Section 108 Loan Guarantee Program: Announcement of Fee To Cover Credit Subsidy Costs, 68297-68299 [2016-23986]
Download as PDF
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 192 / Tuesday, October 4, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
risks. For example, available quality
control materials may contain glucose
but do not contain other reducing sugars
(e.g., galactose, lactose). Therefore, such
materials might not readily detect an
issue with the device’s safety or
effectiveness in detecting other reducing
sugars, before causing harm. The
petition provided insufficient
information to support the position that
changes in the device that could affect
safety and effectiveness will either be
readily detectable or not materially
increase risks. Moreover, changes in the
device that could affect safety and
effectiveness might materially increase
the risk of injury, incorrect diagnosis, or
ineffective treatment given the device
type’s intended uses. The petition also
did not provide information to the
contrary. The petition did not provide
any information regarding the fourth
factor.
In addition to these four factors, FDA
considers the ‘‘limitations on
exemption.’’ Manufacturers of any
commercially distributed device for
which FDA has granted an exemption
from the requirement of premarket
notification must still submit a
premarket notification to FDA prior to
marketing the device when any of the
limitations of exemption are exceeded.
The general limitations of exemption
from premarket notification contained
in § 862.9 (21 CFR 862.9) are broadly
applicable to in vitro diagnostic (IVD)
devices classified under part 862 (21
CFR part 862). Under § 862.9, the
exemption from the premarket
notification requirements applies, in the
case of IVD devices, only to those
devices under part 862 for which
misdiagnosis, as a result of using the
device, would not be associated with
high morbidity or mortality. FDA has
previously assessed that this limitation
is exceeded, and a premarket
notification is necessary to provide a
reasonable assurance of the safety and
effectiveness of an IVD device, when
such device is intended for use in
screening or diagnosis of familial or
acquired genetic disorders, including
inborn errors of metabolism
(§ 862.9(c)(2)) or intended for use in
diabetes management (§ 862.9(c)(5)).
The copper reduction tablet test
described in the petition is intended for
such uses and would likely exceed the
limitations just described.
Accordingly, for all of the foregoing
reasons, the petition failed to
demonstrate that a premarket
submission is not necessary to provide
a reasonable assurance of the safety and
effectiveness of the device intended for
such uses. Therefore, FDA is issuing
this order denying the petition
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:56 Oct 03, 2016
Jkt 241001
requesting exemption for a method,
metallic reduction, glucose (urinary,
nonquantitative) test system in a reagent
tablet format that is intended to measure
glucosuria (glucose in urine) from the
premarket notification requirements.
Manufacturers of this device type must
continue to submit and receive FDA
clearance of a 510(k) before marketing
their device, as well as comply with all
other applicable requirements under the
FD&C Act.
V. Reference
The following reference is on display
in the Division of Dockets Management
(HFA–305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm.
1061, Rockville, MD 20852, and is
available for viewing by interested
persons between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m.,
Monday through Friday; it is also
available electronically at https://
www.regulations.gov. FDA has verified
the Web site address, as of the date this
document publishes in the Federal
Register, but Web sites are subject to
change over time.
1. ‘‘Procedures for Class II Device
Exemptions from Premarket Notification,
Guidance for Industry and CDRH Staff,’’
February 1998, available at https://
www.fda.gov/downloads/
MedicalDevices/
DeviceRegulationandGuidance/
GuidanceDocuments/UCM080199.pdf.
Dated: September 28, 2016.
Leslie Kux,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2016–23901 Filed 10–3–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND
URBAN DEVELOPMENT
24 CFR Part 570
[Docket No. FR–5767–N–05]
RIN 2506–AC35
Section 108 Loan Guarantee Program:
Announcement of Fee To Cover Credit
Subsidy Costs
Office of the Assistant
Secretary for Community Planning and
Development, HUD.
ACTION: Announcement of fee.
AGENCY:
This document announces the
fee that HUD will collect from
borrowers of loans guaranteed under
HUD’s Section 108 Loan Guarantee
Program (Section 108 Program) to offset
the credit subsidy costs of the
guaranteed loans pursuant to
commitments awarded in FY 2017.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
DATES:
68297
Effective Date: November 3,
2016.
Paul
Webster, Director, Financial
Management Division, Office of Block
Grant Assistance, Office of Community
Planning and Development, Department
of Housing and Urban Development,
451 7th Street, SW., Room 7180,
Washington, DC 20410; telephone
number 202–402–4563 (this is not a tollfree number). Individuals with speech
or hearing impairments may access this
number through TTY by calling the tollfree Federal Relay Service at 800–877–
8339. FAX inquiries (but not comments)
may be sent to Mr. Webster at 202–708–
1798 (this is not a toll-free number).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
I. Background
The Consolidated and Further
Continuing Appropriations Act, 2015
(Public Law 113–235, approved
December 16, 2014) (2015
Appropriations Act) provided that ‘‘the
Secretary shall collect fees from
borrowers . . . to result in a credit
subsidy cost of zero for guaranteeing’’
Section 108 loans. The Continuing
Appropriations Act, 2016 (Public Law
114–53, approved September 30, 2015)
continued the 2015 provision. This
continued funding act was followed by
The Consolidated Appropriations Act,
2016, Public Law 114–133, approved
December 18, 2015) (2016
Appropriations Act), which had
identical language regarding Section 108
credit subsidy to the 2015
Appropriations Act. The fiscal year
2017 HUD appropriations bills under
consideration in the House of
Representatives (H.R. 5394), and the
Senate (S. 2844) also have identical
language regarding the credit subsidy
for the Section 108 Program, and it is
expected that, when enacted, the final
fiscal year 2017 appropriations act will
as well.
On November 3, 2015, HUD
published a final rule (80 FR 67626)
following a February 5, 2015 proposed
rule (80 FR 6470) that amended the
Section 108 Program regulations at 24
CFR part 570 to establish additional
procedures, including procedures for
determining the amount of the fee and
for a 30-day public comment process
when HUD adopts changes to the
assumptions underlying the fee
calculation or if the fee structure itself
raises new considerations for borrowers.
HUD is required to collect fees from
Section 108 borrowers when necessary
to offset the credit subsidy costs to the
Federal government to guarantee
Section 108 loans. Following
E:\FR\FM\04OCR1.SGM
04OCR1
68298
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 192 / Tuesday, October 4, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
consideration of the public comments
submitted in response to HUD’s
February 5, 2015 proposed rule (80 FR
6469) that proposed the fee required to
offset the credit subsidy costs, on
November 3, 2015, HUD issued an
announcement of fee (80 FR 67634) to
set the fee for Section 108 loan
disbursements under loan guarantee
commitments awarded in FY 2016 at
2.58 percent of the principal amount of
the loan.
II. FY 2017 Fee: 2.59 Percent of the
Principal Amount of the Loan
This document sets the fee for Section
108 loan disbursements under loan
guarantee commitments awarded in FY
2017 at 2.59 percent of the principal
amount of the loan. This amount was
proposed in the President’s FY 2017
budget.1 HUD will collect this fee from
borrowers of loans guaranteed under the
Section 108 Program to offset the credit
subsidy costs of the guaranteed loans
pursuant to commitments awarded in
FY 2017, as authorized by the 2017
appropriations act.
For this fee document, HUD is not
changing the underlying assumptions or
creating new considerations for
borrowers. The calculation of the FY
2017 fee uses the same fee calculation
model as the FY 2016 announcement of
fee, but incorporates updated
information regarding the composition
of the Section 108 portfolio and the
timing of the estimated future cash
flows for defaults and recoveries. The
calculation of the fee is also affected by
the discount rates required to be used by
HUD when calculating the present value
of the future cash flows as part of the
Federal budget process.
As described in 24 CFR 570.712(b),
HUD’s credit subsidy calculation is
based on the amount required to fully
offset the credit subsidy cost to the
Federal government associated with
making a Section 108 loan guarantee. As
a result, HUD’s credit subsidy cost
calculations incorporated assumptions
based on: (i) data on default frequency
for municipal debt where such debt is
comparable to loans in the Section 108
loan portfolio; (ii) data on recovery rates
on collateral security for comparable
municipal debt; (iii) the expected
composition of the Section 108 portfolio
by end users of the guaranteed loan
funds (e.g., third party borrowers and
public entities); and (iv) other factors
1 The FY 2017 President’s Budget for HUD is
available at: https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/
default/files/omb/budget/fy2017/assets/hud.pdf.
The fee is specified in table 6 of the Federal Credit
Supplement to the 2017 budget and is available at:
https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/
omb/budget/fy2017/assets/cr_supp.pdf
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:56 Oct 03, 2016
Jkt 241001
that HUD determined were relevant to
this calculation (e.g., assumptions as to
loan disbursement and repayment
patterns).
Taking these factors into
consideration, HUD determined that the
fee for disbursements made under loan
guarantee commitments awarded in FY
2017 will be 2.59 percent, which will be
applied only at the time of loan
disbursements. Note that future
documents may provide for a
combination of up-front and periodic
fees for loan guarantee commitments
awarded in future fiscal years but, if so,
will provide the public an opportunity
to comment if appropriate under 24 CFR
570.712(b)(2).
The expected cost of a Section 108
loan guarantee is difficult to estimate
using historical program data because
there have been no defaults in the
history of the program that required
HUD to invoke its full faith and credit
guarantee or use the credit subsidy
reserved each year for future losses.2
This is due to a variety of factors,
including the availability of Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds
as security for HUD’s guarantee as
provided in 24 CFR 570.705(b). As
authorized by Section 108 of the
Housing and Community Development
Act of 1974, as amended (42 U.S.C.
5308), borrowers may make payments
on Section 108 loans using CDBG grant
funds. Borrowers may also make Section
108 loan payments from other
anticipated sources but continue to have
CDBG funds available should they
encounter shortfalls in the anticipated
repayment source. Despite the
program’s history of no defaults, federal
credit budgeting principles require that
the availability of CDBG funds to repay
the guaranteed loans cannot be assumed
in the development of the credit subsidy
cost estimate (see 80 FR 67629,
November 3, 2015). Thus, the estimate
must incorporate the risk that
alternative sources are used to repay the
guaranteed loan in lieu of CDBG funds,
and that those sources may be
insufficient. Based on the rate that
CDBG funds are used annually for
repayment of loan guarantees, HUD’s
calculation of the credit subsidy cost
must take into account the possibility of
future defaults if those CDBG funds
were not available. The fee of 2.59
percent of the principal amount of the
loan will offset the expected cost to the
government due to default, financing
costs, and other relevant factors. To
2 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development, Study of HUD’s Section 108 Loan
Guarantee Program, (prepared by Econometrica, Inc.
and The Urban Institute), September 2012.
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
arrive at this measure, HUD analyzed
data on comparable municipal debt over
an extended 16 to 23-year period. The
estimated rate is based on the default
and recovery rates for general purpose
municipal debt and industrial
development bonds. The cumulative
default rates on industrial development
bonds (14.62 percent) were higher than
the default rates on general purpose
municipal debt (0.25 percent) during the
period from which the data were taken.
(The recovery rates for industrial
development bonds and general purpose
debt were 74.76 and 90.27 percent,
respectively.) These two subsectors of
municipal debt were chosen because
their purposes and loan terms most
closely resemble those of Section 108
guaranteed loans. In this regard, Section
108 guaranteed loans can be broken
down into two categories: (1) loans that
finance public infrastructure and
activities to support subsidized housing
(other than financing new construction)
and (2) other development projects (e.g.,
retail, commercial, industrial). The 2.59
percent fee was derived by weighting
the default and recovery data for general
purpose municipal debt and the data for
industrial development bonds according
to the expected composition of the
Section 108 portfolio by corresponding
project type. Based on the dollar amount
of Section 108 loan guarantee
commitments awarded during the
period from FY 2011 through FY 2015,
HUD expects that 25 percent of the
Section 108 portfolio will be similar to
general purpose municipal debt and 75
percent of the portfolio will be similar
to industrial development bonds. In
setting the fee at 2.59 percent of the
principal amount of the guaranteed
loan, HUD expects that the amount
generated will fully offset the cost to the
Federal government associated with
making guarantee commitments
awarded in FY 2017. Note that the FY
2017 fee represents only a .01 percent
increase over the FY 2016 fee of 2.58
percent. This is due primarily to
updated loan repayment patterns and
discount rates used in calculating the
present value of cash flows. These are
variable that ordinarily are modified in
the credit subsidy calculation.
This document establishes a rate that
does not constitute a development
decision that affects the physical
condition of specific project areas or
building sites. Accordingly, under 24
CFR 50.19(c)(6), this document is
categorically excluded from
environmental review under the
National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321).
E:\FR\FM\04OCR1.SGM
04OCR1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 192 / Tuesday, October 4, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
Dated: September 28, 2016.
Harriet Tregoning,
Principal Deputy Assistant, Secretary for
Community Planning and Development.
[FR Doc. 2016–23986 Filed 10–3–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210–67–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Internal Revenue Service
26 CFR Part 1
[TD 9786]
RIN 1545–BC70
Credit for Increasing Research
Activities
Internal Revenue Service (IRS),
Treasury.
ACTION: Final regulations.
AGENCY:
This document contains final
regulations concerning the application
of the credit for increasing research
activities. These final regulations
provide guidance on software that is
developed by (or for the benefit of) the
taxpayer primarily for internal use by
the taxpayer (internal use software).
These final regulations also include
examples to illustrate the application of
the process of experimentation
requirement to software. These final
regulations will affect taxpayers engaged
in research activities involving software.
DATES: Effective date: These regulations
are effective on October 4, 2016.
Applicability date: For date of
applicability see § 1.41–4(e).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Martha Garcia or Jennifer Records of the
IRS Office of the Associate Chief
Counsel (Passthroughs and Special
Industries) at (202) 317–6853 (not a tollfree number).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Background
This document contains final
regulations that amend the Income Tax
Regulations (26 CFR part 1) relating to
the credit for increasing research
activities (research credit) under section
41 of the Internal Revenue Code (Code).
Section 41(d)(4)(E) provides that, except
to the extent provided by regulations,
research with respect to software that is
developed by (or for the benefit of) the
taxpayer primarily for internal use by
the taxpayer is excluded from the
definition of qualified research under
section 41(d). Software that is
developed for use in an activity that
constitutes qualified research for
purposes of section 41(d) and software
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:56 Oct 03, 2016
Jkt 241001
that is developed for use in a production
process with respect to which the
general credit eligibility requirements
under section 41 are satisfied are
internal use software, but are not
excluded under section 41(d)(4)(E) from
the definition of qualified research and
are not subject to these regulations.
On January 20, 2015, the Treasury
Department and the IRS published in
the Federal Register (80 FR 2624,
January 20, 2015) a notice of proposed
rulemaking (REG–153656–03, 2015–5
IRB 566) under section 41 (the proposed
regulations) relating to the research
credit. Comments responding to the
proposed regulations were received and
a public hearing was held on April 17,
2015. After consideration of all of the
comments received, these final
regulations adopt the proposed
regulations as revised by this Treasury
decision.
Summary of Comments and
Explanation of Provisions
I. Definition of Internal Use Software
The proposed regulations provided
that software is developed by (or for the
benefit of) the taxpayer primarily for
internal use if the software is developed
by the taxpayer for use in general and
administrative functions that facilitate
or support the conduct of the taxpayer’s
trade or business. General and
administrative functions, as defined in
the proposed regulations, are limited to
(1) financial management functions, (2)
human resource management functions,
and (3) support services functions.
Financial management functions are
functions that involve the financial
management of the taxpayer and the
supporting recordkeeping. Human
resource management functions are
functions that manage the taxpayer’s
workforce. Support services functions
are functions that support the day-today operations of the taxpayer, such as
data processing or facilities services.
Commenters expressed concern that
the list of general and administrative
functions in the proposed regulations
was overly broad and included
functions that do not represent ‘‘backoffice’’ functions. In particular, the
commenters noted that inventory
management, marketing, legal services,
and government compliance services
can provide significant benefits to third
parties and may be developed to enable
a taxpayer to interact with third parties
or to allow third parties to initiate
functions or review data on the
taxpayer’s system. Specifically, one
commenter noted that many inventory
management software applications are
an integral part of a taxpayer’s supply
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
68299
chain management system and can be
readily seen as part of the modern ‘‘front
office.’’ This commenter noted that
modern inventory management software
usually requires interaction with a
number of third party vendors to ensure
the correct flow of raw materials and a
corresponding flow of finished goods.
Additionally, the commenter added that
inventory management is inherently
customer facing because it provides the
proper amount of inventory to
customers at the point of sale at the
right time. Another commenter added
that marketing is an external-facing
function by nature, and software that
supports marketing is necessarily
intended to interact with third parties.
The Treasury Department and the IRS
understand that many modern software
systems perform more than back-office
functions. These software systems
commonly provide benefits to vendors
and include functions that are customer
facing. Additionally, software with
functions such as marketing or
inventory management may not provide
solely back-office functions, but may
also contain functions that enable a
taxpayer to interact with third parties or
to allow third parties to initiate
functions or review data on the
taxpayer’s system. Recognizing such
situations, the proposed regulations
provided rules under § 1.41–
4(c)(6)(iv)(C) (dual function rules) to
evaluate whether software that has both
back-office and front-office functions is
developed primarily for internal use.
The Treasury Department and the IRS
continue to believe that functions such
as inventory management, marketing,
legal services, and government
compliance services provide support to
day-to-day operations of a taxpayer in
carrying on business regardless of the
taxpayer’s industry and that the benefits
that such functions may provide to third
parties are collateral and secondary. In
addition, the Treasury Department and
the IRS believe the dual function rules
in these final regulations sufficiently
address these comments by allowing
taxpayers to identify subsets of elements
of dual function software that only
enable a taxpayer to interact with third
parties or allow third parties to initiate
functions or review data. Accordingly,
the list of general and administrative
functions provided in the proposed
regulations remains unchanged in the
final regulations.
Another commenter referred to the tax
software example in the preamble to the
proposed regulations which notes that
tax software developed by a company
engaged in providing tax services to its
customers is not used by the taxpayer in
general and administrative functions
E:\FR\FM\04OCR1.SGM
04OCR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 192 (Tuesday, October 4, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 68297-68299]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-23986]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
24 CFR Part 570
[Docket No. FR-5767-N-05]
RIN 2506-AC35
Section 108 Loan Guarantee Program: Announcement of Fee To Cover
Credit Subsidy Costs
AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Community Planning and
Development, HUD.
ACTION: Announcement of fee.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document announces the fee that HUD will collect from
borrowers of loans guaranteed under HUD's Section 108 Loan Guarantee
Program (Section 108 Program) to offset the credit subsidy costs of the
guaranteed loans pursuant to commitments awarded in FY 2017.
DATES: Effective Date: November 3, 2016.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Webster, Director, Financial
Management Division, Office of Block Grant Assistance, Office of
Community Planning and Development, Department of Housing and Urban
Development, 451 7th Street, SW., Room 7180, Washington, DC 20410;
telephone number 202-402-4563 (this is not a toll-free number).
Individuals with speech or hearing impairments may access this number
through TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Relay Service at 800-877-
8339. FAX inquiries (but not comments) may be sent to Mr. Webster at
202-708-1798 (this is not a toll-free number).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
The Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2015
(Public Law 113-235, approved December 16, 2014) (2015 Appropriations
Act) provided that ``the Secretary shall collect fees from borrowers .
. . to result in a credit subsidy cost of zero for guaranteeing''
Section 108 loans. The Continuing Appropriations Act, 2016 (Public Law
114-53, approved September 30, 2015) continued the 2015 provision. This
continued funding act was followed by The Consolidated Appropriations
Act, 2016, Public Law 114-133, approved December 18, 2015) (2016
Appropriations Act), which had identical language regarding Section 108
credit subsidy to the 2015 Appropriations Act. The fiscal year 2017 HUD
appropriations bills under consideration in the House of
Representatives (H.R. 5394), and the Senate (S. 2844) also have
identical language regarding the credit subsidy for the Section 108
Program, and it is expected that, when enacted, the final fiscal year
2017 appropriations act will as well.
On November 3, 2015, HUD published a final rule (80 FR 67626)
following a February 5, 2015 proposed rule (80 FR 6470) that amended
the Section 108 Program regulations at 24 CFR part 570 to establish
additional procedures, including procedures for determining the amount
of the fee and for a 30-day public comment process when HUD adopts
changes to the assumptions underlying the fee calculation or if the fee
structure itself raises new considerations for borrowers.
HUD is required to collect fees from Section 108 borrowers when
necessary to offset the credit subsidy costs to the Federal government
to guarantee Section 108 loans. Following
[[Page 68298]]
consideration of the public comments submitted in response to HUD's
February 5, 2015 proposed rule (80 FR 6469) that proposed the fee
required to offset the credit subsidy costs, on November 3, 2015, HUD
issued an announcement of fee (80 FR 67634) to set the fee for Section
108 loan disbursements under loan guarantee commitments awarded in FY
2016 at 2.58 percent of the principal amount of the loan.
II. FY 2017 Fee: 2.59 Percent of the Principal Amount of the Loan
This document sets the fee for Section 108 loan disbursements under
loan guarantee commitments awarded in FY 2017 at 2.59 percent of the
principal amount of the loan. This amount was proposed in the
President's FY 2017 budget.\1\ HUD will collect this fee from borrowers
of loans guaranteed under the Section 108 Program to offset the credit
subsidy costs of the guaranteed loans pursuant to commitments awarded
in FY 2017, as authorized by the 2017 appropriations act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The FY 2017 President's Budget for HUD is available at:
https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2017/assets/hud.pdf. The fee is specified in table 6 of the Federal
Credit Supplement to the 2017 budget and is available at: https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2017/assets/cr_supp.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For this fee document, HUD is not changing the underlying
assumptions or creating new considerations for borrowers. The
calculation of the FY 2017 fee uses the same fee calculation model as
the FY 2016 announcement of fee, but incorporates updated information
regarding the composition of the Section 108 portfolio and the timing
of the estimated future cash flows for defaults and recoveries. The
calculation of the fee is also affected by the discount rates required
to be used by HUD when calculating the present value of the future cash
flows as part of the Federal budget process.
As described in 24 CFR 570.712(b), HUD's credit subsidy calculation
is based on the amount required to fully offset the credit subsidy cost
to the Federal government associated with making a Section 108 loan
guarantee. As a result, HUD's credit subsidy cost calculations
incorporated assumptions based on: (i) data on default frequency for
municipal debt where such debt is comparable to loans in the Section
108 loan portfolio; (ii) data on recovery rates on collateral security
for comparable municipal debt; (iii) the expected composition of the
Section 108 portfolio by end users of the guaranteed loan funds (e.g.,
third party borrowers and public entities); and (iv) other factors that
HUD determined were relevant to this calculation (e.g., assumptions as
to loan disbursement and repayment patterns).
Taking these factors into consideration, HUD determined that the
fee for disbursements made under loan guarantee commitments awarded in
FY 2017 will be 2.59 percent, which will be applied only at the time of
loan disbursements. Note that future documents may provide for a
combination of up-front and periodic fees for loan guarantee
commitments awarded in future fiscal years but, if so, will provide the
public an opportunity to comment if appropriate under 24 CFR
570.712(b)(2).
The expected cost of a Section 108 loan guarantee is difficult to
estimate using historical program data because there have been no
defaults in the history of the program that required HUD to invoke its
full faith and credit guarantee or use the credit subsidy reserved each
year for future losses.\2\ This is due to a variety of factors,
including the availability of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)
funds as security for HUD's guarantee as provided in 24 CFR 570.705(b).
As authorized by Section 108 of the Housing and Community Development
Act of 1974, as amended (42 U.S.C. 5308), borrowers may make payments
on Section 108 loans using CDBG grant funds. Borrowers may also make
Section 108 loan payments from other anticipated sources but continue
to have CDBG funds available should they encounter shortfalls in the
anticipated repayment source. Despite the program's history of no
defaults, federal credit budgeting principles require that the
availability of CDBG funds to repay the guaranteed loans cannot be
assumed in the development of the credit subsidy cost estimate (see 80
FR 67629, November 3, 2015). Thus, the estimate must incorporate the
risk that alternative sources are used to repay the guaranteed loan in
lieu of CDBG funds, and that those sources may be insufficient. Based
on the rate that CDBG funds are used annually for repayment of loan
guarantees, HUD's calculation of the credit subsidy cost must take into
account the possibility of future defaults if those CDBG funds were not
available. The fee of 2.59 percent of the principal amount of the loan
will offset the expected cost to the government due to default,
financing costs, and other relevant factors. To arrive at this measure,
HUD analyzed data on comparable municipal debt over an extended 16 to
23-year period. The estimated rate is based on the default and recovery
rates for general purpose municipal debt and industrial development
bonds. The cumulative default rates on industrial development bonds
(14.62 percent) were higher than the default rates on general purpose
municipal debt (0.25 percent) during the period from which the data
were taken. (The recovery rates for industrial development bonds and
general purpose debt were 74.76 and 90.27 percent, respectively.) These
two subsectors of municipal debt were chosen because their purposes and
loan terms most closely resemble those of Section 108 guaranteed loans.
In this regard, Section 108 guaranteed loans can be broken down into
two categories: (1) loans that finance public infrastructure and
activities to support subsidized housing (other than financing new
construction) and (2) other development projects (e.g., retail,
commercial, industrial). The 2.59 percent fee was derived by weighting
the default and recovery data for general purpose municipal debt and
the data for industrial development bonds according to the expected
composition of the Section 108 portfolio by corresponding project type.
Based on the dollar amount of Section 108 loan guarantee commitments
awarded during the period from FY 2011 through FY 2015, HUD expects
that 25 percent of the Section 108 portfolio will be similar to general
purpose municipal debt and 75 percent of the portfolio will be similar
to industrial development bonds. In setting the fee at 2.59 percent of
the principal amount of the guaranteed loan, HUD expects that the
amount generated will fully offset the cost to the Federal government
associated with making guarantee commitments awarded in FY 2017. Note
that the FY 2017 fee represents only a .01 percent increase over the FY
2016 fee of 2.58 percent. This is due primarily to updated loan
repayment patterns and discount rates used in calculating the present
value of cash flows. These are variable that ordinarily are modified in
the credit subsidy calculation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Study of
HUD's Section 108 Loan Guarantee Program, (prepared by Econometrica,
Inc. and The Urban Institute), September 2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This document establishes a rate that does not constitute a
development decision that affects the physical condition of specific
project areas or building sites. Accordingly, under 24 CFR 50.19(c)(6),
this document is categorically excluded from environmental review under
the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321).
[[Page 68299]]
Dated: September 28, 2016.
Harriet Tregoning,
Principal Deputy Assistant, Secretary for Community Planning and
Development.
[FR Doc. 2016-23986 Filed 10-3-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210-67-P