HR-7791-119
Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
Sponsored by Josh Harder (D-CA)
What it does
This bill would authorize the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to give additional weight — when scoring competitive grant applications — to applicants whose housing projects are located in, or directly benefit, federally designated "Qualified Opportunity Zones." These are low-income census tracts designated under the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. The bill covers any competitive HUD grant related to constructing, modifying, rehabilitating, or preserving housing, as determined by the Secretary.
Who benefits
Residents of Qualified Opportunity Zones (roughly 8,700 low-income census tracts across all 50 states, D.C., and U.S. territories) who may gain access to more housing. Nonprofit housing developers, community development organizations, and local governments that operate in those zones and compete for HUD grants. Affordable housing advocates seeking to direct federal resources to distressed communities. Real estate developers and contractors working in opportunity zones who may see increased project activity.
Who is hurt
Grant applicants whose projects are located outside Qualified Opportunity Zones — including those serving low-income populations in areas not designated as opportunity zones — who would face a relative disadvantage in competitive scoring. Rural or suburban communities with housing needs that were not designated as opportunity zones. HUD grant applicants in higher-cost urban markets where opportunity zone designations are sparse. Existing grant recipients whose competitive position may weaken under revised scoring criteria.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that Qualified Opportunity Zones were specifically designed to identify the most economically distressed communities in America, and that directing HUD housing grants toward these areas aligns two federal tools — tax incentives and direct grants — to maximize impact where need is greatest. They contend that housing supply in these communities is a critical barrier to economic mobility, and that giving HUD explicit authority to prioritize these areas removes bureaucratic ambiguity and ensures federal housing dollars reach the populations most left behind.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that Qualified Opportunity Zone designations were created primarily as a tax incentive framework and were not designed to serve as a precise measure of housing need — meaning some designated zones may not have the most acute housing shortfalls, while communities with severe needs outside those boundaries would be systematically disadvantaged. They contend that layering a grant-scoring preference on top of existing opportunity zone tax benefits could further concentrate federal resources in areas already receiving preferential treatment, potentially at the expense of equally or more distressed communities that lack the designation.