• Publications
    • Essay
    • Case Study
    • Policy Study
    • Report
    • Testimony
    • Other
    • Newsletter
  • Blog
    • Daily Blog
    • Podcasts and Radio
    • Video
    • Infographics
    • Commentary / Op-Eds
    • Events
  • Events
  • Donate
  • About
    • Our Team
    • Show-Me Institute Board of Directors
    • Fellows and Scholars
    • Our Authors
    • Jobs
  • Contact
  • Explore Topics
    • Education
      • Accountability
      • Education Finance
      • Performance
      • School Choice
    • Health Care
      • Free-Market Reform
      • Medicaid
    • Corporate Welfare
      • Special Taxing Districts
      • Subsidies
      • Tax Credits
    • Labor
      • Government Unions
      • Public Pensions
    • State and Local Government
      • Budget and Spending
      • Courts
      • Criminal Justice
      • Municipal Policy
      • Property Rights
      • Transparency
      • Transportation
    • Economy
      • Business Climate
      • Energy
      • Minimum Wage
      • Privatization
      • Regulation
      • Taxes
      • Welfare
      • Workforce
Show Me InstituteShow Me Institute
Show Me InstituteShow Me Institute
Support the Show-Me Institute
  • Publications
    • Essay
    • Case Study
    • Policy Study
    • Report
    • Testimony
    • Other
    • Newsletter
  • Blog
    • Daily Blog
    • Podcasts and Radio
    • Video
    • Infographics
    • Commentary / Op-Eds
    • Events
  • Events
  • Donate
  • About
    • Our Team
    • Show-Me Institute Board of Directors
    • Fellows and Scholars
    • Our Authors
    • Jobs
  • Contact
  • Explore Topics
    • Education
      • Accountability
      • Education Finance
      • Performance
      • School Choice
    • Health Care
      • Free-Market Reform
      • Medicaid
    • Corporate Welfare
      • Special Taxing Districts
      • Subsidies
      • Tax Credits
    • Labor
      • Government Unions
      • Public Pensions
    • State and Local Government
      • Budget and Spending
      • Courts
      • Criminal Justice
      • Municipal Policy
      • Property Rights
      • Transparency
      • Transportation
    • Economy
      • Business Climate
      • Energy
      • Minimum Wage
      • Privatization
      • Regulation
      • Taxes
      • Welfare
      • Workforce
State and Local Government

Low-Income Housing Tax Credits Are Being Reformed? Not So Fast

By Elias Tsapelas on Mar 1, 2019
Housing Cost
Tero Vesalainen / Shutterstock

Last week, the Missouri Senate gave preliminary approval to a plan that supposedly “reforms” the state’s low-income housing tax credit (LIHTC) program. This proposal follows the announcement by Governor Parson last September that the Missouri Housing Development Commission, the body in charge of awarding LIHTCs, would not be issuing any new tax credits until the program is reformed by the legislature. At the time of the Governor’s announcement, my colleagues cheered the prospect of long-anticipated tax credit reform. Sadly, the most recent moves by the Senate deserve no cheers and should hardly be considered “reform.”

Prior to 2017, Missouri’s LIHTC program was one of the most generous in the country. The LIHTC program is federally created and funded, but in an effort to increase affordable housing development across the state, Missouri agreed to match up to 100% of the federal funds allocated to the state. The problem was that report after report showed the tax credit wasn’t an effective use of state funds. For example, a state auditor’s report showed that only 42 cents of each dollar allocated to LIHTCs was spent on the development of low-income housing. That was why the state’s portion of the program was halted in 2017.

But those who profit from the tax credits have always had a well-organized lobby, so it was only a matter of time until legislative efforts were made to restore Missouri’s funding. The measure approved last week returns Missouri’s funding for LIHTCs to 72.5% of the federally allocated funds.  Unsurprisingly, a St. Louis Post Dispatch article chronicling the negotiations notes the original “reform” proposal was to only return 50% of the funds, but developers felt that number was too low and as such eventually got the amount increased 77%, before eventually reaching the compromise number of 72.5%.

Just to summarize this backwards process: a program that currently receives zero state dollars was offered a return of 50% of their funding (over $100 million annually), supporters of that program claimed 50% was an inadequate number, and then the funding increase was bumped up north of 70% while no structural changes were made to the program that would actually ensure more dollars are spent on the original purpose of the tax credit (low income housing). If any dollars are going to be restored for the LIHTC program, there needs to be serious structural reform first. Anything else is just window dressing.

 

  • Share
  • Tweet
  • Share
  • Email
  • Print
About the author

Elias Tsapelas

Director of State Budget and Fiscal Policy

More about this author >
Footer Logo
Support the Show-Me-Institute
Showmeinstitute.org is brought to you by Show-Me Institute and Show-Me Opportunity.
  • Publications
  • Blog
  • Events
  • Donate
  • About
  • Contact

Reprint permission for Show-Me Institute publications and commentaries is hereby granted, provided that proper credit is given to the author. We request, but do not require, that those who reprint our material notify us of publication for our records: [email protected]

Mission Statement
Advancing liberty with responsibility by promoting market solutions for Missouri public policy.

© Copyright 2023 All Rights Reserved