HUD HOTMA Rules Clarify and Change the Treatment of Assets

person A.J. Johnson today 02/14/2024

Introduction

HUD Notice H 2013-10 expands upon the Final Rule for implementing the Housing Opportunity Through Modernization Act (HOTMA). This final rule makes some changes to the way managers of HUD-assisted housing will deal with assets on HUD-assisted properties. Since LIHTC properties are required to follow HUD rules relative to the determination of income, these changes also apply to tax credit properties.

Net family assets are defined as the net cash value of all assets owned by the family, after deducting reasonable costs that would be incurred in disposing of real property, savings, stocks, bonds, and other forms of investment, except as excluded by regulation.

Assets with Negative Equity

While assets with negative equity are still considered assets, the cash value of real property or other assets with negative equity are considered to have zero value for purposes of calculating net family assets. Negative numbers are never used in the calculation of asset value.

Assets Owned by a Business Entity

If a business entity (e.g., LLC or LP) owns an asset, then the family’s asset is their ownership stake in the business. The actual assets of the business are not counted as family assets. However, if the family holds the assets in their name (e.g., they own 1/3 of a restaurant) rather than in the name of the business entity, then the percentage value of the asset owned by the family is what is counted toward the net family assets (e.g., one-third of the value of the restaurant).

Jointly Owned Assets

For assets jointly owned by the family and one or more individuals outside of the assisted family, owners must include the total value of the asset in the determination of net family assets, unless the asset is otherwise excluded, or unless the assisted family can demonstrate that the asset is inaccessible to them, or that they cannot dispose of any portion of the asset without the consent of another owner who refuses to comply. If the family demonstrates that they can only access a portion of an asset, then only that portion’s value shall be included in the calculation of net family assets.

Exclusions from Assets

Required exclusions from net family assets include the following:

  • The value of necessary items of personal property;
  • The value of all non-necessary items of personal property with a total combined value of $50,000 or less, annually adjusted for inflation;
  • The value of any retirement plan recognized by the IRS, including IRAs, employer retirement plans, and retirement plans for self-employed individuals;
  • The value of real property that the family does not have the effective legal authority to sell. Examples of this include (1) co-ownership situations {including situations where one owner is a victim of domestic violence} where one party cannot unilaterally sell the property, (2) property that is tied up in litigation, and (3) inherited property in dispute;
  • The value of any education savings account under Section 530 of the IRC 1986, the value of any qualified tuition program under Section 529 of the IRC, and the contributions to and distributions from any Achieving a Better Life Experience (ABLE) account authorized under Section 529A of the IRC;
  • The value of any "baby bond" account created, authorized, or funded by the federal, state, or local government (money held in trust by the government for children until they are adults);
  • Interests in Indian trust land;
  • Equity in a manufactured home where the family receives assistance under the Housing Choice Voucher Program;
  • Equity in a property under the Homeownership Option where the family receives assistance under the Housing Choice Voucher Program;
  • Family Self-Sufficiency accounts;
  • Federal or state tax refunds or refundable tax credits for 12 months after receipt by the family;
  • The full amount of assets held in an irrevocable trust; and
  • The full amount of assets held in a revocable trust where a member of the family is the beneficiary, but the grantor and trustee of the trust is not a member of the family.

Necessary & Non-Necessary Personal Property

Necessary personal property is excluded from assets. Non-necessary personal property with a combined value of more than $50,000 (adjusted by inflation) is an asset. When the combined value of non-necessary personal property does not exceed $50,000, it is excluded from assets.

All assets are categorized as either real property (e.g., land, a home) or personal property. Personal property includes tangible items, like boats, as well as intangible items, like bank accounts. For example, a family could have non-necessary personal property with a combined value that does not exceed $50,000 but also own real property such as a parcel of land. While the non-necessary personal property would be excluded from assets, the real property would be included - regardless of its value, unless it meets a specific exclusion.

Necessary personal property are items essential to the family for the maintenance, use, and occupancy of the premises as a home; or they are necessary for employment, education, or health and wellness. Necessary personal property includes more than mere items that are indispensable to the bare existence of the family. It may include personal effects (such as items that are ordinarily worn or used by the individual), items that are convenient or useful to a reasonable existence, and items that support and facilitate daily life within the family’s home. Necessary personal property does not include bank accounts, other financial investments, or luxury items.

Determining what is a necessary item of personal property is very fact-specific and will require a case-by-case analysis. Following are examples of necessary and non-necessary personal property (not an exhaustive list).

Necessary Personal Property

  • Vehicles used for personal or business transportation;
  • Furniture and appliances;
  • Common electronics such as TV, radio, DVD players, gaming systems;
  • Clothing;
  • Personal effects that are not luxury items (e.g., toys and books);
  • Wedding & Engagement rings;
  • Jewelry used in religious or cultural celebrations or ceremonies;
  • Medical equipment & supplies;
  • Musical instruments used by the family;
  • Personal computers, tablets, phones, and related equipment;
  • Educational materials; and
  • Exercise Equipment

Non-Necessary Personal Property

  • RVs not needed for day-to-day transportation, including motor homes, campers, and all-terrain vehicles;
  • Bank accounts or other financial investments (e.g., checking/savings account, stocks/bonds);
  • Recreational boats or watercraft;
  • Expensive jewelry without cultural or religious significance or which has no family significance;
  • Collectibles, such as coins or stamps;
  • Equipment/machinery that is not part of an active business; and
  • Items such as gems, precious metals, antique cars, artwork, etc.

Trusts

Any trust (both revocable and non-revocable) that is not under the control of the family is excluded from assets.

For a revocable trust to be excluded from net family assets, no family or household member may be the account’s trustee.

A revocable trust that is under the control of the family or household (e.g., the grantor is a member of the assisted family or household) is included in net family assets, and, therefore, income earned on the trust is included in the family’s income from assets. This also means that PHAs/MFH Owners will calculate imputed income on the revocable trust if net family assets are more than $50,000, as adjusted by inflation, and actual income from the trust cannot be calculated (e.g. if the trust is comprised of farmland that is not in use).

Actual Income from a Trust

If the Owner determines that a revocable trust is included in the calculation of net family assets, then the actual income earned by the revocable trust is also included in the family’s income. Where an irrevocable trust is excluded from net family assets, the Owner must not consider actual income earned by the trust (e.g., interest earned, rental income if the property is held in the trust) for so long as the income from the trust is not distributed.

Trust Distributions & Annual Income

A revocable trust is considered part of net family assets: If the value of the trust is considered part of the family’s net assets, then distributions from the trust are not considered income to the family. 

Revocable or irrevocable trust not considered part of net family assets: If the value of the trust is not considered part of the family’s net assets, then distributions from the trust are treated as follows: (1) All distributions from the trust’s principal are excluded from income. (2) Distributions of income earned by the trust (i.e., interest, dividends, realized gains, or other earnings on the trust’s principal), are included as income unless the distribution is used to pay for the health and medical expenses for a minor.

Actual & Imputed Income from Assets

The actual income from assets is always included in a family’s annual income, regardless of the total value of net family assets or whether the asset itself is included or excluded from net family assets unless that income is specifically excluded.

Income or returns from assets are generally considered to be interest, dividend payments, and other actual income earned on the asset, and not the increase in market value of the asset.

Imputed income from assets is no longer determined based on the greater of actual or imputed income from the assets. Instead, imputed asset income must be calculated for specific assets when three conditions are met: (1) The value of net family assets exceeds $50,000 (as adjusted for inflation); (2) The specific asset is included in net family assets; and (3) Actual asset income cannot be calculated for the specific asset. Imputed asset income is calculated by multiplying the net cash value of the asset, after deducting reasonable costs that would be incurred in disposing of the asset, by the HUD-published passbook rate. If the actual income from assets can be computed for some assets but not all assets, then PHAs/MFH Owners must add up the actual income from the assets, where actual income can be calculated, then calculate the imputed income for the assets where actual income could not be calculated. After the PHA/MFH owner has calculated both the actual income and imputed income, the housing provider must combine both amounts to account for income on net family assets with a combined value of over $50,000. When the family’s net family assets do not exceed $50,000 (as adjusted for inflation), imputed income is not calculated. Imputed asset income is never calculated on assets that are excluded from net family assets. When actual income for an asset — which can equal $0 — can be calculated, imputed income is not calculated for that asset.

Owners should not conflate an asset with an actual return of $0 with an asset for which an actual return cannot be computed, such as could be the case for some non-financial assets that are items of nonnecessary personal property. If the asset is a financial asset and there is no income generated (for example, a bank account with a 0 percent interest rate or a stock that does not issue cash dividends), then the asset generates zero actual asset income, and imputed income is not calculated. When a stock issues dividends in some years but not others (e.g., due to market performance), the dividend is counted as the actual return when it is issued, and when no dividend is issued, the actual return is $0. When the stock never issues dividends, the actual return is consistently $0.

Self-Certification of Net Family Assets Equal to or Less Than $50,000

Owners may determine net family assets based on a self-certification by the family that the family’s total assets are equal to or less than $50,000, adjusted annually for inflation, without taking additional steps to verify the accuracy of the declaration at admission and/or reexamination. Owners are not required to obtain third-party verification of assets if they accept the family’s self-certification of net family assets. When Owners accept self-certification of net family assets at reexamination, the Owner must fully verify the family’s assets every three years. Owners may follow a pattern of relying on self-certification for two years in a row and fully verifying assets in the third year.

The family’s self-certification must state the amount of income the family anticipates receiving from such assets. The actual income declared by the family must be included in the family’s income unless specifically excluded from income under HUD regulations. Owners must clarify, during the self-certification process, which assets are included/excluded from net family assets.  Owners may combine the self-certification of net family assets and questions inquiring about a family’s present ownership interest in any real property into one form.

Bottom Line

Owners and managers of properties that are subject to HOTMA should familiarize themselves with these new asset rules and ensure they are in place. HUD properties will be required to implement the rules when they put the HOTMA changes into effect in 2024. LIHTC properties should consult the appropriate HFA to determine when the new rules must be followed.

Latest Articles

Understanding Tariffs and Their Impact on Construction Costs

What Are Tariffs? A tariff is simply a tax imposed on imported goods. When products like building materials enter U.S. ports, paying the applicable tariff is a standard part of the customs process. Historical Context Tariffs have deep roots in American history. From the colonial era through the early 1900s, they served as the federal government s primary revenue source. They were relatively straightforward to enforce even before modern technology, as customs officers could inspect incoming shipments at ports and collect the appropriate fees. The federal government s limited taxing authority under the Constitution meant that a modern income tax was not legally permissible until the 16th Amendment was enacted in 1913. The Decline of Tariffs Despite their historical importance, tariffs have several inherent problems that led to their declining use over the past century: They disadvantaged U.S. agricultural interests and exporters as other countries implemented retaliatory trade barriers. The tax burden fell disproportionately on lower-income individuals who spend more of their income on basic necessities. They couldn t generate sufficient revenue to fund modern government operations. When the global economy faltered in 1930, many nations, including the U.S., implemented protective tariffs with the Smoot-Hawley Act. Most economists view this wave of protectionism as a contributing factor to the severity of the Great Depression. Learning from this experience, the U.S. and other advanced economies gradually reduced trade barriers during the postwar period to foster economic cooperation and peace. Current Tariff Landscape Even during periods of free trade enthusiasm, tariffs never disappeared entirely. They remained relatively low in recent years, dropping to 1.5% in 2017 after decades of bipartisan efforts to establish global trade agreements. The Trump administration increased rates to approximately 3% during his previous term, which President Biden largely maintained. According to the Yale Budget Lab, the Trump administration s announced policies would raise the average tariff to 22.5% higher than during the Smoot-Hawley era and roughly equivalent to 1909 levels. Implementation Authority The scale of newly announced tariffs is significantly larger than previous ones. They affect nearly all goods from every country worldwide and invoke emergency authority not previously used for this purpose. Tariffs Impact on Construction Costs Tariffs increase construction costs through several key mechanisms: Direct price increases on imported construction materials like steel, aluminum, lumber, and other building products. These higher costs are typically passed along to developers and ultimately to end consumers. The specific impact depends on several factors: Which materials are targeted The tariff rate percentages Availability of domestic alternatives Proportion of imported versus domestic materials used The recent tariffs on imports from China (20%), Mexico, and Canada (25%) have significant implications for construction. According to the National Association of Home Builders, these tariffs could increase builder costs by approximately $7,500 to $10,000 per home for residential construction. This impact is substantial because approximately 7% of all goods used in new residential construction are imported. Critical materials like softwood lumber come predominantly from Canada (72% of imports), while gypsum for drywall is mainly sourced from Mexico (74% of imports). Multifamily Construction Impact For multifamily construction specifically, with 46% of materials sourced from these countries and 35-50% of project costs tied to finished materials, tariffs could increase material costs by 7.5%, potentially raising total construction budgets by 3-4%. Broader Effects Beyond core construction materials, reciprocal tariffs may also influence other building-related imports, such as carpeting, electrical outlets, security equipment, furniture, and tools. Projects that have already been awarded but are not yet started are likely to experience the most significant impact. Industry forecasts suggest the construction industry will feel the brunt of tariff policy changes in late 2025 and early 2026. Meanwhile, due to tariff-related inflation concerns, the Federal Reserve is expected to maintain stable interest rates through most of 2025. Recent Developments Homebuilders have been relieved, as Canada and Mexico were exempted from the latest round of tariffs, protecting key lumber and drywall component imports. Additionally, a carveout exists for lumber and copper imports. These tariff developments are challenging the U.S. housing market, which is already struggling with supply constraints and affordability issues. Developers with affordable multifamily housing projects in the pipeline or underway but for which materials have not yet been purchased should prepare for these possible increases. Developers facing this uncertainty should take a proactive, strategic approach. Here are some of the steps they should consider: 1. Lock in Pricing Where Possible Negotiate Early Procurement Contracts: Secure pricing and delivery timelines now for materials that may be subject to tariffs. Bulk Purchasing: If financially feasible and storage is available, purchase critical materials before the tariff is implemented. 2. Revisit and Update Budgets Include Contingency Allowances: Adjust budgets to account for a potential spike in material costs (e.g., steel, aluminum, electrical components). Run Revised Pro Formas: Model project feasibility under different tariff scenarios to understand the margin of financial risk. 3. Communicate with Key Stakeholders Inform Lenders and Syndicators: Ensure your financial partners know potential cost escalations and any resulting impact on project viability or timelines. Coordinate with HFAs and Local Agencies: If the deal includes LIHTCs or public funding, discuss possible adjustments or relief options (e.g., basis boosts, revised gap financing). 4. Evaluate Alternative Materials and Suppliers Source Domestic Alternatives: Tariffs often target imported materials. Switching to local or tariff-exempt sources could mitigate cost hikes. Value Engineering: Reassess design specs to identify non-critical elements where substitutions could reduce costs. 5. Monitor Policy and Industry Updates Stay Informed: Watch for updates on tariff decisions and industry responses through trade associations (e.g., NAHB, NMHC). Engage in Advocacy: Support efforts to exempt affordable housing materials from tariffs or seek policy carve-outs. 6. Build Schedule Flexibility Buffer Time for Delays: Tariffs often disrupt supply chains, so build in extra time for procurement and delivery to avoid construction slowdowns. 7. Document Impacts Track Cost Changes: Keep records showing cost increases due to tariffs this can be useful when requesting additional funding or extensions from oversight bodies. Being proactive can help developers manage risk rather than be blindsided by rising costs. In this environment, a smart developer remains nimble, communicates clearly, and plans for the worst while hoping for the best.

A. J. Johnson Partners with Mid-Atlantic AHMA for Training on Affordable Housing - May 2025

In May 2025, A. J. Johnson will partner with the MidAtlantic Affordable Housing Management Association for four live webinar training sessions for real estate professionals, particularly those in the affordable multifamily housing field. The following sessions will be presented: May 20: Acquisition/Rehab, Tenant Selection Plans & Affirmative Fair Housing Marketing Plans The complexities of affordable housing development don t stop at financing. When acquisition, rehabilitation, and layered funding programs collide, the stakes increase. Join industry expert A. J. Johnson for a practical and timely webinar on compliance pitfalls and planning strategies that can make or break your LIHTC project. This fast-paced session will break down the following: Acquisition-Rehab LIHTC Projects: How IRS rules impact "placed in service dates, acquisition credits, and meeting the 120-day qualification rule. The Available Unit Rule (AUR): Why this often-overlooked rule can lead to credit loss even on properties that no longer recertify. Tenant Selection Plans (TSPs): What every property manager must know about layered program requirements, lottery procedures, and legal screening standards. Affirmative Fair Housing Marketing Plans (AFHMPs): How to structure your outreach to comply with HUD requirements and avoid costly fair housing violations. Whether you're a developer, property manager, or compliance officer, this training will give you actionable strategies to keep your project on track and in full regulatory compliance. Who Should Attend - LIHTC developers, compliance specialists, property managers, syndicators, and housing agency staff responsible for acquisition, rehabilitation, and oversight of layered programs. May 21: HOTMA - Update on HUD Requirements On January 9, 2023, HUD published a final rule implementing The Housing Opportunity Through Modernization Act (HOTMA), signed into law on July 29, 2016. This final rule was published in the Federal Register on February 14, 2023, and has yet to become effective for HUD programs. Virtually all HUD programs are impacted by the rule, as are the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) Program and the Rural Development Section 515 Program. Since publishing the final rule in February 2023, HUD has provided additional guidance in implementing the rule, including extensions regarding implementation. This three-hour training will explain any updated HUD guidance and will cover the following areas: Definitional changes relating to earned and unearned income, non-recurring income, and foster children; Revised Income Exclusions; New requirements relative to Student Financial Assistance; Changes to the HUD permitted deductions from gross income, including a full review of the new "hardship exemptions; Brand new rules regarding assets; New Interim Recertification requirements; and The new definition of "annual income. May 22: Basic LIHTC Compliance This training is designed primarily for site and investment asset managers responsible for site-related asset management. It is especially beneficial to those managers who are relatively inexperienced in the tax credit program. It covers all aspects of credit related to on-site management, including the applicant interview process, determining resident eligibility (income and student issues), handling recertification, setting rents - including a full review of utility allowance requirements - lease issues, and the importance of maintaining the property. The training includes problems and questions to ensure students fully comprehend the material. May 28: Dealing with Income and Assets in Affordable Multifamily Housing - Course Overview This live webinar provides concentrated instruction on the required methodology for calculating and verifying income and determining the value of assets and income generated by those assets. The first section of the course involves a comprehensive discussion of employment income, military pay, pensions/social security, self-employment income, and child support. It concludes with workshop problems designed to test what the student has learned during the discussion phase of the training and serve to reinforce HUD-required techniques for determining income. The second component of the training focuses on a detailed discussion of requirements related to determining asset value and income. It applies to all federal housing programs, including the low-income housing tax credit, tax-exempt bonds, Section 8, Section 515, and HOME. Multiple types of assets are covered in terms of what constitutes an asset and how they must be verified. This section also concludes with problems designed to test the student s understanding of the basic requirements relative to assets. These sessions are part of a year-long collaboration between A. J. Johnson and MidAtlantic AHMA and are designed to provide affordable housing professionals with the knowledge needed to manage the complex requirements of the various agencies overseeing these programs effectively. Individuals or organizations interested in any (or all) training sessions may register by visiting either www.ajjcs.net or https://www.mid-atlanticahma.org.

Crime-Free Ordinances: When Local Laws Conflict with Federal Fair Housing Protections

In August 2024, the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice issued a critical warning: municipal "crime-free rental housing and "nuisance property ordinances may violate federal fair housing laws. These ordinances effective in nearly 2,000 cities across 48 states until recently place landlords in a precarious position. While intended to reduce crime and maintain neighborhood stability, these measures often result in unintended discrimination and can expose landlords to significant legal liability. Notable Legal Cases Several landmark cases have established important precedents regarding crime-free ordinances: United States v. City of Hesperia (2023) In a groundbreaking case, the Justice Department secured a landmark agreement with the City of Hesperia, California, and the San Bernardino County Sheriff s Department to resolve racial and national origin discrimination allegations in their "crime-free rental housing program. The consent order required the city to completely repeal its crime-free program and ordinance marking the first resolution demanding the complete end of such a program. The settlement included a $950,000 payout, with $670,000 allocated to compensate individuals harmed by the program. The Justice Department alleged that the city and sheriff s department engaged in a pattern of discrimination against Black and Latinx individuals in violation of the Fair Housing Act and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 through the enforcement of their crime-free rental housing program. Briggs v. Norristown After experiencing the harmful impacts of a nuisance ordinance, Ms. Briggs, with support from the American Civil Liberties Union, filed a lawsuit against the City of Norristown. The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) filed a complaint stating that the ordinance violated the Fair Housing Act based on its impact on women experiencing domestic violence. The case resulted in a settlement requiring Norristown to repeal its ordinances, and subsequently, Pennsylvania passed legislation banning localities from creating these types of ordinances. Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs v. The Inclusive Communities Project, Inc. (2015) In this influential Supreme Court case, the Court held that disparate impact claims are cognizable under the Fair Housing Act. This crucial decision established that housing policies with discriminatory effects even without discriminatory intent could violate the FHA. The ruling is particularly relevant to crime-free ordinances, which often produce disparate impacts on protected classes. The Legal Conflict: Federal Protections vs. Local Ordinances Landlords face a troubling dilemma: follow local crime-free ordinances and risk violating federal law, or disregard local requirements and face municipal penalties. This conflict stems from the fact that these ordinances may violate four major federal laws: 1. The Fair Housing Act Crime-free ordinances often have a disproportionate impact on protected classes. For example: When these ordinances require eviction based on arrests rather than convictions, they disproportionately affect Black and Hispanic tenants, who statistically face higher rates of police interaction regardless of criminal activity. Blanket policies requiring eviction of an entire household due to one member s criminal activity can discriminate against families with children, female-headed households, and certain cultural groups where extended family living arrangements are common. 2. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 Title VI prohibits discrimination in programs receiving federal funds. When municipalities with crime-free ordinances receive federal housing funds, they may violate Title VI if: Their ordinances have disparate impacts on protected classes Implementation decisions are influenced by discriminatory intent or stereotypes about certain neighborhoods or demographic groups 3. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Crime-free ordinances may discriminate against individuals with disabilities in several ways: Automatic eviction for behavior related to mental health conditions without consideration of reasonable accommodations Policies that penalize multiple emergency service calls, which may disproportionately impact those with chronic health conditions requiring frequent medical assistance Exclusions of individuals with past substance use disorder convictions, despite recovery and treatment 4. The Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) VAWA specifically protects victims of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking from housing discrimination. Crime-free ordinances often violate these protections by: Requiring eviction when police are called to a property multiple times, discouraging victims from seeking help Failing to distinguish between perpetrators and victims when criminal activity occurs Treating domestic disturbances as "nuisances rather than recognizing them as situations where victims need protection Problematic Practices in Crime-Free Ordinances Collective Punishment: Holding Entire Households Accountable One of the most troubling aspects of many crime-free ordinances is the requirement to evict entire households based on one individual s actions. This approach: Punishes innocent family members who had no knowledge of or participation in criminal activity Creates homelessness risks for vulnerable household members, including children, elderly relatives, and individuals with disabilities Disproportionately impacts communities where multi-generational or extended family living arrangements are cultural norms. Blanket Exclusions Based on Criminal Records Many ordinances include overly broad exclusions for individuals with criminal records: Lifetime bans for certain offenses, regardless of rehabilitation or time elapsed Failure to consider the nature, severity, or relevance of the criminal conduct to tenant suitability No individualized assessment of actual risk to property or other tenants Exclusion Based on Arrests Rather Than Convictions Some ordinances allow or require action against tenants based merely on arrests: Violates the presumption of innocence It has a disparate impact on communities of color, which experience higher rates of arrests that do not lead to convictions Creates housing instability based on unproven allegations rather than established facts Automatic Exclusion for Any Criminal Conviction Overly broad policies that automatically deny housing based on any criminal history: Fail to distinguish between violent crimes and minor offenses Ignore evidence of rehabilitation and the age of convictions Create permanent barriers to housing for individuals who have served their sentences and are working to reintegrate into society. Penalizing Emergency Service Calls Particularly problematic are provisions that treat emergency calls as "nuisances : Discourages tenants from seeking emergency medical assistance Forces vulnerable individuals to choose between needed help and keeping their housing Creates dangerous situations where tenants delay calling for assistance during genuine emergencies. Punishing Victims of Domestic Violence Perhaps most concerning is how these ordinances often penalize victims: Treating domestic violence incidents as "nuisance activities requiring eviction Failing to distinguish between calls made by victims versus perpetrators Creating a situation where victims must choose between enduring abuse in silence or risking homelessness. Legal Protections and Ongoing Developments The legal landscape around crime-free ordinances continues to evolve. In states like Illinois, legislation has been enacted to protect survivors of domestic or sexual violence and individuals with disabilities from being penalized due to calls to police for assistance. The Illinois Department of Human Rights and the UIC Law School Fair Housing Legal Support Center and Clinic have developed a guidebook addressing the fair housing implications of nuisance and crime-free ordinances. In 2024, additional cases have further clarified the legal boundaries of these ordinances: A case against a municipality alleged violations of both the Americans with Disabilities Act and Fair Housing Act for enforcing crime-free housing ordinances that denied tenants with mental health disabilities equal access to emergency response services. The consent decree required the municipality to revise its program rules and enforcement practices and adopt non-discrimination policies. The Department of Justice has increased enforcement actions against localities with discriminatory housing policies, particularly those that disproportionately affect racial minorities, women, and people with disabilities. Recommendations for Landlords If your municipality has implemented a crime-free ordinance that may conflict with federal protections, consider the following steps: 1. Review your lease agreements and policies to identify provisions that may violate federal law, even if required by local ordinance. 2. Consult with a housing attorney familiar with fair housing law and local regulations to understand your specific obligations and risks. 3. Implement individualized assessments rather than blanket policies when evaluating potential tenants with criminal histories. 4. Document all housing decisions with clear, non-discriminatory business justifications. 5. Create explicit exceptions in your policies for domestic violence victims and emergency service calls. 6. Engage with local government by attending city council meetings and advocating for amendments to problematic ordinances. 7. Join or form landlord associations to collectively address concerns with local officials. 8. If necessary, consider seeking a declaratory judgment in court to resolve the conflict between federal and local requirements. 9. Stay informed about new legal developments in this rapidly evolving area of law. Navigating this legal minefield is challenging; however, landlords should prioritize compliance with federal civil rights laws. When local ordinances and federal protections conflict, federal law generally prevails. By taking proactive steps to ensure fair housing practices, landlords can protect themselves from liability while also supporting safe, stable housing for all community members.

HUD Publishes 2025 Income Limits

On April 1, 2025, HUD published the 2025 income limits for HUD programs and the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit and Tax-Exempt Bond programs. The limits are effective on April 1, 2025. The limits for the LIHTC and Bond projects are published separately from those for HUD programs. For better understanding, LIHTC and Bond properties operate under the Multifamily Tax Subsidy Project (MTSP) limits. These properties are 'held harmless' from income limit (and therefore rent) reductions. This means that these properties may use the highest income limits for resident qualification and rent calculation since the project has been in service. However, it's important to note that HUD program income limits are not 'held harmless '. HUD publishes the 50% and 60% MTSP limits alongside the Average Income (AI) limits, which are set at 20%, 30%, 40%, 50%, 60%, 70%, and 80%. Projects that began service before 2009 may utilize the HERA Special Income Limits in areas where HUD has published such limits. Projects placed in service after 2008 cannot use the HERA Special Limits. Projects in rural areas not financed by tax-exempt bonds can use the higher MTSP limits or the National Non-Metropolitan Income Limits (NNMIL). It is important to note that for 2025, HUD has made changes to the definitions of geographic areas as determined by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). The counties or towns within certain metropolitan areas may have changed. Owners and managers should consult the HUD Area Definition Report for a list of their areas and their components. The link to the Area Definition Report can be found on the website provided below. Owners of LIHTC projects may rely on the 2024 income limits for all purposes for 45 days after the effective date of the newly issued limits, which ends on May 16, 2025. The limits for HUD programs may be found at www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/il.html. The limits for LIHTC and Bond programs may be found at www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/mtsp.html.

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.