Louisiana House Bill HB349

Louisiana 2011 Regular Session

• Introduced: 4/25/11
• Refer: 4/25/11
• Report Pass: 6/2/11
• Engrossed: 6/8/11
• Report Pass: 6/13/11

Caption

Extends applicability of the tax credit for the rehabilitation of certain historic structures (EG1 DECREASE GF RV See Note)

Impact

The extension of the tax credit is expected to have a positive impact on state laws related to historic preservation and economic incentives. It offers financial support to individuals and businesses engaged in restoring historic properties, potentially leading to increased economic activity in eligible areas. Communities stand to benefit from boosted tourism, increased property values, and stimulated local economies as a result of more resources being allocated towards rehabilitation efforts.

Summary

House Bill 349 aims to extend the applicability of tax credits for the rehabilitation of certain historic structures. This bill reflects a broader initiative to promote the conservation of culturally significant buildings while providing financial incentives to property owners who undertake restoration projects. By extending these tax credits, the legislation seeks to encourage investment in local economies and the preservation of historical architecture in communities across the state.

Sentiment

The sentiment regarding HB 349 is largely positive among stakeholders in the preservation and construction sectors. Supporters view it as an essential measure to foster economic growth through historical restoration and have expressed strong backing during discussions. However, while enthusiasm is prevalent, some concerns about the fiscal implications of extending tax credits were noted, with some legislators emphasizing the need for careful examination of the budgetary impacts before implementation.

Contention

Notable points of contention regarding HB 349 revolve around the allocation of state resources and the prioritization of tax credits over other funding needs. Critics argue that while preservation is important, it must be balanced against the state’s overall fiscal responsibilities. This debate highlights the tension between supporting historic preservation and ensuring adequate funding for a wider array of state services. Nonetheless, the lack of opposition during the voting process indicates a prevailing consensus around the bill's intent to support heritage conservation.