Civil Rights Research - October 2023 - Building Opportunity III: Affirmatively furthering fair housing in the Low Income Housing Tax Credit program

Oct 15, 2026

Uploaded by Fahsai

Civil Rights Research (October 2023) examines civil-rights provisions in state Qualified Allocation Plans for the Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) program and tracks how trends have shifted since earlier 50-state surveys. It highlights the importance of strengthening incentives for higher-opportunity siting, improving affirmative marketing and nondiscriminatory tenant selection, and ensuring community revitalization requirements. The report also discusses how IRS guidance affects local approval practices and the Fair Housing Act’s requirements for affirmatively furthering fair housing compliance.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages20

Reading Time50 min

AccessFree to download

Introduction

Local contribution and approval requirements

The 2016 IRS Revenue Ruling

Civil Rights Research October 2023 Building Opportunity III: Affirmatively furthering fair housing in the Low Income Housing Tax Credit program Janelle Taylor, Robert Lindsay, and Philip Tegeler About the Authors Janelle Taylor, J.D. Georgetown Law School 2023, was a Law & Policy Internat PRRAC in 2022-2023; Robert Lindsay, J.D. University of Minnesota Law School 2023, was also a Law & Policy Intern at PRRAC in 2022-2023; Philip Tegeler is the Executive Director of PRRAC. Cover photos: featured are the state capitols of IN (Photo credit: Sean Pavone), CA (Photo credit: Sundry Photography), MO (Photo credit: RAWF8), and NY (Photo credit: Sean Pavone) . Introduction PRRAC began tracking civil rights related provisions in state Qualified Allocation Plans (QAPs) in 2008,1 out of concern for a growing concentration of LIHTC developments in high poverty, segregated neighborhoods, a trend which had already generated fair housing litigation in several states. Since that first 50-state survey, and a followup survey in 2015,2 much has changed. Whether because of increasingly powerful public health and social science evidence, growing awareness of fair housing obligations, or positive leadership within the industry, an increasing number of states have eliminated potentially discriminatory provisions in their QAPs, added incentives for development in high opportunity communities, strengthened affirmative marketing and tenant selection practices, and defined requirements for concerted community revitalization plans accompanying developments in low income neighborhoods. Strong incentives to support new LIHTC development in higher opportunity communities are especially important today, as an increasing share of LIHTC funds are going toward preservation of existing public and assisted housing developments, which are often located in high poverty neighborhoods. Preservation of existing affordable housing is critical, but to maintain balance and choice in affordable housing investment, even greater efforts must be made to expand new LIHTC family development in low poverty communities with high performing schools. Improved QAPs are an important first step toward this goal, but the true test offair housing compliance is the program’s performance in siting new developments, affirmative marketing, nondiscriminatory tenant selection, and community development. This 50-state survey will report on current state trends in local contribution and approval requirements, incentives for siting developments in high opportunity neighborhoods, affirmative marketing and tenantselection, and the concerted community revitalization requirement.3 1. A dramatic decline in local contribution and approval requirements and incentives Requirements or incentives for local government support of LIHTC developments have traditionally been viewed as the most exclusionary provision in state QAPs, effectively giving local governments veto power over any LIHTC development, and deterring developers from even attempting to propose family housing developments in known exclusionary communities. In Building Opportunity II (2015),4 we observed that, overall, provisions around local support were getting weaker, but were not less common. Following our 2015 review of state Qualified Allocation Plans and __________________________ 1 Sarah Bookbinder et al, Building Opportunity: Civil Rights Best Practices in the Low Income Housing Tax Credit Program (PRRAC and the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, 2008), [http://www.prrac.org/pdf/2008-Best](http://www.prrac.org/pdf/2008-Best)Practices-final.pdf. 2 Sarah Oppenheimer et al, Building Opportunity II: Civil Rights Best Practices in the Low Income Housing Tax Credit Program (PRRAC, 2015), [http://www.prrac.org/pdf/BuildingOpportunityII.pdf](http://www.prrac.org/pdf/BuildingOpportunityII.pdf). 3 All data in this report are drawn from the most recent Qualified Allocation Plans available during

FAQs

What is the report’s main purpose regarding LIHTC and fair housing?

The report surveys 50 states to document current trends affecting fair housing compliance in LIHTC projects, focusing on incentives, siting, affirmative marketing, tenant selection, and community revitalization requirements.

Why are local contribution and approval requirements described as exclusionary?

Such requirements can give local governments effective veto power over LIHTC development, deterring proposals for housing in communities viewed as exclusionary.

What did the 2016 IRS Revenue Ruling clarify about local approval for LIHTC projects?

It confirmed that the LIHTC statute does not require projects to obtain a jurisdiction’s approval, while still requiring notice and an opportunity to comment; it also emphasized LIHTC’s obligation under the Fair Housing Act.

Oct 15, 2026

Uploaded by Fahsai