Nebraska’s Community Development Law gives mayors a proven TIF framework — but the procedural details and unique characteristics of Nebraska TIF create specific pitfalls to watch for. Hageman Capital works with municipal leaders across the state, and here are the missteps we see most often.
Pitfall 1: Underestimating the Blight Declaration Process
Nebraska TIF requires a substandard and blighted declaration before any redevelopment plan can be adopted. The blight study must be commissioned, submitted to the planning commission for a 30-day review, followed by a public hearing with two weeks of published notice plus mailed notice to affected associations and political subdivisions. This process takes time. Mayors who assume blight can be declared quickly risk missing the July 1 Notice to Divide Tax deadline — delaying the entire project by a year.
Pitfall 2: Missing the July 1 Deadline
The Notice to Divide Tax must be filed with the county assessor on or before July 1 of the calendar year in which the tax division becomes effective. This is a hard deadline — miss it and the taxes remain undivided for the affected year. Build this deadline into your project timeline from day one and work backward to ensure all approvals are complete in time.
Pitfall 3: Poor Communication About Taxing Body Impact
Nebraska requires mailed notice to every county, school district, community college, and political subdivision affected by the TIF plan. These entities will scrutinize the proposal. Be prepared to explain that base value taxes continue flowing as usual, only the excess value is captured, and the cost-benefit analysis demonstrates the project is in the community’s long-term interest. Proactive communication builds support before opposition forms.
Pitfall 4: Not Ensuring the CRA Is Active and Prepared
Many Nebraska cities have CRAs that exist on paper but have not been actively used. If your CRA lacks current board members, operating procedures, or staff capacity, it will slow the TIF process. Ensure your CRA is active, staffed, and ready before a developer brings a project to the table.
When Old Town Companies set out to develop the North End project in Carmel, Indiana, they faced a challenge familiar to commercial real estate developers everywhere: a mission-driven, mixed-use project that served the community’s needs but required creative financing to be economically feasible. The solution came through Tax Increment Financing — and specifically, through Hageman Capital’s ability to purchase TIF bonds and deliver upfront capital. For Tennessee municipal leaders evaluating the state’s new developer-backed TIF legislation, this case study illustrates exactly how TIF transforms a project from infeasible to operational.
The North End Project: What Was Built
North End is a mixed-use development located north of Smokey Row Road along the Monon Trail in Carmel, Indiana. The project includes 168 high-end apartments, with 40 units dedicated to serving individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD), plus office and retail space. Old Town Companies served as the developer, and the City of Carmel provided municipal support through TIF revenues backed by the real estate development.
The project had strong community support — it added housing, office, and retail to an area with limited commercial development, and the IDD-dedicated units addressed a real need. But mission-driven housing is rarely profitable on its own, and the financial gap between what the project cost and what private financing could cover required a public incentive to bridge.
How TIF Made It Work
Old Town was financing the project through a Freddie Mac program with specific requirements: the project needed municipal incentives to qualify, at least 10% of units had to be under 80% Area Median Income, and Freddie’s underwriting standards required multiple iterations of financial and construction budget reviews. The municipal incentive came in the form of TIF — but for the project to close, Old Town needed to monetize that TIF upfront, receiving proceeds at loan closing rather than waiting years for increment revenue to accumulate.
Hageman Capital purchased the TIF bonds from Old Town, providing the upfront equity required to satisfy the lender’s requirements and close the construction loan. Throughout the transaction, Hageman Capital maintained financing flexibility and created solutions that kept the real estate closing as the primary goal. North End officially closed in December 2021, and the project is now complete — delivering housing, commercial space, and long-term tax base growth to the City of Carmel.
What Tennessee Municipal Leaders Should Take Away
The North End project demonstrates several principles that apply directly to Tennessee’s new TIF framework under SB 1760 / HB 1892. First, TIF can make projects feasible that would not otherwise proceed — satisfying the “but-for” test that Tennessee requires for TIF approval. Second, developer-backed TIF bonds shift the financial risk away from the municipality. Carmel did not pledge its general credit; the TIF revenue was supported by the real estate development itself. Third, the ability for a developer to sell their TIF bond to a capital provider like Hageman Capital and receive upfront cash is what transforms TIF from a long-term revenue stream into an immediate project catalyst.
Tennessee’s new taxpayer agreement provisions strengthen this model further. Under SB 1760, the developer can now contractually guarantee any shortfall between actual tax increment revenues and the required debt service — a binding obligation backed by a lien that carries the same priority as property tax liens. This gives both municipalities and capital providers like Hageman Capital greater confidence in the transaction, which ultimately means more projects get built.
The Types of Projects TIF Can Support in Tennessee
Tennessee’s TIF framework is broad enough to support a wide range of project types. Housing Authority TIFs can fund redevelopment of blighted areas including site acquisition, infrastructure installation, and public improvements. IDB TIFs can support commercial, industrial, retail, and mixed-use projects — with TIF proceeds funding public infrastructure directly, and private improvements with state approval. The North End model — a mixed-use development combining market-rate housing, affordable units, and commercial space — is precisely the kind of transformative project Tennessee municipalities can now greenlight with even stronger financial protections.
Hageman Capital: Your TIF Partner at No Cost
Old Town Companies has become one of Hageman Capital’s closest partners because the relationship works: Hageman Capital understands its role as a facilitator, not a complication. That same approach extends to our work with municipal leaders. We provide free, expert guidance to Tennessee municipalities looking to understand how developer-backed TIF Bonds work, how to evaluate projects, and how to structure transactions that protect the public interest while delivering real community growth. Connect with our team and see how TIF can transform development in your community.
Municipal leaders across Tennessee are accustomed to fielding inquiries from commercial real estate developers — but understanding what drives those developers, how they evaluate markets, and what makes a project financially viable is essential to deploying TIF effectively. Developer-backed TIF Bonds work best when municipalities understand the developer’s perspective, because that understanding helps you structure an incentive that attracts investment without giving away more than necessary.
How Developers Choose Where to Build
Commercial real estate developers evaluate potential markets across several dimensions simultaneously. They look at population growth trends, employment centers, infrastructure quality, and regulatory environment. They assess whether the local market can support the rents, lease rates, or sale prices their project requires. And they compare the incentive landscape across competing municipalities — because in today’s environment of elevated construction costs and tightening capital markets, the availability and quality of public incentives can determine whether a project lands in your city or a neighboring one.
Tennessee’s business-friendly environment, absence of a state income tax on wages, and growing metro areas in Nashville, Memphis, Knoxville, and Chattanooga already make the state attractive. But developers making site selection decisions weigh those macro advantages against the specific financial feasibility of each project — and that is where TIF becomes the differentiator.
The Financial Anatomy of a Development Project
Every development project has a capital stack — the combination of equity, debt, and incentives that funds the total project cost. The developer contributes equity (their own money), secures construction and permanent debt from lenders, and looks for additional sources to fill any remaining gap. That gap is the difference between what the project costs and what private capital alone can cover while still generating a return that justifies the risk.
TIF fills that gap. By capturing the incremental property tax revenue generated by the completed development and directing it toward eligible project costs, TIF provides a revenue stream that reduces the developer’s out-of-pocket equity requirement and improves the project’s financial feasibility. When the developer can sell their TIF Bond to a capital provider like Hageman Capital, that future revenue stream becomes upfront cash — reducing contributed equity even further and accelerating the project timeline.
What Makes a Project Ideal for TIF
Not every project needs TIF, and not every project qualifies. The “but-for” test requires the municipality to be satisfied that the project would not proceed without TIF assistance. Projects most suited for developer-backed TIF Bonds typically share several characteristics: significant infrastructure or site preparation costs that public investment can address, a projected assessed value increase large enough to generate meaningful tax increment, a developer with the financial capacity to guarantee bond repayment through a taxpayer agreement, and a clear public benefit such as job creation, blight elimination, or tax base expansion.
Tennessee’s TIF framework supports both public infrastructure improvements (roads, utilities, parking, drainage) and, with state approval for IDB projects, private property improvements. Housing Authority TIFs can fund a broad range of redevelopment costs in blighted areas. Understanding which costs qualify — and which TIF agency structure best fits the project — is where municipal leaders can add real value to the developer relationship.
Positioning Your Municipality as Developer-Friendly
Developers value certainty and speed. A municipality that can clearly communicate its TIF process, identify the right TIF agency, and move efficiently from application to bond issuance will attract more and better projects than one where the process is opaque or unpredictable. This does not mean lowering your standards — it means being prepared.
Key steps to positioning your municipality include having a clear TIF policy or application process in place, identifying which TIF agency (Housing Authority or IDB) is best suited for the types of projects you want to attract, understanding the taxpayer agreement framework under SB 1760 so you can discuss it knowledgeably with developers, and working with experienced TIF advisors who can help you evaluate proposals quickly and structure deals that protect the public interest.
Hageman Capital: Bridging the Gap Between Municipalities and Developers
Hageman Capital sits at the intersection of municipal finance and commercial real estate development. We purchase developer-backed TIF Bonds, providing developers with the upfront capital they need — and we work with municipal leaders at no cost to help them understand developer needs, evaluate TIF proposals, and structure transactions that work for both sides. Understanding your audience — the commercial real estate developer — is the first step toward deploying TIF as the powerful community growth tool it is designed to be. Connect with our team to learn more.
When a commercial real estate developer secures a TIF Bond in Tennessee, they have options for what to do with it. Each option carries different financial implications for the developer — and understanding these options helps municipal leaders have more informed conversations with the developers proposing projects in their communities. Here is a breakdown of the three primary paths a developer can take with a TIF Bond, and why selling the bond to a capital provider like Hageman Capital typically delivers the most favorable outcome for everyone involved.
Option 1: Hold the Bond and Collect Increment Over Time
A developer can hold the TIF Bond and receive regular payments from the tax increment revenue as it is collected by the municipality each year. This is the simplest approach — the developer waits for the project to generate assessed value, the increment flows into the TIF fund, and the municipality passes through payments on the bond according to the amortization schedule.
The advantage of this approach is that the developer captures the full face value of the bond over time. The drawback is significant: the developer does not receive capital when they need it most — during construction. Development costs are front-loaded, and waiting years for increment to accumulate creates a cash flow gap that must be filled by other sources. For most developers, tying up capital in a long-duration receivable is not financially efficient, especially when construction lenders expect equity contributions at closing.
Option 2: Borrow Against the Bond
A developer can use the TIF Bond as collateral to secure a loan from a bank or other lender. This provides some upfront liquidity, but typically at a discount — lenders will not advance 100% of the bond’s value, and the interest rate on the loan adds cost to the transaction. The developer also retains the ongoing obligation to manage the loan relationship, and the bond’s value is subject to the lender’s assessment of risk, which may not fully account for the taxpayer agreement guarantees now available under Tennessee’s SB 1760.
Borrowing against a TIF Bond can work for certain situations, but it introduces complexity and cost that many developers prefer to avoid — especially when a cleaner alternative exists.
Option 3: Sell the Bond to Hageman Capital
The third option — and the one that Hageman Capital specializes in — is for the developer to sell the TIF Bond outright to a capital provider. Hageman Capital purchases developer-backed TIF Bonds, providing the developer with upfront cash at loan closing. This is the approach that delivers the greatest financial efficiency for the developer and the most certainty for the project.
When a developer sells their TIF Bond to Hageman Capital, they receive immediate capital that can be applied to the construction budget, reducing the equity gap and improving the project’s overall returns. There is no ongoing loan to manage, no interest accruing on borrowed funds, and no uncertainty about future collections. The developer trades a long-duration receivable for day-one cash — and the municipality benefits because the project moves forward faster and with greater financial certainty.
Why This Matters for Municipal Leaders
Understanding a developer’s financing options helps you evaluate TIF proposals more effectively. When a developer tells you they plan to sell their TIF Bond to Hageman Capital, it signals several positive things about the transaction: the developer has a clear capital strategy, the project’s financial structure is sound enough to attract a third-party purchaser, and the TIF Bond will be underwritten by professionals who evaluate these instruments for a living.
It also means the developer will have capital certainty at closing — which reduces the risk that the project stalls during construction. For municipalities, a completed project that generates assessed value and tax increment on schedule is the best possible outcome. The financing path that maximizes the likelihood of that outcome is the one where the developer has upfront capital and the municipality has zero credit exposure.
Tennessee’s Taxpayer Agreements Strengthen Every Option
Under SB 1760, the taxpayer agreement creates a binding developer guarantee with a lien that carries property tax priority. This strengthens the TIF Bond regardless of which financing path the developer chooses — but it is especially valuable when the developer sells the bond to a capital provider, because the taxpayer agreement provides enforceable security that supports the purchase price. The stronger the legal framework, the more capital the developer can unlock and the more confident the municipality can be in the transaction.
Hageman Capital works with both municipalities and developers to structure TIF Bonds that maximize value for all parties. Our team is available as a free resource to Tennessee municipal leaders who want to understand how these financing options work and how to evaluate the proposals developers bring to the table. Connect with our team to start the conversation.
When Tennessee municipal leaders consider using Tax Increment Financing to support a development project, one of the most consequential decisions they face is how the TIF Bond will be structured. The two primary options — municipal-backed and developer-backed — carry fundamentally different risk profiles for your city. With the passage of SB 1760 and HB 1892, Tennessee has created a legal framework that makes developer-backed TIF Bonds not just viable, but preferable for most transactions. Here is why.
Municipal-Backed TIF: What It Means for Your City
In a municipal-backed TIF structure, the municipality or its TIF agency issues bonds that may be supported — in whole or in part — by the municipality’s credit, general revenues, or taxing power. If the tax increment generated by the development falls short of the required debt service, the municipality may bear some financial responsibility for covering the gap. The bonds may count against statutory debt limitations, and the municipality’s bond rating could be affected.
Municipal-backed bonds can offer lower interest rates because the lender has the security of the municipality’s credit behind the obligation. In some cases, this structure may be appropriate — particularly for large-scale public infrastructure projects where the municipality is the primary beneficiary and the increment is well-supported by existing development trends. But for individual commercial real estate projects driven by a private developer, pledging municipal credit introduces risk that is unnecessary under Tennessee’s updated TIF framework.
Developer-Backed TIF: Risk Where It Belongs
In a developer-backed TIF structure, the TIF agency issues the bond to the developer, who assigns it to a capital provider in exchange for upfront cash. The bond is repaid solely from the tax increment, and the developer — through a taxpayer agreement under SB 1760 — contractually guarantees any shortfall. The municipality serves as a conduit issuer with no obligation to advance funds, levy additional taxes, or pledge its general credit.
The taxpayer agreement lien runs with the land, carries the same priority as property tax liens, and takes precedence over any existing or subsequent mortgage. Delinquent taxpayer direct payments are enforceable as real property taxes. This means the developer’s guarantee is not just a contractual promise — it is backed by the strongest collection mechanism available under Tennessee law.
The Developer Gets the Same Proceeds Either Way
A common misconception is that developer-backed bonds reduce the capital a developer receives compared to a municipal-backed structure. This is not the case. The TIF Bond’s value is determined by the projected tax increment — the increase in property taxes generated by the completed development. Whether the bond is municipal-backed or developer-backed, the underlying revenue stream is the same. What changes is who bears the risk if that revenue stream falls short.
When a developer sells a developer-backed TIF Bond to Hageman Capital, they receive upfront cash based on the projected increment and the strength of the taxpayer agreement guarantee. The developer gets the capital they need for construction. The municipality gets a completed project that generates long-term tax base growth. And neither party has pledged anything they cannot afford to lose — the developer’s guarantee is tied to the property they are developing, and the municipality’s general fund remains untouched.
When to Choose Developer-Backed
For most individual commercial real estate projects in Tennessee — multifamily developments, mixed-use projects, retail centers, office buildings, and industrial facilities — developer-backed TIF Bonds are the appropriate structure. The developer is the party that benefits most directly from the TIF assistance, the developer has the financial incentive to complete the project and generate the increment, and the developer is best positioned to bear the risk of underperformance.
Municipal-backed structures may still make sense in limited circumstances — large public infrastructure projects, area-wide TIF districts supporting multiple developments, or situations where the municipality has strong budgetary reasons to issue general obligation bonds. But for the single-site, developer-driven projects that make up the majority of TIF transactions, developer-backed is the structure that protects the public interest while delivering the same economic development outcomes.
Hageman Capital Makes Developer-Backed TIF Work
The developer-backed structure works because there is a capital provider willing to purchase the bond. Hageman Capital is that capital provider. We purchase developer-backed TIF Bonds across multiple states, and we work with municipal leaders at no cost to help them understand the difference between these structures and evaluate which approach best fits their community’s needs. Connect with our team and let’s make the right call for your municipality.
If you are a Tennessee mayor who has heard the term “developer-backed TIF Bond” but has not yet had the chance to explore what it means for your community, this overview is for you. SB 1760, signed into law during the 2026 legislative session, introduced new tools that make Tax Increment Financing one of the most powerful and lowest-risk economic development instruments available to your city. Here is what you need to know at a high level.
What TIF Is and What It Is Not
Tax Increment Financing captures the increase in property tax revenue generated by a new development project and directs that increase toward paying for eligible project costs. It does not create new taxes. It does not raise anyone’s tax rate. The base amount of property taxes — everything your city and county were collecting before the project — continues flowing to all taxing jurisdictions as usual. Only the increment, the growth that would not exist without the development, is set aside for a limited period to support the project.
When the TIF period ends (up to 20 years for IDB projects or 30 years for Housing Authority projects), all tax revenue — including what was the increment — flows back to the taxing jurisdictions permanently. The result is a larger tax base generating more revenue for your city, schools, and county than existed before the project was built.
What Changed With SB 1760
The new legislation authorizes taxpayer agreements — binding contracts where the developer guarantees repayment of TIF bond debt. If the actual tax increment falls short of what is needed to cover the bond payment, the developer makes up the difference. The taxpayer agreement lien runs with the land, carries first-priority status over any mortgage, and is enforceable as real property taxes. This means the municipality bears zero financial risk on the bond — the developer is contractually and legally on the hook.
What This Means for Your Role as Mayor
As mayor, you are the public face of economic development in your community. Your role in TIF is to champion projects that serve the community’s interests, work with your economic development team to evaluate proposals, and ensure the governing body has the information needed to make sound decisions. You are not expected to be a TIF expert — that is what professional advisors and resources like Hageman Capital are for.
What you should be able to communicate to your council and constituents is straightforward: TIF does not spend public money, does not redirect existing tax revenue, and under the new taxpayer agreement structure, does not put the city’s credit at risk. It is a tool that turns developer investment into long-term community growth — more jobs, more tax revenue, and better infrastructure.
Getting Started
Hageman Capital provides free TIF education and structuring guidance to Tennessee mayors. Whether you have a specific project in mind or simply want to understand the landscape before a developer comes knocking, our team is available to help. Connect with Whitney Peterson, our Director – Government Relations, to schedule a no-cost consultation and start exploring what developer-backed TIF Bonds can do for your city.
Tennessee’s passage of SB 1760 and HB 1892 has added a significant new capability to the state’s TIF toolkit. For Economic Development Directors managing active developer pipelines, this legislation means you now have a deal-structuring mechanism that competing states are still catching up to. Here is an overview of the framework and how it fits into your work.
TIF in Tennessee: The Framework
Tax Increment Financing in Tennessee operates through two primary agency types. Housing Authorities can allocate increment for up to 30 years and focus on redevelopment of blighted areas. Industrial Development Boards can allocate increment for up to 20 years and have broader project authority, though state approval is required for private property improvements beyond public infrastructure. Both can issue TIF bonds or notes to developers, who then assign those instruments to capital providers in exchange for upfront construction capital.
The increment itself consists of the increase in property taxes above the base amount established when the TIF plan is approved. No existing revenue is redirected — only the new growth generated by the project is captured. When the allocation period ends, all revenue flows back to the taxing jurisdictions permanently.
What SB 1760 Adds to Your Toolkit
The new legislation introduces taxpayer agreements — voluntary, binding contracts where the developer guarantees any shortfall between actual increment and required debt service. The taxpayer agreement lien is recorded with the register of deeds, runs with the land, carries first-priority status over mortgages, and is enforceable as property taxes. For ED Directors, this changes the conversation with developers and lenders alike: the municipality’s credit is completely off the table, and the security structure is stronger than traditional TIF bonds.
How This Helps You Close Deals
When a developer evaluates incentive packages across competing cities, certainty of capital is a major factor. Developer-backed TIF Bonds with taxpayer agreements offer that certainty. The developer can sell the bond to a capital provider like Hageman Capital and receive upfront cash — rather than waiting years for increment to accumulate. For your pipeline, this means you can offer an incentive that is financially compelling to the developer, defensible to your governing body, and carries zero municipal credit exposure. That is a combination few other incentive tools can match.
Choosing Between Housing Authority and IDB
One of the first decisions in any Tennessee TIF transaction is which agency to use. Housing Authorities offer longer allocation periods and broader eligible cost categories for blighted areas, but require a blight determination. IDBs offer more flexibility on project types and do not require blight findings, but have shorter allocation periods and need state approval for private property expenditures. The choice depends on the project’s location, the nature of the costs, and whether the additional time or eligible cost flexibility of a Housing Authority structure adds value.
Hageman Capital as Your TIF Resource
Hageman Capital works alongside ED Directors as a free TIF structuring resource — helping you evaluate project feasibility, navigate the IDB vs. Housing Authority decision, and structure developer-backed TIF Bonds that move deals from conversation to groundbreaking. Connect with Whitney Peterson and let’s discuss your pipeline.
As a city council member in Tennessee, you may soon be asked to vote on a TIF-supported development project — and that vote will carry weight with your constituents, your fellow council members, and the local media. Tennessee’s new TIF legislation (SB 1760 / HB 1892) has introduced developer-backed TIF Bonds with protections that make the structure far more favorable for municipalities than traditional approaches. Here is a high-level overview to help you prepare.
TIF in Plain Language
Tax Increment Financing does not spend public money, create new taxes, or raise existing tax rates. It captures only the increase in property taxes that a new development project generates — revenue that would not exist without the project. The base amount of property taxes your city was collecting before the development continues flowing to all taxing jurisdictions as usual. Only the new growth, the increment, is set aside for a limited period (up to 20 or 30 years depending on the TIF agency) to help pay for eligible project costs.
When the TIF period ends, all revenue — including the increment — flows permanently to the city, county, schools, and other taxing bodies. The net result is a larger tax base generating more revenue than your community had before the project was built.
What SB 1760 Means for Risk
The new legislation authorizes taxpayer agreements — binding contracts where the developer guarantees bond repayment. If the increment falls short, the developer covers the difference. The lien created by this agreement carries the same priority as property tax liens and takes precedence over any mortgage on the property. The municipality issues the bond as a conduit — with no obligation to advance funds from the general fund. No public debt is created. No municipal credit is pledged.
What You Are Actually Voting On
When a TIF resolution comes before your council, you are voting to approve either an economic impact plan (for IDB projects) or a redevelopment plan (for Housing Authority projects). Tennessee law allows this approval by resolution at a single reading. Before that vote, you should have access to the TIF plan document identifying the project boundaries, projected increment, proposed allocation period, eligible costs, and estimated impact on all affected taxing agencies. The developer’s taxpayer agreement and redevelopment agreement terms should also be part of the record.
Your job is to evaluate whether the project genuinely benefits your community, whether the safeguards protect the public interest, and whether you can explain your vote clearly to constituents who ask. Developer-backed TIF Bonds make that explanation straightforward: the developer pays, the community benefits, and the city holds no debt.
Hageman Capital as Your TIF Resource
Hageman Capital provides free TIF education to Tennessee council members. Whether you want a walkthrough of the legislation, help preparing constituent talking points, or simply want to ask questions before your next vote, our team is available. Connect with Whitney Peterson, our Director – Government Relations, for a no-obligation conversation.
Tennessee’s new TIF legislation (SB 1760 / HB 1892) introduces legal instruments that materially change the risk analysis for TIF-supported projects. For municipal financial advisors responsible for evaluating bond structures and protecting the municipality’s fiscal position, this overview covers the key statutory provisions and their practical implications.
Tennessee’s TIF Framework at a Glance
TIF in Tennessee operates through Housing Authorities (up to 30-year allocation periods, blighted areas, broad eligible cost authority) and Industrial Development Boards (up to 20-year allocation periods, broader project eligibility, state approval required for private improvements beyond public infrastructure). The increment consists of the increase in property taxes above the base amount established at plan approval. Tennessee allows personal property taxes to be included in the increment for IDB projects.
TIF bonds or notes issued by a TIF agency are non-recourse — payable solely from tax increment revenues. Neither the TIF agency, the city, nor the county pledges its general credit. This has been the case under existing law, but SB 1760 strengthens the framework considerably.
Taxpayer Agreements: The Technical Details
Under SB 1760, a TIF agency can enter into a taxpayer agreement with a property owner in the plan area. The agreement creates a “taxpayer direct payment” obligation — the positive difference between the next-due debt service and the actual increment available. The taxpayer agreement lien is recorded with the register of deeds, carries first-priority status over existing and subsequent mortgages, runs with the land, and is enforceable as real property taxes. Critically, the lien is not accelerated or eliminated by foreclosure of a property tax lien, and any deed of trust provision requiring acceleration solely due to entering a taxpayer agreement is unenforceable.
Implications for Your Analysis
The taxpayer agreement structure means TIF bonds issued under this framework do not constitute municipal debt, carry no recourse to the municipality’s general credit, and are fully backstopped by a developer guarantee with the strongest lien priority available under Tennessee law. For your analysis, the key modeling inputs are the projected assessed value increase, the resulting annual increment, the debt service schedule, and the developer’s financial capacity to honor the taxpayer agreement guarantee. Coverage ratios, development timeline risk, and the methodology for calculating increment (aggregate vs. parcel-by-parcel) should all be evaluated.
Compliance and Reporting Requirements
After plan approval, the TIF agency must file parcel descriptions, resolutions, and base tax amounts with the Comptroller and each applicable tax assessor. Annual reports on tax increment revenues allocated to the TIF agency are due by October 1 each year. Taxpayer agreements must be filed and recorded with the register of deeds, including the legal description, property owner name, lien term, and the executed agreement. Written notification to the county trustee of any specific collection or enforcement requirements must be provided on or before the recording date.
Hageman Capital as a Technical Resource
Hageman Capital works alongside municipal financial advisors as a specialized TIF structuring resource. Our team has experience across multiple state legislative frameworks and understands the technical details that matter for your analysis. Connect with our team for a no-cost technical consultation.
Tennessee’s new developer-backed TIF Bond framework is a powerful tool — but like any complex financial instrument, the details matter. For mayors championing TIF-supported development in their communities, there are common missteps that can undermine a project’s success, erode public trust, or leave value on the table. Hageman Capital works with municipal leaders across Tennessee to help navigate these challenges, and we have seen the same patterns repeat. Here are the pitfalls worth watching for — and how to avoid them.
Pitfall 1: Approving a Project Without a Clear “But-For” Justification
Tennessee’s TIF framework requires that the project would not be economically feasible without TIF assistance. This is not a formality — it is the legal and political foundation of the entire transaction. If a project would have proceeded anyway, using TIF is giving away future tax revenue unnecessarily. Mayors should insist on a genuine feasibility analysis that demonstrates the funding gap and confirms TIF is the tool that closes it. If the developer cannot articulate why the project fails without TIF, the incentive may not be warranted.
Pitfall 2: Not Understanding the Difference Between Housing Authority and IDB Structures
Choosing the wrong TIF agency can limit your project’s flexibility or introduce unnecessary approval requirements. Housing Authorities offer 30-year allocation periods and broader eligible cost authority for blighted areas, but require a blight determination. IDBs offer 20-year periods and do not require blight, but need state approval for private property improvements. A mayor who does not understand this distinction may inadvertently delay a project or miss out on a more favorable structure. Working with experienced TIF advisors early in the process prevents this.
Pitfall 3: Failing to Negotiate Strong Taxpayer Agreement Terms
SB 1760 authorizes taxpayer agreements, but the legislation does not dictate every term — many details are negotiated in the redevelopment agreement. Mayors should ensure the taxpayer agreement includes clear shortfall guarantee provisions, enforceable performance milestones, financial reporting requirements, and meaningful remedies for default. A weak taxpayer agreement undermines the protections the legislation was designed to provide.
Pitfall 4: Poor Public Communication
TIF is often misunderstood by the public. Constituents may believe TIF diverts existing tax revenue from schools and services, or that it amounts to a handout to developers. Neither is accurate, but if you cannot explain TIF clearly at a town hall, you will face opposition based on misconceptions rather than facts. The key messages are simple: TIF does not create new taxes, does not redirect existing revenue, and under the developer-backed structure, the city carries zero financial risk. Preparing clear talking points before the public hearing is essential.
Pitfall 5: Going It Alone Without Expert Support
Tennessee’s TIF legislation is new, and the taxpayer agreement framework adds legal and financial complexity that most municipal staff have not encountered before. Mayors who try to navigate the process without experienced partners risk structural errors, missed deadlines, or terms that do not adequately protect the municipality. This does not mean you need to hire expensive consultants — Hageman Capital provides TIF structuring expertise to Tennessee mayors at no cost. We work alongside your existing financial advisors, legal counsel, and economic development staff to ensure the structure is right.
Start the Conversation
If you are evaluating a TIF opportunity or simply want to understand how the new legislation applies to your city, Hageman Capital is here to help. Our Director – Government Relations, Whitney Peterson, works directly with mayors across Tennessee to provide education, structuring guidance, and deal support at no charge. Request a meeting with Whitney Peterson and make sure your community’s next TIF project is structured right from day one.
