South Carolina Updates the Abandoned Buildings Revitalization Act: What It Means for Economic Development
May 28, 2026
- William R. Johnson
By: Will Johnson and Lee Scarborough (2026 Summer Law Clerk, rising 2L at University of South Carolina Rice School of Law)
South Carolina has taken an important step to make it easier to redevelop abandoned properties.
On May 19, 2026, Governor Henry McMaster signed S.853 into law, updating the South Carolina Abandoned Buildings Revitalization Act (the “Act”). The changes are intended to remove uncertainty, expand eligibility and make the incentive more practical for real-world redevelopment projects.
South Carolina has taken an important step to make it easier to redevelop abandoned properties.
On May 19, 2026, Governor Henry McMaster signed S.853 into law, updating the South Carolina Abandoned Buildings Revitalization Act (the “Act”). The changes are intended to remove uncertainty, expand eligibility and make the incentive more practical for real-world redevelopment projects.
What Changed and Why It Matters
The legislation directly responds to South Carolina Department of Revenue Ruling #26-1, which had narrowed how the Act was applied.First, the General Assembly clarified what types of buildings qualify under Section 12-67-120. In Revenue Ruling #26-1, the Department interpreted this section to allow tax credits only for buildings that had been “open to business or operational for income producing purposes prior to abandonment.” This excluded many common redevelopment opportunities such as former schools, hospitals and government buildings.
S.853 removes references to “income producing purposes” from Section 12-67-120 of the Act. As a result, the General Assembly removed a cloud of uncertainty surrounding a broad range of abandoned buildings, aligning the statute with its stated purpose of “encourag[ing] private investment and restor[ing] and enhanc[ing] the tax base of the taxing districts in which such buildings are located by the redevelopment of abandoned buildings.”
Second, the law eliminates a source of subjectivity that created uncertainty for developers. Revenue Ruling #26-1 interpreted the Act to require that projects “meet the purpose of this chapter,” not just the statutory requirements. That standard made eligibility less predictable.
Section 2 of S.853 replaces that language with “that otherwise meet the requirements of this chapter.” Now, projects that meet the statutory requirements qualify without an additional subjective determination, providing greater certainty for developers and economic development partners.
More Flexibility on Timing
Section 3 of S.853 updates the timing for filing a Notice of Intent to Rehabilitate.Previously, the notice had to be filed before any rehabilitation expenses were incurred, and only expenses incurred after filing the notice were eligible for credits. As amended, the notice must be filed before the taxpayer receives a building permit. If a developer incurs expenses before filing the notice but submits the notice before obtaining a building permit, those earlier costs qualify.
This change gives projects more flexibility, particularly during early-stage work.
Additional Clarifications
Section 4 of S.853 makes minor updates to city and county certification resolutions.
Why This Matters for Economic Developers
These updates make the Act more usable and predictable. In practical terms, this means:- More types of properties clearly qualify for incentives
- Less ambiguity in determining eligibility
- Greater flexibility in timing of Notice of Intent to Rehabilitate
Please contact Will Johnson or a member of the Haynsworth Sinkler Boyd economic development team with any questions about the new legislation or the Act.
