As a tax credit manager, meeting your site’s minimum set-aside is the most important goal. If you meet the set-aside, the owner of your site will be entitled to claim its tax credits. If you don’t meet the set-aside, your site won’t qualify for the tax credit program, which means the owner won’t be able to claim any of the credits it was allocated. And unlike many other types of noncompliance, failure to meet the minimum set-aside isn’t correctable.
A key aspect of your job as a tax credit manager is performing calculations. For instance, you must perform calculations to correctly determine whether a household is eligible to occupy a low-income unit, how much rent you can charge, and how many low-income units you need to set aside at your site. When performing these calculations, it’s easy to make mistakes. And because the tax credit program requirements are very precise, even one small mistake can cost the owner its tax credits.
Every tax credit site must meet and maintain a “minimum set-aside” throughout the 15-year compliance period to qualify for the tax credit program. To meet the set-aside, you must rent a certain percentage of the units in your building or site to qualified low-income households.All tax credit owners must formally notify the IRS of their minimum set-aside election for their building or site when they file IRS Form 8609. If an owner doesn’t elect a set-aside on this form, all the tax credits the owner was allocated for its site may be lost.
In the Fall 2016 Special Issue, we discussed how a site owner may comply with first-year certification requirements under Internal Revenue Code (IRC) Section 42(l)(1). Making the certification involves Form 8609, Low-Income Housing Credit Allocation and Certification. The agency executes Part I and then mails the Form 8609 to the owner. The owner then completes the certification required under IRC Section 42(l)(1) for the first year of the credit period by completing Part II of the Form 8609 and submitting it, one time, to the IRS.
At some tax credit sites, setting up a household file may mean randomly tossing all the paperwork concerning a household into a folder. Or household files may be organized in a way that’s understood by only one or two staffers. But practices like these can cost the owner its tax credits. When IRS or state housing agency auditors need to review your files, they could be sifting through decades’ worth of documents.
As the end of the calendar year nears, your site’s annual certification to your state housing agency is approaching. Under Treasury Regulation Section 1.42-5(c)(1), owners are required to certify to the state agency that allocated the credit at least annually that, for the preceding 12-month period, the site was operated in compliance with Internal Revenue Code (IRC) Section 42 requirements. Most state agencies define “annual period” as the calendar year with due dates for submission.
In addition to annual certifications, owners are required to complete a “First-Year Certification” under Internal Revenue Code (IRC) Section 42(l)(1). The certification is made to identify specific information needed for the administration of the program and document specific elections that will govern how the site is operated.
You probably know that when a low-income household’s income exceeds 140 percent of the income limit (or 170 percent in the case of deep rent-skewed units), you must follow the Next Available Unit (NAU) rule to make sure the owner can continue claiming credits for the over-income unit. But you might not realize that changes in a household’s size can trigger the NAU rule. This can occur if a household’s size increases or decreases.
In the May issue, we discussed HUD’s new guidance on criminal background checks. The new guidelines spell out how HUD will evaluate fair housing complaints in cases where a site refuses to rent or renew a lease based on an individual’s criminal history. The new guidance has brought about many questions concerning whether and when criminal background checks may be used to screen applicants.
From time to time, you or a staff member may get a rent check from someone other than the resident named on the lease. If you deposit the check and it turns out that the resident is illegally subletting his unit to the person who sent the rent check, you could run into problems. A court may rule that you have had knowledge of and consented to the sublet by accepting and depositing the rent check even if you never intended to.
