Assembly committee hears proposal to expand Nevada state tax credits for affordable housing

CARSON CITY — The Assembly Committee on Revenue heard testimony on Assembly Bill 62 on the state’s transferable tax credit program for affordable housing, which would expand the program from $40 million to $100 million and make technical changes that division staff said would clarify eligibility and speed deployment of credits.

Steve Acroft, administrator of the Nevada Housing Division, told the committee the bill would (1) add ground leases for the benefit of public housing authorities to the list of projects eligible for the credits, (2) shorten the required submission of the final application from 45 days before closing to 15 days, and (3) increase total available tax credit authority from $40 million to $100 million.

The measure, sponsored on behalf of the Advisory Committee on Housing, would not create a new tax. Acroft said the change to the application timing reflects the need to finalize underwriting closer to financial close because project numbers change during development. “As development comes to financial close, the numbers are constantly changing,” Acroft said.

Christine Hess, chief financial officer for the Nevada Housing Division, told the committee the state program provides gap equity paired with federal low-income housing tax credits and that statute limits the amount the division can approve each year. Hess said the pilot has been effective and that the division has approved about $19.7 million in state credits across eight projects to date, with roughly $9 million approved in fiscal year 2025 so far and an expected additional $4 million before the fiscal year ends. She said the program is on pace to use its existing approval capacity ($13 million in annual approval authority, with carryforward) in fiscal year 2026 if additional authority is not provided.

Hess described a stewardship example in which underwriting shortly before closing allowed the division to reduce an originally requested $3 million credit to $1.7 million because the project no longer needed the full amount. “We are underwriting projects right before close in order to determine that they need the full amount that was originally requested and approved,” Hess said.

Supporters who testified included Bill Brewer, executive director of Nevada Rural Housing Authority; Nick Ciccone, government affairs manager for the City of Reno; representatives of the Reno and Southern Nevada regional housing authorities; Maurice Page of the Nevada Housing Coalition; Audra Hamernik of Nevada HAND; Joanna Jacob representing Clark County; Cadence Matejevich representing Washoe County; Randy Robinson for the City of Las Vegas; and Eric (Erik) Sorenson of Ovation (telephonic). Those supporters said the state tax credits have filled gaps caused by increased costs and rising interest rates and that the $40 million appropriation from 2019 and subsequent program design helped projects move forward.

Cyrus Hojjady of Strong Towns’ Las Vegas chapter testified in opposition, arguing the credits shift liabilities to taxpayers and questioning whether zoning and other regulatory changes could more directly address affordability. Chris Burress, who identified himself as a real estate agent, testified in neutral and suggested expanding down-payment assistance as another way to increase homeownership opportunities.

No final vote on AB 62 occurred at the hearing; committee members questioned staff about utilization, the number of projects likely to request credits (Acroft estimated roughly five to six projects using a $3 million benchmark per project with current balances), and interaction with federal ARPA-funded gap financing. Hess told members the division has spent roughly 38 percent of $500 million in Home Means Nevada funding and estimated that the program supported about 50 projects and roughly 3,400 units (new construction and rehabilitation) across multiple categories including multifamily and home-ownership programs. She said exact, project-level numbers could be provided to the committee on request.

The committee closed the hearing on AB 62 after taking support, opposition and neutral testimony. No committee action or vote was recorded during the hearing.

Ending note: Division staff said they are available to provide the committee additional program-level data, including the qualified allocation plan and precise project counts and unit totals, if the committee requests them.