1

Annual Report 

on the 

Economic 

Impact 

of the 

Federal Historic 

Tax Credit for 

FY 2016 

Edward J. Bloustein School 

of Planning and Public Policy 

Edward J. Bloustein Sch 

NaƟonal Park Service 

U.S. Department of the Interior 

Technical PreservaƟ on Services 
This execuƟve summary is based on the findings of a NaƟonal Park Service-funded annual study undertaken 

through a cooperaƟve agreement with Rutgers University. The University is responsible for the content of the 

study. 

Center for Urban Policy Research 

Edward J. Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy 

Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey 

New Brunswick, NJ 08901 

Technical PreservaƟ on Services 

NaƟonal Park Service 

U.S. Department of the Interior 

Washington, DC 20240 

The NaƟonal Trust for Historic PreservaƟon provided assistance in the preparaƟon of the two case studies. 

July 2017 

Cover photo: The restored historic lobby of the Paducah Coca-Cola BoƩling Plant, Paducah, Kentucky. Photo: Ray Black & Sons 
ANNUAL REPORT ON THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF THE FEDERAL HISTORIC TAX CREDIT FOR FY 2016 

A Message from the NaƟonal Park Service 

Beyond the NaƟ onal Park System, the NaƟonal Park Service through its Cultural Resources, Partnerships, and 

Science Programs is part of a naƟ onal preservaƟon partnership working to promote the preservaƟon of historic 

resources in communiƟes small and large throughout the country. For the past 39 years, the NaƟonal Park Ser

vice, in partnership with the State Historic PreservaƟ on Offi ces, has administered the Federal Historic PreservaƟon Tax IncenƟ ves Program. 

Commonly referred to as the Federal Historic Tax Credit (HTC), the HTC is designed to not only preserve and 

rehabilitate historic buildings, but to also promote the economic revitalizaƟon of older communiƟes in the naƟ on’s ciƟes and towns, along Main Streets, and in rural areas. Targeted to income-producing buildings, the HTC 

program is the largest and most effecƟve Federal program specifi cally supporƟng historic preservaƟ on. Since 

the program’s incepƟon in 1976, the NaƟonal Park Service has cerƟfied the rehabilitaƟon of more than 42,000 

historic properƟes throughout the United States. 

In Fiscal Year (FY) 2016, 1,039 completed historic rehabilitaƟon projects were cerƟfied by the NaƟ onal Park 

Service, represenƟng $5.85 billion in esƟ mated rehabilitaƟon costs that qualify for a 20% Federal tax credit. 

(Another 1,299 proposed projects were also approved in FY 2016.) Many of these projects involved buildings 

that were abandoned or underuƟlized, and in need of substanƟ al rehabilitaƟon to return them to, or for their 

conƟnued, economic viability. The HTC program also is an important tool in helping to revitalize older, economically-depressed communiƟes. Based on project data provided by the NaƟonal Park Service, PolicyMap has 

determined that over 55% of the cerƟfi ed rehabilitaƟon projects in FY 2016 were located in low and moderate 

income census tracks. 

The NaƟonal Park Service issues annual reports on the HTC program quanƟfying the number of historic rehabilitaƟ ons cerƟfied each year, their reported costs, and other staƟsƟ cal informaƟon on the program. The annual 

and staƟsƟcal reports are available on the NaƟonal Park Service’s Technical PreservaƟon Services (TPS) website 

at hƩ p://www.nps.gov/tps/tax-incenƟves.htm, along with informaƟon on the HTC program in general. 

For FY 2016, the NaƟonal Park Service also turned to the Rutgers University’s Center for Urban Policy Research, 

through a cooperaƟve agreement, to undertake and report on the economic impacts of the HTC for the fi scal 

year ending September 30, 2016. This report highlights its main findings. An economic model originally developed by the Center under a series of grants from the NaƟonal Park Service was used in the preparaƟon of this 

report. The economic model was uƟlized by the Center for their seven prior reports on the Federal HTC, as well 

as for a number of other economic reports for state governments and others. 

As the Center’s report idenƟfies, the level and breadth of economic impacts resulƟng from the Federal HTCs in 

FY 2016 are quite impressive. In addiƟon, the report includes informaƟon on the cumulaƟve economic impact of the Federal Historic PreservaƟon Tax IncenƟves Program for the past 39 years, starƟng in 1977-78 with 

the first completed rehabilitaƟon project to be cerƟfied by the NaƟonal Park Service under the program. The 

program remains one of the Federal government’s most successful and cost-effecƟve community revitalizaƟon 

programs. 

Technical PreservaƟ on Services 

­

1
 
 

 

 

ANNUAL REPORT ON THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF THE FEDERAL HISTORIC TAX CREDIT FOR FY 2016 

Annual Report on the Economic Impact of the Federal Historic 

Tax Credit for FY 2016: ExecuƟ ve Summary 

Overview of the Rutgers Economic Analysis 

The federal historic tax credit (HTC) is a federal income tax credit that promotes the rehabilitaƟon of incomeproducing historic properƟes. This study examines the economic impacts of the HTC (currently at 20 percent) 

by analyzing the economic consequences of the projects it supports. This analysis focuses on the economic 

effects of these projects during construcƟon and quanƟfies the total economic impacts (i.e., direct as well as 

mulƟplier, or secondary, economic consequences) for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2016, and for the 

period since the program’s incepƟon. The study uƟlizes the PreservaƟon Economic Impact Model (PEIM), a 

comprehensive economic model development by Rutgers University for the NaƟonal Park Service. 

The current analysis applies the PEIM to both cumulaƟve (FY 1978 through FY 2016) HTC-related historic rehabilitaƟon investment (about $131.8 billion in inflaƟon-adjusted 2016 dollars) and single-year (FY 2016) HTCrelated rehabilitaƟon investment (about $6.5 billion). It considers the effects of the cumulaƟve $131.8 billion 

rehabilitaƟon investment as if it applied to one year (2016), rather than backdaƟng the PEIM for each of the 

39 years in the study period. It also considers the full rehabilitaƟon investment associated with the HTC (e.g., 

$6.5 billion in FY 2016), and not the somewhat lower amount reported by the NaƟonal Park Service based on 

esƟ mated qualifi ed rehabilitaƟ on costs indicated by property owners who request cerƟficaƟon of rehabilitaƟon 

for purposes of the tax credit (e.g., $5.9 billion in FY 2016). 1 

The results of the PEIM include many fields of data. The fields most relevant to this study are the following: 

• JOBS: Employment, both part- and full-Ɵme, by place of work, esƟmated using the typical job 

characterisƟcs of each industry. 

• INCOME: “Earned” or labor income; specifically, wages, salaries, and proprietor income. 

• WEALTH: Value-added—the subnaƟonal equivalent of gross domesƟc product (GDP). At the state level,

 this is called gross state product (GSP). 

• OUTPUT: The value of shipments, as reported in the Economic Census. 

• TAXES: Tax revenues generated by the acƟvity, which include taxes to the federal government and 

to state and local governments. 

1

The HTC has a mulƟ step applicaƟon process, encompassing Part 1 (evaluaƟon of the historic significance of the property), Part 2 (descripƟon of the 

proposed rehabilitaƟon work), and Part 3 (request for cerƟficaƟon of completed work). Both Part 2 and Part 3 rehabilitaƟ on staƟsƟcs include only costs 

considered “eligible” or “qualified” for the tax credit under the Internal Revenue Code (Qualifi ed RehabilitaƟon Expenditures, or QREs), as opposed to 

“ineligible” or “nonqualified” costs. While the ineligible/nonqualified expenses do not count for tax-credit purposes, they are a component of the total 

rehabilitaƟon investment or cost borne by the HTC developer. In pracƟcal terms, the total rehabilitaƟon investment, including ineligible/nonqualified 

costs, helps pump-prime the economy. For example, in FY 2016, the Part 3 cerƟfied investment amounted to about $5.9 billion, while the total rehabilitaƟon outlay associated with the HTC was about $6.5 billion. 

2
 
ANNUAL REPORT ON THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF THE FEDERAL HISTORIC TAX CREDIT FOR FY 2016 

The following table summarizes the impacts of the HTC in inflaƟon-adjusted 2016 dollars for each of these 

economic measures for the cumulaƟve period FY 1978-2016 and for FY 2016. 

NaƟonal Economic Impacts 

Federal HTC-assisted RehabilitaƟon 

$131.8 billion CUMULATIVE (FY 1978-2016)2 

historic rehabilitaƟ on expenditures $6.5 billion ANNUAL FY 2016 

(adjusted for inflaƟon) result in: historic expenditures results in: 

Jobs (person-years, in thousands ) 2,441.0 109.0 

Income ($ billion) 106.6 4.6 

Output ($ billion) 291.7 12.3 

GDP ($ billion) 144.9 6.2 

Taxes ($ billion) 41.7 1.7 

Federal ($ billion) 29.8 1.1 

State ($ billion) 5.9 0.3 

Local ($ billion) 5.9 0.3 

The benefits of investment in HTC-related historic rehabilitaƟon projects are extensive, increasing payrolls 

and producƟon in nearly all sectors of the naƟon’s economy. The cumulaƟ ve effects for the period of FY 1978 

through FY 2016 are illustraƟve. During that period, $131.8 billion in HTC-related rehabilitaƟ on investment 

created 2,441,000 jobs and $144.9 billion in GDP, about 30 percent of which (727,000 jobs and $42.3 billion in 

GDP) was in the construcƟon sector. This is as one would expect, given the share of such projects that require 

the employment of building contractors and trades. Other major beneficiaries were the service sector (447,000 

jobs, $19.2 billion in GDP), the manufacturing sector (508,000 jobs, $37.9 billion in GDP), and the retail trade 

sector (356,000 jobs, $10.5 billion in GDP). As a result of both direct and mulƟ plier effects, and due to the interconnectedness of the naƟonal economy, sectors not immediately associated with historic rehabilitaƟon, such as 

agriculture, mining, transportaƟon, and public uƟliƟ es, benefit as well. (Summary Exhibit). 

2 Changes in the offi cial annual reported rates of inflaƟon caused the Rutgers research team to make various changes in the calculaƟ ons concerning 

the economic impacts of the historic tax credit (HTC) over Ɵme. The changes are parƟcularly notable over the past few years when job counts ensuing from the HTC had to be adjusted. 

3
 
ANNUAL REPORT ON THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF THE FEDERAL HISTORIC TAX CREDIT FOR FY 2016 

The most recent economic benefits of the federal HTC are also quite impressive. In FY 2016, HTC-related investments generated approximately 109,000 jobs, including 39,000 in construcƟon and 24,000 in manufacturing, 

and were responsible for $6.2 billion in GDP, including $2.0 billion in construcƟon and $1.8 billion in manufacturing. HTC-related acƟvity in FY 2016 generated $4.6 billion in income, with construcƟon ($1.7 billion) and 

manufacturing ($1.1 billion) reaping major shares. (See Summary Exhibit 2 for more details.) 

The HTC NaƟonal Economic Impacts 

HTC-related historic rehabilitaƟ on benefits state economies as well as the naƟonal economy. For example, in 

the State of New York in FY 2016, federal HTC-related rehabilitaƟ on acƟvity totaled about $831 million. The 

naƟonal impacts of that investment included 13,751 jobs, an addiƟonal $1,564 million in output, $592 million 

in income, $791 million in GDP, $143 million in federal taxes, and $242 million in total taxes. In New York alone, 

the same $831 million in HTC-related spending resulted in 7,855 jobs, $830 million in output, $369 million in 

income, $455 million in gross state product (GSP), and $134 million in total taxes. 

HTC Impacts Compared with Those of NonpreservaƟon Investments and Housing ContribuƟons 

How does HTC-related historic rehabilitaƟon perform as an economic pump-primer compared with other, nonpreservaƟon investments? In short, quite well. 

Numerous studies conducted by Rutgers University show that in many parts of the country, a $1 million investment in historic rehabilitaƟon yields markedly beƩ er effects on employment, income, GSP, and state and local 

taxes than an equal investment in new construcƟon or many other economic acƟviƟes (e.g., manufacturing or 

services). These findings demonstrate that historic rehabilitaƟon, combined holisƟcally with the many acƟviƟes 

of the broader economy, delivers a commendably strong “bang for the buck.” 

About half of all HTC transacƟons include housing. OŌen used in combinaƟon with programs such as the Low 

Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC), the HTC has produced powerful and very beneficial results in this area. 

From FY 1978 through FY 2016, the HTC has been involved in the creaƟon of a reported 549,005 housing units. 

Of that 549,005 total, 271,174, or 49.4 percent, were exisƟng housing units that were rehabilitated; 277,831 or 

50.6 percent were newly creaƟng housing units (e.g., housing resulƟng from the adapƟve reuse of commercial 

space). In addiƟon, 153,255, or 28 percent of the total housing units produced (549,005), were aff ordable to 

low- and/or moderate-income (LMI) families. In FY 2016, of the 21,139 units created (rehab and other) produced under the federal HTC, 7,181 (34 percent) were LMI units. The federal HTC’s influence on housing, largely 

invisible to the general public, deserves much greater aƩenƟon, given its producƟon of housing in general and 

LMI housing units in parƟ cular. 

4
 
ANNUAL REPORT ON THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF THE FEDERAL HISTORIC TAX CREDIT FOR FY 2016 

The Cost of the HTC 

The HTC is a tax expenditure and has a public cost. In the simplest terms, the federal cost of the HTC is equal 

to the credit percent (20 percent since 1986) applied to the Part 3 (“qualified for tax credit”) esƟ mated invest

ment.3

 Applying that calculaƟon, the federal HTC costs the U.S. Treasury approximately $25.2 billion (in inflaƟon-adjusted 2016 dollars) over the period of FY 1978 through FY 2016, while the cost for projects cerƟfi ed by 

the NaƟonal Park Service in FY 2016 alone was about $1.2 billion.Т Weighing against these costs are the signifi

cant economic impacts (i.e., jobs, income, GDP, and output) and tax revenue (federal, state, and local) generated by HTC-aided rehabilitaƟons and documented in this study. An important finding is that the HTC yields 

a net benefit to the U.S. Treasury, generaƟng $29.8 billion in federal tax receipts over the life of the program, 

compared with $25.2 billion in credits allocated. 

­

­

Summary of HTC Impacts 

In short, the federal HTC is a good investment for local communiƟes, individual states, and the naƟ on. The 

cumulaƟve impacts of the program to date (FY 1978 through FY 2016) support this conclusion.5 

• An inflaƟon-adjusted (2016 dollars) $25.2 billion in HTC cost encouraged a five Ɵmes greater amount of 

historic rehabilitaƟon ($131.8 billion). 

• This rehabilitaƟon investment generated almost 2.5 million new jobs and billions of dollars in total 

(direct and secondary) economic gains. 

• The cumulaƟ ve posiƟve impacts on the naƟonal economy included $291.7 billion in output, $144.9 

billion in GDP, $106.6 billion in income, and $41.7 billion in taxes, including $29.8 billion in federal tax receipts. 

• The leverage and mulƟ plier effects noted above support the argument that the federal HTC is a 

strategic investment that works. 

3 See footnote 1.
 

4 These esƟmates are based on full uƟ lizaƟon of the credits in cases of cerƟfi ed rehabilitaƟons. For various reasons, not all completed projects cerƟfi ed by 

the NaƟonal Park Service may ulƟ mately uƟlize the credit. Their economic impact, nevertheless, remains.
 

5 See footnote 2.
 

5
 
ANNUAL REPORT ON THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF THE FEDERAL HISTORIC TAX CREDIT FOR FY 2016 

SUMMARY EXHIBIT 1 

NaƟonal Economic and Tax Impacts of Federal HTC-related AcƟvity 

FY 1978 through FY 2016 (HTC investment: $131.8 billion) 

686

19,183

17,472

10,468

5,102

8,195

37,922

42,310

2,296

825

451

0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 35,000 40,000 45,000

Government

Services

Finance, Ins., & Real Estate

Retail Trade

Wholesale

Transport. & Public Utilities

Manufacturing

Construction

Mining

Agri. Serv., Forestry, & Fish

Agriculture

(millions of 2016 $)

Gross Domestic Product by Sector from Federal Historic Preservation Investment

($144,911 million cumulative, FY 1978Ͳ2016)

439

18,762

10,026

6,629

4,870

4,816

24,355

34,716

1,308

511

200

0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 35,000 40,000

Government

Services

Finance, Ins., & Real Estate

Retail Trade

Wholesale

Transport. & Public Utilities

Manufacturing

Construction

Mining

Agri. Serv., Forestry, & Fish

Agriculture

(millions of 2016 $)

Income Created by Sector from Federal Historic Preservation Investment

($106,632 million cumulative, FY 1978Ͳ2016)

10,511

446,945

173,059

356,068

84,637

94,689

507,595

726,904

19,855

13,259

7,651

0 100,000 200,000 300,000 400,000 500,000 600,000 700,000 800,000

Government

Services

Finance, Ins., & Real Estate

Retail Trade

Wholesale

Transport. & Public Utilities

Manufacturing

Construction

Mining

Agri. Serv., Forestry, & Fish

Agriculture

(jobs)

Jobs Created by Sector from Federal Historic Preservation Investment

(2,441,172 jobs cumulative, FY 1978Ͳ2016)

6
 
ANNUAL REPORT ON THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF THE FEDERAL HISTORIC TAX CREDIT FOR FY 2016 

SUMMARY EXHIBIT 2 

NaƟonal Economic and Tax Impacts of Federal HTC-related AcƟvity 

FY 2016 (HTC Investment: $6.5 billion) 

Gross Domestic Product by Sector from Federal Historic Preservation

Investment ($6,249 million, FY 2016)

Agriculture 18

Agri. Serv., Forestry, & Fish 36

Mining 90

Construction 2,048

Manufacturing 1,753

Transport. & Public Utilities 322

Wholesale 219

Retail Trade 385

Finance, Ins., & Real Estate 515

Services 839

Government 26

0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500

(millions of 2016 $)

Income Created by Sector from Federal Historic Preservation Investment

($4,598 million, FY 2016)

Agriculture 6

Agri. Serv., Forestry, & Fish 20

Mining 50

Construction 1,692

Manufacturing 1,075

Transport. & Public Utilities 176

Wholesale 205

Retail Trade 245

Finance, Ins., & Real Estate 287

Services 826

Government 16

0 400 800 1,200 1,600

(millions of 2016 $)

Jobs Created by Sector from Federal Historic Preservation Investment (108,528

jobs, FY 2016)

Agriculture 283

Agri. Serv., Forestry, & Fish 526

Mining 955

Construction 38,635

Manufacturing 24,374

Transport. & Public Utilities 4,154

Wholesale 3,592

Retail Trade 12,741

Finance, Ins., & Real Estate 4,445

Services 18,435

Government 388

0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000

(jobs)

7
 
ANNUAL REPORT ON THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF THE FEDERAL HISTORIC TAX CREDIT FOR FY 2016 

NaƟonal Economic and Tax Impacts of Federal HTC-related Investment by State, Fiscal Years 2011- 2016 

National Economic Impacts Tax Impacts Total Rehabilitation Costs State Employment (in 2016 $ millions) (in 2016 $ thousands) (in 2016 $ millions) (jobs) Income GDP Output Local State Federal Total

Alabama $98.9 1,813 $62.7 $118.0 $162.4 $1.7 $2.6 $15.1 $19.4

Alaska $0.1 0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0

Arizona $59.1 1,018 $34.9 $45.0 $113.6 $56.0 $36.1 $9.8 $101.8

Arkansas $103.0 2,110 $71.7 $106.9 $190.3 $2.0 $3.7 $17.3 $23.1

California $1,011.3 14,773 $733.0 $957.6 $1,978.7 $25.5 $40.8 $185.8 $252.1

Colorado $143.3 9,031 $101.0 $139.9 $269.5 $3.6 $4.7 $23.9 $32.1

Connecticut $368.0 5,202 $256.2 $356.2 $673.3 $19.4 $16.4 $59.0 $94.8

Delaware $49.2 759 $34.8 $47.4 $92.0 $2.3 $2.3 $7.9 $12.4

District of Columbia $135.2 1,912 $91.2 $123.2 $238.0 $9.1 $3.7 $18.4 $31.2

Florida $266.5 4,531 $188.1 $254.9 $498.7 $13.8 $8.2 $44.9 $67.0

Georgia $172.1 3,348 $119.5 $175.7 $315.1 $8.1 $7.8 $29.2 $45.1

Hawaii $5.1 68 $3.4 $4.8 $8.8 $0.2 $0.2 $0.8 $1.1

Idaho $0.2 3 $0.1 $0.2 $0.3 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0 $0.0

Illinois $1,601.6 23,389 $1,165.8 $1,504.6 $3,127.6 $50.8 $46.1 $280.5 $377.4

Indiana $219.3 3,800 $156.8 $210.9 $418.6 $72.3 $48.3 $37.3 $157.6

Iowa $510.7 9,055 $345.8 $516.1 $898.3 $17.0 $15.2 $80.2 $112.2

Kansas $269.7 4,777 $188.7 $261.2 $500.0 $63.6 $44.3 $43.4 $151.2

Kentucky $214.6 4,047 $148.6 $209.9 $393.1 $21.6 $17.1 $34.2 $72.8

Louisiana $1,291.9 22,422 $920.9 $1,206.3 $2,447.1 $45.1 $46.9 $211.9 $304.0

Maine $247.1 3,683 $145.3 $218.2 $473.5 $11.2 $10.4 $39.1 $60.8

Maryland $649.8 9,961 $456.3 $613.4 $1,205.6 $21.1 $19.1 $104.1 $144.2

Massachusetts $1,937.3 24,495 $1,359.4 $1,823.7 $3,607.3 $51.7 $62.4 $312.7 $426.8

Michigan $786.9 12,290 $557.6 $746.9 $1,484.5 $23.4 $28.4 $130.0 $181.7

Minnesota $935.1 14,510 $656.6 $884.5 $1,746.1 $32.9 $37.1 $150.8 $220.8

Mississippi $122.6 2,493 $85.4 $120.9 $225.5 $9.2 $7.4 $19.8 $36.5

Missouri $1,949.4 32,607 $1,390.3 $1,841.9 $3,706.4 $53.9 $61.7 $322.9 $438.3

Montana $28.8 549 $20.0 $28.2 $52.8 $1.0 $1.0 $4.6 $6.6

Nebraska $249.0 4,689 $170.2 $246.2 $445.5 $51.4 $35.0 $38.6 $125.1

Nevada $50.9 721 $35.1 $48.7 $92.8 $1.4 $0.8 $8.0 $10.2

New Hampshire $82.5 1,246 $57.4 $79.8 $152.6 $3.1 $1.1 $13.3 $17.5

New Jersey $491.1 7,040 $348.6 $458.5 $933.1 $9.6 $14.6 $80.4 $104.4

New Mexico $41.7 788 $29.5 $40.5 $78.6 $1.8 $1.8 $6.9 $10.3

New York $2,424.2 39,591 $1,727.4 $2,307.1 $4,561.7 $157.1 $133.0 $416.7 $706.9

North Carolina $812.9 15,041 $572.5 $814.2 $1,522.6 $19.6 $28.4 $139.0 $187.1

North Dakota $16.7 291 $11.7 $15.4 $30.8 $0.6 $0.4 $2.5 $3.5

Ohio $1,392.0 24,616 $991.3 $1,371.6 $2,643.7 $60.5 $50.9 $241.4 $352.7

Oklahoma $337.2 6,575 $240.2 $336.7 $643.7 $8.1 $11.6 $57.9 $77.6

Oregon $228.0 3,931 $165.5 $216.9 $443.8 $5.9 $8.0 $39.7 $53.8

Pennsylvania $1,447.5 23,101 $1,050.7 $1,393.0 $2,822.5 $48.3 $41.0 $254.9 $344.0

Rhode Island $410.3 6,155 $279.6 $419.9 $737.7 $15.0 $13.0 $64.0 $91.9

South Carolina $127.1 2,370 $88.2 $128.9 $232.2 $3.6 $4.1 $21.1 $28.7

South Dakota $16.1 314 $11.3 $14.7 $29.8 $0.5 $0.3 $2.4 $3.2

Tennesse $103.8 1,806 $72.9 $100.8 $193.6 $3.0 $2.2 $16.9 $22.0

Texas $363.2 5,793 $263.1 $344.0 $711.3 $12.5 $7.3 $64.9 $84.5

Utah $26.1 476 $18.2 $25.6 $48.4 $0.6 $0.8 $4.2 $5.8

Vermont $129.6 2,253 $93.8 $123.2 $248.7 $5.1 $6.4 $21.2 $32.7

Virginia $1,457.9 24,037 $1,043.3 $1,409.9 $2,777.7 $37.7 $49.0 $249.6 $336.5

Washington $272.6 4,279 $195.3 $264.8 $523.7 $12.5 $9.7 $47.1 $69.5

West Virginia $40.3 752 $27.9 $40.6 $73.7 $1.1 $1.5 $6.5 $9.2

Wisconsin $257.4 4,410 $182.3 $250.8 $483.8 $9.0 $10.4 $43.5 $62.9

Wyoming $6.0 131 $4.8 $7.0 $12.7 $0.3 $0.3 $1.4 $2.1

Totals $23,960.9 393,052 $16,974.9 $22,975.1 $45,271.6 $1,084.5 $1,003.4 $4,025.6 $6,113.1

Sources: Department of the Interior, NaƟonal Park Service, Technical PreservaƟon Services; NaƟonal Council of State Historic PreservaƟ on Offices; 

 and calculaƟons by Rutgers University 

8 
ANNUAL REPORT ON THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF THE FEDERAL HISTORIC TAX CREDIT FOR FY 2016 

CASE STUDY #1 

Paducah Coca-Cola 

BoƩ ling Plant 

Paducah, Kentucky 

Project Profile 

Historic Name: Paducah Coca-Cola BoƩ ling Plant 

Current Name: The Coke Plant 

Original ConstrucƟon Year: 1939 

Year RehabilitaƟon Completed: 2016 

Original Use: The boƩling of Coca-Cola products 

New Use: Mixed commercial uses 

Total Project Cost: $5,300,000 

Federal Historic Tax Credit Equity: $679,000 

State Historic Tax Credit Equity: $321,000 

The Coke Plant: History and Downtown Paducah RevitalizaƟ on Context 

Paducah, Kentucky’s recently renovated Coke Plant, located in the City’s Midtown neighborhood, has a storied 

past. It begins with Luther Carson, who established a family-owned Paducah-based Coca-Cola boƩ ling company 

in 1903, becoming the seventh boƩler of Coca-Cola in the world. The Coke Plant’s current address at 3141 

Broadway was the plant’s fourth locaƟon. The building’s role in Paducah’s industrial development, its disƟncƟve Art Deco style, and its highly visible locaƟon has made it an iconic structure revered by local residents. 

The Coke Plant with its prominent dome faces a corner 

street. The restored lobby (above) leads into a restaurant space (below). Photos: Ray Black & Sons 

9
 
 

 

 

ANNUAL REPORT ON THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF THE FEDERAL HISTORIC TAX CREDIT FOR FY 2016 

Vacant since 2005, the Coke Plant’s redevelopment was the vision of Ed and Meagan Musselman of Musselman 

ProperƟes, who had the support of Chris Black of Ray Black & Son, the general contractor, and the Paducah Economic Development agency. Since opening in 2016, the Coke Plant has become a desƟnaƟon for metropolitan 

area residents looking to have a relaxing food, drink, health, or cultural experience. When asked why he and his 

wife took on this complex project, Ed Musselman said, 

“We wanted to eliminate a blighƟ ng influence in the Midtown neighborhood. And we wanted to put under one 

roof the things that had made Paducah great and tenants 

who would bring new experiences to area residents.” 

The new tenants include Mellow Mushroom, a regional 

pizza restaurant that works with local communiƟ es to 

make its retail locaƟ ons reflecƟve of their history and culture. Other tenants include Dry Ground Brewing Company, Pipers Tea and Coffee, the Ice Cream Factory, Time on 

a String (a recording and music lesson studio), True North 

Yoga, Socially Present (a markeƟng and website design 

firm), Ochre (a cooperaƟve of local arƟsts) and BapƟst 

Health Paducah. Ed Musselman stated that the building’s 

beauƟful architecture was a major driver of tenant inter

est in the property. 

­

Project Budget 

Sources of Funds Amount 

Bank Loan $3,800,000

Federal HTC Equity $ 679,000 

State HTC Equity $ 321,000 

Developer Equity $ 500,000 

Total $5,300,000

Uses of Funds Amount 

AcquisiƟon Costs $ 400,000

ConstrucƟon $3,700,000

Equipment $ 800,000

SoŌ Costs $ 400,000 

Total $5,300,000

Scope of RehabilitaƟon 

RehabilitaƟon work included a faithful restoraƟon of the Coke Plant’s exterior façade and disƟncƟ ve copper 

dome. Its lobby was fully restored and features a large Coca-Cola logo in its terrazzo floor, a canƟ levered terrazzo stairway, and a hemispherical domed ceiling 45 feet in height and 30 feet in diameter. Other areas were 

reconfigured to accommodate the new uses. Work also included new plumbing, electrical and HVAC, restoraƟon of the original steel windows, roof replacement, repairs to the copper dome, and repairs to the dome’s 

clear glass-block clerestory. Neon lighƟng was restored on the interior of the dome and is strikingly visible from 

the exterior through the glass block. 

Role of the Historic Tax Credit 

The role of the federal Historic Tax Credit (HTC) was criƟcal to the financing of the Coke Plant, providing 

$679,000 in equity. The Kentucky State Historic Tax Credit contributed another $321,000. Without the federal 

HTC, the developer would not have received a compeƟƟve return on his substanƟal equity contribuƟ on. Over 

Ɵme, the federal tax credit equity will parƟally pay back the developer’s “paƟ ent capital.” 

10
 
 Community Benefits 

Permanent Jobs: 160 

ConstrucƟon Jobs: 54 

State & Local Taxes: $630,000 

Business Income 

Generated: $5,570,000 

Household Income 

Generated: $3,600,000 

ANNUAL REPORT ON THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF THE FEDERAL HISTORIC TAX CREDIT FOR FY 2016 

Economic Impact on Paducah 

The Coke Plant has become a model for entrepreneurs in 

other parts of Paducah and helps promote a city policy 

of economic development through historic preservaƟon. PACRO (Paducah Area Community Reuse OrganizaƟon) provided a porƟon of the financing for the Mellow 

Mushroom. Other city government preservaƟon-based 

iniƟaƟves include the revitalizaƟon of homes in the early 

20th-century Jefferson Street-Fountain Avenue ResidenƟal 

District. The Coke Plant generated 54 construcƟon and 160 

permanent jobs as well as significant annual state and local 

taxes, business income, and salaries. 

CASE STUDY #2 

Greyhound StaƟon 

Savannah, Georgia 

Project Profile 

Historic Name: AtlanƟc Greyhound Bus Terminal 

Current Name: The Grey 

Original ConstrucƟon Year: 1938 

Year RehabilitaƟon Completed: 2015 

Original Use: Bus depot for the Greyhound Lines 

New Use: Restaurant 

Total Project Cost: $3,061,437 

Federal Historic Tax Credit Equity: $507,219 

State Historic Tax Credit Equity: $300,000 

The front facade of the historic bus terminal has been repaired 

and restored and even the new signage evokes the past. 

Historic photograph: George Historic Society 

The Grey: History and Downtown Context 

In its heyday, the Greyhound Lines ran TV commercials that concluded with the tag line, “And leave the driving to us.” Savannah, Georgia residents and visitors did just that between 1938 and 1964, converging on 109 

11
 
ANNUAL REPORT ON THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF THE FEDERAL HISTORIC TAX CREDIT FOR FY 2016 

MarƟn Luther King, Jr. Boulevard to access the Greyhound terminal and catch one of 75 buses a day that provided regional intercity service. AŌer it was replaced by a new bus staƟon in 1964, the property saw a variety of 

reuses, with the last being a restaurant which shuƩered in 2001. 

The property sat vacant for more than a decade unƟl transplanted-New Yorker Johno Morisano purchased it 

with a vision to preserve the Streamline Moderne-style building for a new restaurant that he hoped would set a 

new standard for culinary arts in his adopted city. He and his wife Carol purchased a house in Savannah several 

years earlier, and a restaurant provided an opportunity to share his passion for food and wine with city residents and visitors. 

With a disƟncƟve curvilinear façade, the building was designed by naƟonally regarded Greyhound architect 

George D. Brown who used Greyhound’s signature ivory Ɵle and blue curved Vitriolite glass on the building’s 

exterior. With the help of the Georgia State Historic PreservaƟ on Offi ce and the NaƟonal Park Service, Mr. Morisano restored the exterior, including the disƟncƟ ve verƟcal marquee, and uƟlized many of the interior’s historic 

features and spaces to create a unique dining ambiance for “The Grey” restaurant. Asked about these design 

requirements, Mr. Morisano said, “It did make the project more expensive, but I have no doubt that the alluring 

exterior look of the building is drawing passersby inside and supporƟng the restaurant’s boƩ om line.” 

Chef Mashama Bailey describes The Grey’s menu as “Port City Southern,” with food and drink offerings that reflect a combinaƟon of historical and cultural influences. These include Savannah’s history as an early port, and 

food tradiƟons of the city’s residents that include large Irish, African-American and Jewish communiƟ es. The 

restaurant’s entrees emphasize fresh fish, fowl, lamb, beef, pasta and raw oysters with Italian infl uences that 

reflect Morisano’s family upbringing. Chief Bailey has roots in Savannah and nearby Waynesboro, Georgia, and 

brings her knowledge of local cooking to the restaurant. 

Scope of RehabilitaƟon, 

The scope of rehabilitaƟon for The Grey was driven by a faithful rehabilitaƟon of the property’s exterior look as 

a Greyhound bus staƟon and the preservaƟon of many original interior spaces. The original Ɵcket counter now 

serves as an open kitchen, the former lunch counter is now a separate bar, and all waiƟng rooms and bathrooms, including the formerly segregated areas for African-American travelers, have been retained and repurposed for various restaurant uses. Such aƩenƟon to preservaƟon allows diners to enjoy a fine menu within a 

historic seƫ ng that reflects both Savannah’s history and its economic renewal today. 

Role of the Historic Tax Credit 

The project’s Qualifi ed RehabilitaƟon Expenses of $2,536,097 generated $507,219 in federal historic tax credit 

equity for the transacƟon. The Georgia historic tax credit generated an addiƟonal $300,000. Understanding that 

startup restaurants need very paƟent capital, the developer self-financed the project and used the credits to 

12
 
Economic Benefits 

50 permanent job 

Startup small business 

CatalyƟc project in a low-income community 

2 nearby hotels open or under 

construcƟon 

4 addiƟ onal properƟes in predevelopment stage 

ANNUAL REPORT ON THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF THE FEDERAL HISTORIC TAX CREDIT FOR FY 2016 

The historic main waiƟng room was successfully reused for dining. 

Photo: Emily Andrews
 

offset his federal and state taxes. The credits provide Mr. Morisano with an accelerated return on his investment. The availability of the federal and state tax credit was a significant factor influencing the owner’s decision to take on the rehabilitaƟon of the Greyhound Bus Terminal. 

Economic Impact on Savannah 

The Grey has created 50 new permanent jobs. By taken a 

long-vacant building and turning it into a popular restaurant, the project is also having a catalyƟ c economic 

impact along the long-neglected western edge of the 

Savannah Downtown Landmark District. The local real 

estate market views The Grey as an anchor property in a 

transiƟonal commercial area that includes Yamacraw Village, a 1960s-era public housing complex. Since The Grey 

opened, a Fairfield Inn and pub have opened right next 

door and, just to the north, Hilton has broken ground on 

another hotel. Johno Morisano is also moving ahead with 

the rehabilitaƟon of four more historic buildings in the 

vicinity of his restaurant. 

13
 
Edward J. Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy 

Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey 

Civic Square Building, 33 Livingston Avenue 

New Brunswick, NJ 08901 

848-932-5475 

Web: policy.rutgers.edu 

Email: ejb@policy.rutgers.edu 

Technical PreservaƟ on Services 

NaƟonal Park Service 

U.S. Department of the Interior 

Washington, DC 20240 

Web: hƩ ps://www.nps.gov/tps/