Norma Ruth Criswell Carpenter & Clovis C. Criswell Grant Parish Restoration Act of 2026
SB 4584 would amend the Internal Revenue Code’s New Markets Tax Credit (NMTC) rules to make certain rural and federally impacted counties more likely to qualify for the credit. The bill first changes how “high migration rural counties” are measured by excluding individuals in institutionalized group quarters from the population calculation, which can affect whether a county meets the NMTC eligibility threshold. It also creates a special rule for census tracts in counties where at least 30% of the land is federally owned, lowering the population-density threshold from 20% to 15% for determining low-income communities.
The bill includes two carve-outs in the federal-land provision: military installations are not counted as federal land, and land held by the federal government in trust for Native Americans is also excluded from the federal-land calculation. Both amendments apply prospectively to investments made after enactment, with the federal-land rule applying to investments after December 31, 2025. The short title indicates the measure is intended to support Grant Parish restoration efforts, suggesting a targeted local or regional economic development purpose within the broader NMTC framework.
The bill would modify Section 45D of the Internal Revenue Code, changing eligibility rules for New Markets Tax Credit investments in certain rural counties and in counties with substantial federal land ownership. By lowering the effective population-density threshold in qualifying tracts and adjusting how county population is measured, the bill could expand the number of communities and projects that can attract NMTC-financed investment. The affected parties would include community development entities, rural counties, low-income census tracts, local businesses seeking capital, and potentially counties with significant federal land holdings, while preserving separate treatment for military and tribal trust lands.
There is no recorded committee transcript or vote history in the provided material, so no direct debate or roll-call sentiment is available. Based on the bill’s structure and title, the measure appears to be framed as a targeted economic development and rural restoration proposal rather than a broad partisan policy change. The absence of recorded opposition or amendments in the provided context suggests the bill was, at minimum, introduced in a focused and technical manner.
The main policy issues likely concern how eligibility for the New Markets Tax Credit is calculated in counties with unusual land-use or population patterns. One point of contention could be the decision to exclude institutionalized group quarters from the high-migration rural county calculation, which may benefit some counties while excluding others from qualification. Another possible issue is the special treatment for counties with large amounts of federal land, including the lower density threshold and the exclusions for military installations and tribal trust lands; these provisions could draw scrutiny over whether they fairly target distressed communities or create preferential treatment for certain jurisdictions.