IRS Issues Revenue Ruling on 4 Percent Tax Credit Floor

person A.J. Johnson today 12/04/2021

The IRS has issued Revenue Ruling 2021-20, providing clarity on when taxpayers may claim the fixed four percent credit for properties with tax-exempt bonds. The IRS addressed three separate issues relative to the 4% credit:

  1. Does the minimum 4% applicable percentage (4% floor) apply to buildings that are financed in part with a draw-down of tax-exempt bonds that were issued in 2020 but had drawn downs of the proceeds in 2021?
  2. Does the minimum 4% applicable percentage (4% floor) apply to buildings that were financed with tax-exempt bonds issued in 2020 but then had a "de minimis" bond issue after 2020?
  3. Does the minimum 4% applicable percentage (4% floor) apply to buildings that received an allocation of credits in 2020 and a "de minimis" additional allocation after 2020?
  • Example #1: Bonds are issued and partly used in 2020, with the remainder of the bond proceeds drawn down in 2021. The amount drawn in 2020 exceeded the lesser of $50,000 or 5% of the issue price, which qualifies the issue as a 2020 issue.  The qualified low-income building is placed in service after December 31, 2020.
  • Example #2: Assume the same facts as in Example #1, except that instead of a draw-down of bonds in both 2020 and 2021, the Agency issues bonds in 2020 to finance the construction of the project, and in a subsequent year (e.g., 2021), the Agency issues a different issue of tax-exempt bonds, in a de minimis amount, that the Borrower similarly uses to finance construction of the building.
    • Revenue Procedure 2021-43 states that an issuance of bonds in a year after the initial issuance is not de minimis if the aggregate amount of the post-2020 obligations is at least 10% of the total bond financing for the project.
  • Example #3: In 2020, the Agency and Borrower enter into a binding agreement whereby the Agency will allocate tax credits for the acquisition of an existing building and an additional allocation of credits for the rehabilitation of the building into a low-income building. The allocations of both the acquisition and rehab credit are made in 2020. The allocations were made under §42(h)(1)(E) and was a valid carryover allocation. The owner completes the acquisition and rehab of the building and places the building in service after December 31, 2020. After 2020, but before the building is placed in service, the Agency makes an additional allocation of credits relating to the acquisition of the building. This additional allocation is de minimis and reduces the Agency’s ceiling for housing credit dollar amounts for the year after 2020 in which the allocation is made. I.e., this is not an allocation of credits due to an issuance of tax-exempt bonds.
    • Revenue Procedure 2021-43 states that an allocation of credits in a year after the initial allocation is not de minimis if the allocation amount of the post-2020 credit amount is at least 10% of the total allocations for the project.

The ruling indicates that the 4% credit floor does not apply in any of the cited examples, even though all the buildings described in the examples satisfy the requirement of §42(b)(3) that a building is placed in service after 2020. It should be noted that since the IRS considers the placed-in-service date of a building for acquisition purposes to be the date the building is purchased by the new owner, in example #3 above, the building could not be purchased until after December 31, 2020.

Generally, a project without tax-exempt bonds - such as shown in Example #3 - must only meet the post-2020 placed in service test to qualify for the 4% floor for acquisition credits. Properties with tax-exempt bonds must meet two tests: (1) The property must be placed in service after 2020, and (2) the bonds must be issued after 2020.  However, the facts presented in Example #3 have led the IRS to the conclusion - based on the Service’s interpretation of Congressional intent - that even being placed in service after 2020 may not automatically entitle the acquisition costs of a non-tax-exempt bond project to the 4% floor. This issue is covered in more detail below.

  • IRS Ruling Relative to Example #1: The IRS believes that if the post-2020 draws under the 2020 issue allowed the 4% floor to apply, the result would be a windfall of credits that were not taken into account when the transaction was structured in 2020. Thus, in Example #1, because the loan was issued in 2020, the applicable percentage of the building is determined without regard to the 4% floor. The applicable percentage of the building is the amount determined under §42(b)(1)(B) and (C) for the month that the bonds were issued. The project may not use the 4% floor.
  • IRS Ruling Relative to Example #2: In this example, the post-2020 bond proceeds were from a post-2020 issuance of an exempt facility bond issue. Thus, the situation outlined in Example #2 may qualify a project for the 4% floor, but in order to make this determination, an examination of the effect of the post-2020 bond issuance on project feasibility must be made. Since the law allowing the 4% floor was designed to prevent windfalls, it is necessary to consider whether the de minimis post-2020 issue could create a windfall of tax credits. If the post-2020 issuance is non-de-minimis, any concern over a windfall of credits is lessened. In other words, if the post-2020 issuance is not de minimis, the transaction is less likely to have been entirely structured prior to the enactment of the 4% floor. In addition, a greater portion of the total credits generated by applying the 4% floor to the building would be expected to result from basis financed by the post-2020 issuance.
    • If the de minimis amount of bond financing is fully issued after 2020, the IRS takes the position that this more closely aligns with a building whose only tax-exempt financing was issued prior to 2021 - even if placed in service after 2020. Thus, the IRS rules that only non-de-minimis post 2020 tax-exempt bond issuance qualifies a project for the 4% floor. For projects that do not meet this test, the applicable percentage for the building will be based on the credit percentage in place during the month of the initial bond issuance, or, at the election of the taxpayer, the placed in-service date.
  • IRS Ruling Relative to Example #3: In this example, credits were allocated in 2020 and an additional allocation - of a de minimis amount - occurred after 2020. The Taxpayer Certainty and Disaster Tax Relief Act of 2020, Section 201(b)(1) states that the 4% rate applies to buildings that receive an allocation of housing credit after December 31, 2020, or in the case of tax-exempt bond financed projects (§201(b)(2)), to projects if the bonds were issued after December 31, 2020. So, a plain reading of the statute indicates that in this example, the project should be eligible for the 4% credit floor. However, the IRS takes a different position. The Service once again makes the "windfall" argument. Since the transaction was structured in 2020, and at that time the allocating agency did not take the 4% floor into account, the 4% credit was not needed for deal feasibility.
    • In the Ruling, the IRS acknowledges that the windfall effect with an allocation is less than in a building financed with exempt facility bonds. However, the Service believes that the requirements of §201(b)(1) of the Act manifest the same legislative intent of §201(b)(2) of the Act and should therefore be interpreted consistently. For this reason, the principles that govern de minimis amounts of bonds are equally applicable to de minimis allocations.

Therefore, in the example cited here, the 4% floor does not apply to the building described in Example #3, and the credit percentage will be the percentage for the month of the allocation or, at the election of the taxpayer, the month the building was placed in service.

To summarize the IRS ruling -

  • Example 1: the 4% floor does not apply to the building, which is financed in part with a draw-down exempt facility bond issue that was issued in 2020 and on which one or more draws are taken after December 31, 2020.
  • Example 2: the 4% floor does not apply to the building which is financed in part with proceeds of an exempt facility bond issue that was issued in 2020 and in part with proceeds of a different exempt facility bond issue that is issued in a de minimis amount after December 31, 2020.
  • Example 3: the 4% floor does not apply to the building which receives an allocation of credits in 2020 and a de minimis additional allocation after December 31, 2020.

Owners that anticipate the use of the 4% credit floor for properties being placed in service after December 31, 2020, should carefully review this Revenue Ruling for applicability to their project.

Latest Articles

Impact of Trump Administration's Regulatory Restructuring on HUD and IRS

The Trump administration's recent executive order on federal regulations, "Ensuring Lawful Governance and Implementing the President's 'Department of Government Efficiency' Deregulatory Initiative," signals significant changes for federal agencies. The order has particularly notable implications for the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). The New Regulatory Framework On February 19, 2025, President Trump signed this executive order as part of a broader deregulatory agenda aimed at reducing what the administration views as bureaucratic overreach. The directive mandates that federal agencies conduct a comprehensive 60-day review of their regulatory frameworks to ensure alignment with both legal requirements and administration policies. The order targets explicitly regulations considered: Unconstitutional Based on improper delegations of legislative power Imposing excessive costs without clear public benefits Harmful to national interests Hindering development across various sectors This order is part of a series of regulatory rollbacks, including directives like "Ensuring Accountability for All Agencies" and "Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation," which expand upon the administration's previous deregulatory efforts. Specific Impacts on the IRS The IRS faces several significant challenges under this new directive: Continued Hiring Freeze: The executive order maintains an existing hiring freeze at the IRS, which will remain in effect until the Treasury Secretary, in consultation with the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Director, determines that lifting it serves the national interest. Increased White House Oversight: IRS regulations will once again be subject to White House review through the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), reinstating a policy from Trump's first term that adds another layer of scrutiny to IRS rulemaking. "10-for-1" Deregulation Mandate: The IRS must eliminate ten existing guidance documents for every new rule or guidance it issues, significantly constraining its ability to update tax regulations and provide new guidance. These measures could substantially impact the IRS's capacity to uphold compliance and maintain operational efficiency, potentially affecting tax administration and enforcement nationwide. Implications for HUD For the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the executive order brings equally significant changes: Comprehensive Program Review: The order requires a review of hundreds of HUD programs, potentially leading to significant restructuring or budget cuts. Grant Funding Uncertainty: Although a federal court temporarily blocked a separate memo seeking to freeze federal grants, the administration's intent to reassess HUD funding remains evident. "10-for-1" Rule Application: Like the IRS, HUD must adhere to the requirement of eliminating ten existing regulations for every new one proposed, which could significantly impact housing policy implementation and program management. These changes may affect HUD's ability to administer housing assistance programs, enforce fair housing regulations, and support community development initiatives. Legal and Procedural Challenges The administration's deregulatory push faces potential legal obstacles: Agencies seeking to rescind or modify rules must generally follow a new rulemaking process, including issuing a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, collecting public comments, and finalizing the new rule. Failure to adhere to these procedural requirements could expose regulatory rollbacks to legal challenges under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). The APA requires agencies to engage in reasoned decision-making when modifying or rescinding regulations, and courts may overturn agency decisions if this standard is not met. Outlook As the 60-day review period progresses, the IRS and HUD must navigate competing demands: implementing the administration's deregulatory agenda while maintaining their core functions and avoiding legal challenges. The outcome will likely reshape how these agencies operate and could have lasting implications for the United States s tax administration and housing policy. The full impact of these changes will become more evident as agencies determine which regulations to target and how to implement the administration's directives while fulfilling their statutory obligations.

Understanding the HOTMA Educational Assistance Rules

Under the Housing Opportunity Through Modernization Act (HOTMA), specific rules govern how educational assistance is treated as income for Section 8 residents. HOTMA Educational Assistance Rule Overview HOTMA clarified and simplified the treatment of educational assistance in determining a household s income for many affordable housing programs, including most HUD programs, Rural Development Section 515, and the LIHTC program. Under the HOTMA rule: Exclusion of Educational Assistance:Most forms of educational assistance, including scholarships, grants, and work-study income, are excluded from the calculation of annual income. This exclusion applies to both the student and other household members. Limited Exceptions:The only types of educational assistance that may be counted as income are: Amounts exceeding the actual tuition cost, fees, books, and other required educational expenses. Payments for living expenses (e.g., housing, food, and transportation) that are included in the educational assistance package. Student Status and Eligibility: The rule applies to both dependent students and independent students. The educational assistance exclusion is broader for students under Section 8 over 23 with dependent children and generally includes all aid except for amounts used for living expenses. HOTMA s goal in modifying these rules was to reduce administrative complexity and ensure that educational aid meant to support academic success does not create a financial penalty for low-income families participating in HUD programs. Amounts Received Under Section 479B of the Higher Education Act (HEA) of 1965 Educational assistance received under the Higher Education Act is almost always excluded from income even if it exceeds the cost of actual educational expenses. The one exception is for Section 8 residents, where the full amount of educational assistance in excess of actual expenses is included in income. The one exception to this is for Section 8 residents over age 23 with dependent children. HEA assistance is always excluded for this category of resident, as it is for residents in all other affordable housing programs subject to HOTMA. Section 479B provides that certain types of student financial assistance are excluded in determining eligibility for benefits made available through federal, state, or local programs financed with federal funds. The types of financial assistance listed below are considered 479B student financial assistance programs. Federal Pell Grants Teach Grants Federal Work-Study Programs Federal Perkins Grants Student Financial Assistance received under the Bureau of Indian Education Higher Education Tribal Grants Tribally Controlled Colleges or Universities Grant Program Employment Training Program under Section 134 of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) Any other awards under Section 479B Other student financial assistance may also be excluded from income, but only to the extent it pays for actual educational expenses. Such assistance includes grants or scholarships from the following sources: Federal government A State (including U.S. territories), Tribe, or local government A private foundation registered as a non-profit under 26 USC 501(c)(3) A business entity (such as a corporation, general partnership, limited liability company, limited partnership, joint venture, business trust, public benefit corporation, or non-profit entity). An institution of higher education Military assistance (e.g., GI Bill) Other monetary contributions will generally not be excluded from income, and may include - Financial support provided to a student in the form of a fee for services performed (e.g., work-study or teaching fellowship) that is not excluded under Section 479B of the HEA. Gifts, including gifts from family or friends. Covered Costs Costs that may be considered educational expenses include: Tuition Books Supplies Room Board Fees required and charged to a student by an institution of higher education. Property managers operating properties subject to HOTMA need to be familiar with the various types of financial assistance students will likely receive and whether or not such assistance may be excluded from income. Bottom Line The Housing Opportunity Through Modernization Act (HOTMA) streamlines the treatment of educational assistance as income for residents receiving housing support, such as Section 8. In general, most forms of educational assistance, including scholarships and grants, are excluded from income calculations for both the student and their household members. There are limited exceptions, which include amounts that exceed tuition costs and payments designated for living expenses. This rule applies to both dependent and independent students, with more extensive exclusions for Section 8 students over 23 who have dependents. HOTMA seeks to reduce administrative burdens and ensure that educational aid does not financially penalize low-income families.

Executive Order Establishes English as Official U.S. Language: Impact on HUD Programs

President Donald Trump signed an Executive Order on March 1, 2025, establishing English as the official language of the United States. This move has significant implications for federal agencies and their communication policies, especially for the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and Rural Development properties. Key Changes The Executive Order revokes Executive Order 13166, issued on August 11, 2000. That previous order mandated federal agencies, including HUD, to implement Limited English Proficiency (LEP) policies for their programs. Under the previous order, agencies were required to ensure that individuals with limited English proficiency could access their services. With the revocation, HUD will no longer mandate LEP policies for owners and Public Housing Authorities (PHAs) in HUD-assisted properties. Current Status and Recommendations It's important to note that the new Executive Order does not prohibit federal agencies from producing documents in languages besides English. However, they will no longer be legally obligated to do so. No immediate action is necessary for HUD and Rural Development property owners and managers who currently have LEP policies in place. I recommend maintaining current policies until formal guidance is issued. Both HUD and Rural Development are expected to provide official guidance on this change in the coming weeks or months. Project operators are advised to await this guidance before implementing any changes to their existing language access policies. Looking Ahead This policy shift signifies a substantial change in federal language requirements. Housing providers should remain informed about upcoming agency guidance that will clarify expectations and requirements going forward. Once formal guidance is released, property managers and owners should consult with their industry associations and legal advisors to ensure compliance. This article offers informational content based on current developments and should not be interpreted as legal advice. Property owners and managers should seek guidance from qualified legal professionals regarding specific compliance issues.

HUD Extends NSPIRE Affirmative Standards Compliance Deadline to October 2025

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development s (HUD) Real Estate Assessment Center (REAC) has announced an extension of the compliance deadline for the National Standards for the Physical Inspection of Real Estate (NSPIRE) affirmative requirements. Initially planned for earlier implementation, the new deadline of October 1, 2025, gives property owners and managers in the Public Housing and Multifamily Housing programs extra time to align their properties with the updated standards. Background and Rationale for Extension The decision to extend the compliance period was influenced by the challenges property owners and managers encountered in meeting the new requirements. HUD recognizes the complexity of these updates and the operational adjustments needed, so it has opted to provide a grace period, allowing property stakeholders to address any deficiencies without immediate penalty. While property inspections conducted during this period will still identify deficiencies, they will not adversely affect inspection scores until the new deadline. Instead, flagged issues will be marked with a caret (^) symbol, indicating non-compliance that must be addressed before the final implementation date. It s important to note that the extension does not change HUD s existing policies regarding traditionally non-scored deficiencies. This means that requirements related to smoke detectors, carbon monoxide (CO) detectors, handrails, and call-for-aid devices remain unchanged and must continue to be addressed according to HUD s existing standards. Key Affirmative Requirements Under NSPIRE The NSPIRE affirmative requirements encompass a wide array of safety and habitability standards aimed at improving the quality of housing for tenants. These requirements pertain to various aspects of property maintenance, including site conditions, individual unit standards, building interiors, and exterior features. Below is a summary of the essential requirements: Site-Specific Requirements Installation of fire-labeled doors Electrical safety improvements, such as the installation of Ground Fault Circuit Interrupters (GFCI) and Arc Fault Circuit Interrupters (AFCI) are essential. Guardrails for elevated surfaces HVAC system compliance with specified standards Adequate interior lighting levels Minimum electrical and lighting standards to ensure habitability Detailed Unit Requirements Provision of hot and cold running water in bathrooms and kitchens Private bathroom facilities with required fixtures Properly installed smoke detectors in designated locations Special accommodations for hearing-impaired residents, including visual alert devices CO alarms installed per safety regulations Designated living room and kitchen area standards Electrical outlet and lighting provisions for Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) and Project-Based Voucher (PBV) program units GFCI protection in areas near water sources Adequate heating sources to maintain comfortable indoor temperatures Guardrails for elevated surfaces within units Fixed lighting in kitchens and bathrooms for enhanced visibility Building Interior Requirements Smoke detectors installed on each level of the property CO alarms strategically placed to maximize safety GFCI protection in locations with potential water exposure Guardrails for all elevated walking areas Permanently mounted lighting fixtures to improve illumination Restrictions on the use of unvented space heaters to mitigate fire hazards Exterior Requirements GFCI protection for outdoor outlets near water sources Guardrails for elevated exterior walking paths to prevent accidents Preparing for Full Implementation While the extended deadline postpones the enforcement of compliance-related penalties, property owners and managers should take advantage of this time to proactively address deficiencies and make necessary upgrades. By acting now, property stakeholders can ensure a smoother transition when the standards fully take effect in October 2025. The primary goal of these affirmative requirements is to enhance property resilience and increase tenant safety. By following these updated standards, property owners help create a healthier and more secure living environment for residents. HUD strongly encourages proactive compliance measures to prevent last-minute challenges and potential non-compliance issues when the deadline arrives. With this extension, HUD acknowledges the challenges housing providers face while reinforcing its commitment to uphold high standards of housing quality and tenant protection. Property owners and managers should use the extra time to assess, plan, and implement necessary improvements to ensure full compliance by the October 2025 deadline.

Want news delivered to your inbox?

Subscribe to our news articles to stay up to date.

We care about the protection of your data. Read our Privacy Policy.