Paul Jones, an associate at Ice Miller, wrote this recently posted blog.  I thought it merited posting here.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

“Retention and reuse of older buildings is an effective tool for the responsible, sustainable stewardship of environmental resources,” stated Richard Moe, President, National Trust for Historic Preservation: at a dinner last December where Moe was honored by the National Building Museum with the Vincent Scully Prize for his work on historic preservation.  Moe went on to state that “[N]o matter how much green technology is employed in its design and construction, any new building represents a new impact on the environment.  The bottom line is that the greenest building is one that already exists.”

 

Moe is not alone in seeing the critical interplay between historic preservation and sustainable development.  I’m with him, which is why when I was recently asked by the Indiana Chapter of the United States Green  Building Council to speak to its members and guests about tax incentives for sustainable development I could not resist the opportunity to talk a little bit about federal historic rehabilitation tax credits.  Federal income tax law has allowed for many years two credits , a 10% credit for pre-1936, non-certified historic structures, and a 20% credit for “certified historic structures”.  The credit amount equals credit rate (10% or 20%) multiplied by amount of “qualified rehabilitation expenditures”. 

 

The 20% credit provides the historic developer a source of funds with which to fund gaps in financing.  The source is tax credit equity provided by an investor or investors willing to become an owner of the project for 5 years in return for tax credits generated by the project expenditures.  For example, assuming the project has $10M of qualified rehab expenditures (defined below), the project owner (a partnership for federal tax purposes) has $2M in federal tax credits to pass through to its owners.  The project owners can typically raise 85-95% of the $2M in the form of tax credit investor equity. 

 

There are four basic requirements to consider, though other requirements and limitations(such as those related to tax-exempt use of the property) may apply

 

Must involve a “certified historic structure” 

  • Building is listed in the National Register of Historic Places maintained by the Dept. of Interior pursuant to the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966; or
  • Building is located in a “registered historic district” and certified by the Secretary of the Dept. of Interior as being of historic significance to the district

Must result in “qualified rehabilitated building” 

  • Must be a “building” (apartments, factories, office buildings, warehouses, barns, garages NOT bridges, boats, trains, storage tanks, kilns, ovens)
  • Building must be “substantially rehabilitated”

Must have “qualified rehabilitation expenditures” 

  • Costs associated with renovation, restoration or reconstruction which are chargeable to the capital account for property which is depreciable (Hard construction costs, Walls, floors, ceilings, Windows and doors, Plumbing, electrical, lighting, Construction period interest, taxes and insurance, Architectural and engineering fees, Legal fees related to construction, Reasonable developer fees, Historic consultant fees
  • Certain costs NOT included (Building acquisition costs, Enlargements and new additions, Landscaping, parking lots, sidewalks, Outside environmental cleanup, Building demolition costs, Appliances, Furniture and other personal property, Cabinets and carpet (unless permanently affixed), Feasibility and marketing costs

Must be a “certified rehabilitation” 

  • Rehabilitation of a certified historic structure must be certified by the Secretary of the Dept. of Interior in order to qualify for the credit
  • Three part application process involving the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) and the Dept. of Interior

As mentioned above, other limitations and special rules apply, but historic rehabilitation tax credits can serve as one of the many incentives potentially available to finance sustainable development.


Jennifer Rhodes is a partner in Ice Miller's Private Equity/Venture Services Practice.  Her primary area of concentration is in private equity fund formation and operations, venture capital and private equity financings, mergers and acquisitions, and general corporate matters.

 Dr. Homer L. Pearce's remarks during Ice Miller's recent life science distinguished speaker's series highlight the importance of sufficient research funding for success in the war on cancer.  Research and development costs associated with identifying pharmaceutical solutions are particularly daunting and, given the time to market and current patent protection periods, sometimes commercially unjustifiable.

As a result of the targeted efforts of many, including the Indiana Economic Development Corporation and BioCrossroads, among others, Indiana's unique contribution to the national life science sector is becoming increasingly recognized - not only in terms of its many research institutions, major pharma companies and contract service providers, but also with respect to availability of funding.  In 2006, according to PricewaterhouseCoopers, Indiana ranked 21st in the nation for venture capital investments in the life science sector.

 

According to the S&P-2006, Purdue and Indiana University currently have $200 million in academic life science funding commitments and graduate 10,000 science and engineering students each year.  Both institutions are developing innovative diagnostic equipment and pharmaceutical protocols that, with appropriate funding, can bring life saving treatments to market.  The financial needs of Indiana's innovators have not gone unnoticed by public and private financial sources that are positioned to fund such developments. 

 

In 2008, we should expect to see further growth in Indiana's life science community as our state's leading research scientists build on the efforts of past scientific contributors to develop cutting-edge technologies and as funding sources become increasingly available both locally and nationally.