropolitan areas may not contain more than 20 percent of
the aggregate population of all nonmetropolitan areas.
Explanation of HUD Designation Methodology
A. Difficult Development Areas
In developing the list of DDAs, HUD compared housing costs with
incomes. HUD used 2000 Census population data and the metropolitan area
(MSA/PMSA) definitions as published in OMB Bulletin No. 99-04 on June
30, 1999. In keeping with past practice of basing the coming year's DDA
designations on data from the preceding year, the basis for these
comparisons was the 2005 HUD income limits for Very Low-Income
households (Very Low Income Limits, or VLILs) and final FY2005 FMRs
used for the Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program. The procedure
used in making the DDA calculations follows:
1. For each MSA/PMSA and each nonmetropolitan area, a ratio was
calculated. This calculation used the final FY2005 two-bedroom FMR and
the 2005 four-person VLIL.
a. The numerator of the ratio was the area's final FY2005 FMR. In
general, the FMR is based on the 40th percentile rent paid by recent
movers for a two-bedroom apartment. In metropolitan areas granted a FMR
based on the 50th percentile rent for purposes of improving the
administration of HUD's Housing Choice Voucher program (see 66 FR 162),
the 40th percentile rent was used for nationwide consistency of
comparisons.
b. The denominator of the ratio was the monthly LIHTC income-based
rent limit calculated as \1/2\ of 30 percent of 120 percent of the
area's VLIL (where the VLIL was rounded to the nearest $50 and not
allowed to exceed 80 percent of the AMGI in areas where the VLIL is
adjusted upward from its 50 percent of AMGI base).
2. The ratios of the FMR to the LIHTC income-based rent limit were
arrayed in descending order, separately, for MSAs/PMSAs and for
nonmetropolitan areas.
3. The DDAs are those with the highest ratios cumulative to 20
percent of the 2000 population of all metropolitan areas and of all
nonmetropolitan areas, respectively.
B. Application of Population Caps to Difficult Development Area
Determinations
In identifying DDAs, HUD applied caps, or limitations, as noted
above. The cumulative population of metropolitan DDAs cannot exceed 20
percent of the cumulative population of all metropolitan areas and the
cumulative population of nonmetropolitan DDAs cannot exceed 20 percent
of the cumulative population of all nonmetropolitan areas.
In applying these caps, HUD established procedures to deal with how
to treat small overruns of the caps. The remainder of this section
explains the procedure. In general, HUD stops selecting areas when it
is impossible to choose another area without exceeding the applicable
cap. The only exceptions to this policy are when the next eligible
excluded area contains either a large absolute population or a large
percentage of the total population, or the next excluded area's ranking
ratio as described above was identical (to four decimal places) to the
last area selected, and its inclusion resulted in only a minor overrun
of the cap. Thus, for both the designated metropolitan and
nonmetropolitan DDAs, there may be minimal overruns of the cap. HUD
believes the designation of these additional areas is consistent with
the intent of the legislation. As long as the apparent excess is small
due to measurement errors, some latitude is justifiable because it is
impossible to determine whether the 20 percent cap has been exceeded.
Despite the care and effort involved in a decennial census, the Census
Bureau and all users of the data recognize that the population counts
for a given area and for the entire country are not precise. The extent
of the measurement error is unknown. Thus, there can be errors in both
the numerator and denominator of the ratio of populations used in
applying a 20 percent cap. In circumstances where a strict application
of a 20 percent cap results in an anomalous situation, recognition of
the unavoidable imprecision in the census data justifies accepting
small variances above the 20 percent limit.
C. Exceptions to OMB Definitions of MSAs/PMSAs and Other Geographic
Matters
As stated in OMB Bulletin 99-04 defining metropolitan areas:
``OMB establishes and maintains the definitions of the
[Metropolitan Areas] solely for statistical purposes * * * OMB does
not take into account or attempt to anticipate any nonstatistical
uses that may be made of the definitions * * * We recognize that
some legislation specifies the use of metropolitan areas for
programmatic purposes, including allocating Federal funds.''
HUD makes exceptions to OMB definitions in calculating FMRs by
deleting counties from metropolitan areas whose OMB definitions are
determined by HUD to be larger than their housing market areas.
The following counties are assigned their own FMRs and VLILs and
evaluated as if they were separate metropolitan areas for purposes of
designating DDAs.
Metropolitan Area and Counties Deleted
Chicago, Illinois: DeKalb, Grundy, and Kendall Counties.
Cincinnati-Hamilton, Ohio-Kentucky-Indiana: Brown County, Ohio;
Gallatin, Grant, and Pendleton Counties, Kentucky; and Ohio County,
Indiana.
Dallas, Texas: Henderson County.
[[Page 49142]]
Flagstaff, Arizona-Utah: Kane County, Utah.
New Orleans, Louisiana: St. James Parish.
Washington, DC-Maryland-Virginia-West Virginia: Clarke, Culpeper, King
George, and Warren Counties, Virginia; and Berkely and Jefferson
Counties, West Virginia.
Affected MSAs/PMSAs are assigned the indicator ``(part)'' in the
list of Metropolitan DDAs. Any of the excluded counties designated as
DDAs separately from their metropolitan areas are designated by the
county name.
In the New England states (Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New
Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Vermont), OMB defined MSAs/PMSAs according
to county subdivisions or minor civil divisions (MCDs), rather than
county boundaries. Thus, when a New England county is designated as a
Nonmetropolitan DDA, only that part of the county (the group of MCDs)
not included in any MSA/PMSA is the Nonmetropolitan DDA. Affected
counties are assigned the indicator ``(part)'' in the list of
Nonmetropolitan DDAs.
For the convenience of readers of this notice, the geographical
definitions of designated Metropolitan DDAs and the MCDs included in
partial-county Nonmetropolitan DDAs in the New England states are
included in the list of DDAs.
Future Designations
DDAs are designated annually as updated income and FMR data become
available.
Effective Date
The 2006 lists of DDAs are effective: (1) For allocations of credit
after December 31, 2005; or (2) for purposes of Section 42(h)(4)(B) of
the Code, if the bonds are issued and the building is placed in service
after December 31, 2005. If an area is not on a subsequent list of
DDAs, the 2006 lists are effective for the area if (1) the allocation
of credit to an applicant is made no later than the end of the 365-day
period after the submission to the credit-allocating agency of a
complete application by the applicant, and the submission is made
before the effective date of the subsequent lists; or (2) for purposes
of Section 42(h)(4)(B) of the Code, the bonds are issued or the
building is placed in service no later than the end of the 365-day
period after the applicant submits a complete application to the bond-
issuing agency, and the submission is made before the effective date of
the subsequent lists, provided that both the issuance of the bonds and
the placement in service of the building occur after the application is
submitted.
An application is deemed to be submitted on the date it is filed if
the application is determined to be complete as certified in writing by
the credit-allocating agency or bond-issuing agency. A ``complete
application'' means that no more than de minimis clarification of the
application is required for the agency to make a decision about the
allocation of tax credits or issuance of bonds requested in the
application.
The designations of QCTs under Section 42 of the Internal Revenue
Code published December 12, 2002 (67 FR 76451), as supplemented on
December 19, 2003 (68 FR 70982), remain in effect. The above language
regarding calendar year 2006 and subsequent designations of DDAs also
applies to the designations of QCTs published December 12, 2002 (67 FR
76451), as supplemented on December 19, 2003 (68 FR 70982), and
subsequent designations of QCTs.
Interpretive Examples of Effective Date
For the convenience of readers of this notice, interpretive
examples are provided below to illustrate the consequences of the
effective date in areas that gain or lose DDA status. The examples are
equally applicable to future QCT designations.
(Case A) Project ``A'' is located in a 2006 DDA that is NOT a
designated DDA in 2007. An application for tax credits for Project
``A'' is filed with the allocating agency November 15, 2006, which the
credit-allocating agency certifies in writing as complete. Credits are
allocated to Project ``A'' on October 30, 2007. Project ``A'' IS
eligible for the increase in basis accorded a project in a 2006 DDA
because the application was filed BEFORE January 1, 2007 (the assumed
effective date for the 2007 DDA lists), and tax credits were allocated
no later than the end of the 365-day period after the filing of the
complete application for an allocation of tax credits.
(Case B) Project ``B'' is located in a 2006 DDA that is NOT a
designated DDA in 2007. An application for tax credits for Project
``B'' is filed with the allocating agency December 1, 2006, which the
credit-allocating agency certifies in writing as complete. Credits are
allocated to Project ``B'' on March 30, 2008. Project ``B'' IS NOT
eligible for the increase in basis accorded a project in a 2006 DDA
because, although the application for an allocation of tax credits was
filed BEFORE January 1, 2007 (the assumed effective date of the 2007
DDA lists), the tax credits were allocated later than the end of the
365-day period after the filing of the complete application.
(Case C) Project ``C'' is located in a 2006 DDA that was not a DDA
in 2005. Project ``C'' was placed in service November 15, 2005. An
application for tax-exempt bond financing for Project ``C'' is filed
with the bond-issuing agency on January 15, 2006, which the bond-
issuing agency certifies in writing as complete. The bonds that will
support the permanent financing of Project ``C'' are issued September
30, 2006. Project ``C'' IS NOT eligible for the increase in basis
otherwise accorded a project in a 2006 DDA because the project was
placed in service BEFORE January 1, 2006.
(Case D) Project ``D'' is located in an area that is a DDA in 2006,
but IS NOT a DDA in 2007. An application for tax-exempt bond financing
for Project ``D'' is filed with the bond-issuing agency on October 30,
2006, which the bond-issuing agency certifies in writing as complete.
Bonds are issued for Project ``D'' on April 30, 2007, but Project ``D''
is not placed in service until January 30, 2008. Project ``D'' is
eligible for the increase in basis available to projects located in
2006 DDAs because the first of the two events necessary for triggering
the effective date for buildings described in Section 42(h)(4)(B) of
the Code (the two events being bonds issued and buildings placed in
service) took place on April 30, 2007, within the 365-day period after
a complete application for tax-exempt bond financing was filed, and the
application was filed during a time when the location of Project ``D''
was in a DDA.
Findings and Certifications
Environmental Impact
In accordance with 40 CFR 1508.4 of the regulations of the Council
on Environmental Quality and 24 CFR 50.19(c)(6) of HUD's regulations,
the policies and procedures contained in this notice provide for the
establishment of fiscal requirements or procedures that do not
constitute a development decision affecting the physical condition of
specific project areas or building sites and, therefore, are
categorically excluded from the requirements of the National
Environmental Policy Act, except for extraordinary circumstances, and
no Finding of No Significant Impact is required.
Federalism Impact
Executive Order 13132 (entitled ``Federalism'') prohibits an agency
from publishing any policy document that has federalism implications if
the
[[Page 49143]]
document either imposes substantial direct compliance costs on state
and local governments and is not required by statute, or the document
preempts state law, unless the agency meets the consultation and
funding requirements of section 6 of the executive order. This notice
merely designates ``Difficult Development Areas'' and ``Qualified
Census Tracts'' as required under Section 42 of the Internal Revenue
Code, as amended, for the use by political subdivisions of the states
in allocating the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit. This notice also
details the technical methodology used in making such designations. As
a result, this notice is not subject to review under the order.
Dated: August 12, 2005.
Roy A. Bernardi,
Deputy Secretary.
BILLING CODE 4210-62-P
[[Page 49144]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN22AU05.008
[[Page 49145]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN22AU05.009
[[Page 49146]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN22AU05.010
[[Page 49147]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN22AU05.011
[[Page 49148]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN22AU05.012
[[Page 49149]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN22AU05.013
[[Page 49150]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN22AU05.014
[[Page 49151]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN22AU05.015
[FR Doc. 05-16605 Filed 8-19-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210-62-C