Establishes the State Housing Trust Fund in the State Treasury and directs that it be administered by the Florida Housing Finance Corporation on behalf of the department. This is the record that makes SAIL a state housing trust fund programme rather than a generic state loan programme, and it is why the SAIL rules in this batch carry program_id state_htf.

The statutory authority behind Fla. Admin. Code ch. 67-48 Part II. Subsection (2) is the source of the three alternative set-aside tests (tax-exempt bond financing / taxable financing / federal LIHTC) and of the requirement that compliance be contractually provided for the term of the loan or 12 years, whichever is longer.

Read from a third-party mirror because the agency site was unreachable, and seventeen years old. The current guidebook exists but could not be retrieved. Highest-priority refresh in the whole corpus. URL repaired 2026-08-27: previous address https://www.novoco.com/documents96916/florida_10_0.pdf no longer served it. Edition confirmed on the document's own face before repointing -- Cover page reads exactly "Compliance Guidebook / April 2003 / August 2009"; preface signed "Florida Housing Finance Corporation / April 2003". 270 pages, 1,493,951 bytes, sha256 5768510824d27327bac9b3c82fcf9d6b65371d031d0779cd84099fdbc17a2e7e.

Fetched 2026-08-30; 12 pages, 230,384 bytes, sha256 ae886f4806aa97146abdb5de13bb630602169a92ed7417c9aaad95e7d845059a. Published date taken from the running footer on every page, 'Last Updated 12/30/2025', which is the only date the document carries. floridahousing.org has historically blocked automated fetch; on 2026-08-30 a plain curl with a browser user-agent and --compressed succeeded for both this PDF and the programme page. The document itself disclaims legal force ('provided for information purposes only and is not legal advice'), hence persuasive rather than binding, and it is the ONLY published statement of two operating rules that appear nowhere in the statute: that the maximum rent is not required to include a utility allowance, and which fees count as a condition of occupancy.

Fetched 2026-08-30. The page carries no date on its face, so `published` is null; its only self-dating content is the link label '2026 Certificates are now available in the portal' and a dated workshop link, 'September 16, 2025 Multifamily Middle Market Certification Workshop'. It is the page s. 196.1978(3)(h) requires — 'The corporation shall post on its website the deadline to submit a request for a certification notice' — and as served on 2026-08-30 it posts no such deadline, only the portal link. Recorded for the eligibility restatement and the statement that the property appraiser, not Florida Housing, determines eligibility.

Fetched direct from floridahousing.org 2026-08-26 (HTTP 200, 2-page PDF, sha256 480739270f4fa44569d0bdf02c9551f72afde371d4df483259a7feb4b404427b). Carries the 31-day minimum-occupancy condition for certified-vacant status and the building-by-building NAU log requirement, neither stated this precisely in the guidebook chapters.

Portal opens 1 October for preparation and 1 January for submission, closes 15 January at 3pm EST. Certification notices issue to owner and property appraiser by 15 February; the appraiser filing is due 1 March.

Fetched direct from floridahousing.org 2026-08-26 (HTTP 200, .xls workbook, sha256 6f7a5d68cc107e2f049d2efca06126fe978d58a058a56970bcc405ef0341e371). The TIC-1 is named in Fla. Admin. Code R. 67-53.008 and is therefore mandatory (see fl.lihtc.tic_1_mandatory). The workbook's embedded change log documents annual passbook-rate maintenance (0.40% 1/1/2024, 0.45% 1/1/2025, 0.40% 1/1/2026) while Part IV retains the $5,000 asset-imputation threshold -- the primary evidence that FHFC has not adopted the HOTMA $50,000 figure as of January 2026. floridahousing.org has historically blocked automated fetch; this session's plain-curl success may be intermittent.

Read via the Florida Housing Coalition overview and a 2026 legal summary; the consolidated statutory text was not retrieved directly.

Florida's list mirrors the federal seven and adds nothing. Recorded so an operator can stop looking rather than assume a state overlay exists.

The court rejected the exception for landlords renting to single persons, married persons and people with children while excluding unmarried couples. This catalog entry records that holding; it does not certify subsequent treatment or establish that another property qualifies for an exception. Swanner, 874 P.2d 274, 278 (Alaska 1994), also discusses Foreman, but later legal developments remain to be reviewed.

Line 8b carries the multiple-building project election, which changes how set-aside, available unit and transfer rules apply.

The prescribed form for the section 142(d)(7) annual certification. It is the operative source for four facts the statute leaves to the Secretary: who files (the OPERATOR of the project, not the owner), when (by March 31 after the close of the calendar year certified, annually throughout the qualified project period), where (IRS Service Center, Ogden UT 84201), and one form per project. Its instructions also state the consequence of post-issuance noncompliance in current-law terms - the bonds cease to be qualified bonds under section 141, the interest becomes taxable, and issuers or brokers must report that taxable interest to bondholders under section 6049 - which is the clearest statement located this session that the victim of a 142(d) failure is the bondholder rather than the partnership. Line 1 prints five election boxes including two disaster-area tests (20-60 and 40-70) that do not appear in 142(d)(1). The instructions cite Rev. Rul. 94-57, 1994-2 C.B. 5 for computing the income limits; that ruling could not be retrieved on 2026-08-30 (irs.gov/pub/irs-drop/rr-94-57.pdf returned 404) and is therefore not a source in this corpus. RISK: irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/ paths are revision-agnostic, so the IRS replaces the file in place when a new revision issues. The file at that path IS Rev. 12-2021 as of 2026-08-30, but this source should stay on a hash check.

Defines the seventeen noncompliance categories (lines 11a-11q) used by every state allocating agency. Confirmed reachable 2026-08-27 despite the archiver reporting it unreachable: plain curl with a standard browser User-Agent. The URL is correct; the fetch was being blocked. Archiver's timeout was transient. Keep the URL. Worth noting the shape of the risk on this one: irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/ paths are revision-agnostic, so the IRS replaces the file in place when a new revision issues. Right now the file at that path IS Rev. 6-2023, so the citation is sound, but this source backs the 17 noncompliance categories used across the corpus's violation records and should stay on a hash check. No newer revision is being served as of 2026-08-27.

EDITION FROM THE DOCUMENT'S OWN FACE: every page footer reads 'Previous editions are obsolete ... Form HUD-935.2A (12/2011)', and the header carries 'OMB Approval No. 2529-0013 (exp.1/31/2021)'. `published` is left null because the form prints month-and-year only. TWO THINGS WORTH RECORDING. First, the printed OMB expiry of 1/31/2021 is more than five years past while HUD continues to serve the form as current; an expired control number does not extinguish the obligation in 24 CFR 200.620 and 200.625 but it will be asked about. Second, THE FIVE-YEAR REVIEW CADENCE EXISTS ONLY HERE, in the instructions to Part 9: 'Respondents must review their AFHMP every five years or when the local Community Development jurisdiction's Consolidated Plan is updated, or when there are significant changes in the demographics of the project or the local housing market area.' No provision of 24 CFR part 200 subpart M states any review interval. The Part 9 certification block on the form itself makes the instructions binding on the signer by agreement. PDF CreationDate 2025-07-21, i.e. the file was re-saved long after its printed edition; the printed edition governs.

A two-page table answering, per Minnesota Housing program and funding source, 'Do Agency TSP Guidelines apply?' It is the applicability instrument for src.mn.tsp_guidelines and the reason the tenant-selection rules in this batch can state a predicate rather than a guess. Yes for Asset Management Loans, LMIR/FFCC, Housing Infrastructure, PARIF, EDHC, HOME/NHTF (subject to federal requirements), and Section 811 PRA (subject to federal requirements and the 811 PRA TSP Addendum Template). Yes for '9% and 4% Housing Tax Credits (HTC)' with the qualification 'Effective with 2022-2023 QAP' -- a THIRD formulation of the trigger date, differing from the compliance guide's 'selected after March 31, 2021' and the Guidelines' 'funding application submitted ... after March 31, 2021'; all three are quoted on mn.lihtc.tenant_selection.tsp_guidelines_required and the conflict is carried as an open question rather than resolved. No, with the Guidelines merely encouraged, for the Workforce Housing Development Program, RRDL, POHP, the STATE Housing Tax Credit, Community Stabilization NOAH and Distressed Multifamily, and ERA2 Capital Funding. TRAP: document-id URL, same supersession-detection problem as the Guidelines -- only the hash moves.

Holds two provisions no other source in this corpus carries. 24 CFR 5.105(a)(2) is the Equal Access Rule: eligibility determinations and availability without regard to actual or perceived sexual orientation, gender identity, or marital status. It is a REGULATION and remains in force -- distinct from HUD's February 2021 'Implementation of Executive Order 13988' memorandum, which FHEO withdrew effective 17 September 2025 (90 FR, see src.fr.fheo_guidance_withdrawal_2026). Withdrawing guidance about a rule does not withdraw the rule. 24 CFR 5.150 and 5.151 carry the March 2025 rewrite of the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing standard (90 FR 11023), which replaced the planning-and-assessment regime with a certification satisfied by 'any action that is rationally related to promoting one or more attributes of fair housing'.

DCA's per-household student form. Names the documentation it wants for each of the five LIHTC exceptions, tells the reviewer that no verification is needed for a self-certified full-time student and that part-time status is verified only when everyone in the household is a student, and obliges every adult to initial an undertaking to notify management immediately of any change in student status. Its definition of a full-time student -- 'enrolled on a full-time basis for more than four months (need not be consecutive)' -- does not match the March 2024 manual's 'all or part of any 5 months out of the calendar year'; the conflict is carried as an open question on ga.lihtc.student_status.five_exceptions_and_verification_matrix.

Over two years old and no 2025 or 2026 edition exists. A 2016 edition still resolves at a DCA URL and is orphaned from every current compliance page, so a web search can easily surface the wrong manual.

Applies the 2013 HOME Rule Section 8 student rules to DCA-funded HOME and NSP projects from 10 March 2016. Four FAQ answers carry the operative content: two student forms are required at a layered LIHTC/HOME site (Q1); the most-restrictive-rule approach is unavailable because the two rules are structurally different, so each must be monitored and enforced separately (Q2); the fixed-versus-floating replacement mechanics for a HOME unit in student-rule violation (Q3); and, contradicting the March 2024 manual, that rent is NOT adjusted for a student-rule failure and is adjusted only where the household's adjusted income exceeds 80% AMI (Q4). Cited by ga.home.student_status.section_8_individual_student_test_for_home and ga.home.over_income.home_student_ineligible_household_treated_as_over_income.

DATE READ OFF THE FORM'S OWN FACE ("IT-HC (Rev. 6/1/22)" in the header of each page), not from the URL. This is the Georgia state credit's entire compliance artefact, and it matters because Georgia has no state-credit chapter anywhere else: DCA's LIHTC & HOME Compliance Manual mentions state credits exactly once, in its introduction, and the 2026-2027 QAP's monitoring section carries no state-credit provisions. Part IA is completed and signed by an authorised DCA official and states the maximum allowable Georgia credit and the placed-in-service date. Part IB is the ownership entity's declaration under penalties of perjury that the building continues to qualify and meets BOTH IRC 42(g) and O.C.G.A. 48-7-29.6, and whether qualified basis has or has not decreased for the tax year. Part II requires an assignment letter from each entity involved in marketing the credit. Part III instructions supply the transfer rule that the statute states only obliquely -- transfers of ownership of the credit do not trigger recapture, but the Commissioner of Revenue and/or the Commissioner of Insurance must be notified and both parties check the transfer box -- and the three-year carryforward. Page 3 lists the attachments (executed IT-HC pages 1-3, a Georgia K-1 equivalent, and a building-by-building allocation schedule) with the consequence in the form's own emphasis: "***Failure to attach these documents will result in disallowance of the credit.***", plus the bar on claiming for any property whose federal Form 8609 has not issued.

34 pages, 471,260 bytes, sha256 14c4769ed1ae499f485854780944d14579a1fe540c4bba8237fb26ee316ee95a. THIS IS THE CURRENT FINAL EDITION AND GHURA'S OWN LIHTC PROGRAM PAGE DOES NOT LINK IT: ghura.org/low-income-housing-tax-credit-program still lists only the 2018 QAP ('Updated April 18, 2018'), and the 2021 QAP also remains live at /sites/default/files/2021_qap_app_final.pdf - the stale-index trap seen in Utah, Arkansas and Kansas, in territorial form. Currency was established from the document itself (cover approval stamp 7/23/2024; sec. II effectivity statement) and from the absence of any later final: the 2025 QAP exists only as '(Proposed)' on a public-comment notice page (ghura.org/available-public-comment-2025-low-income-housing-tax-credit-lihtc-program-qualified-allocation-plan) with no adoption announcement located on 2026-08-25. GHURA publishes NO standalone compliance manual: Section VI 'Compliance Monitoring Plan' (pp. 22-31) is the whole published monitoring regime, and Section V (p. 22) the fee schedule (application fee $1,500; good faith deposit 10% of first-year credits, 80% retained as an administrative fee at 8609 issuance; qualified contract processing fee $150/unit; attorney's fees to the prevailing party in QAP disputes). The QAP self-describes as guidance, 'not intended to establish binding rules or regulations' (p. 3), and GHURA may modify it case-by-case - recorded here rather than resolved; the compliance plan is nonetheless the only published statement of GHURA's monitoring procedure.