PART I - FINANCIAL INFORMATION

Item 1.     Financial Statements.

See Accompanying Notes to Financial Statements

NATIONAL TAX CREDIT PARTNERS, L.P.

STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS

 (Unaudited)

(In thousands, except per interest data)

See Accompanying Notes to Financial Statements

NATIONAL TAX CREDIT PARTNERS, L.P.

STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN PARTNERS' DEFICIT

 (Unaudited)

(In thousands)

See Accompanying Notes to Financial Statements

STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

 (Unaudited)

(In thousands)

See Accompanying Notes to Financial Statements

NOTE 1 – ORGANIZATION AND SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES

General

The information contained in the following notes to the unaudited financial statements is condensed from that which would appear in the annual audited financial statements.  Accordingly, the unaudited financial statements included herein should be reviewed in conjunction with the audited financial statements and related notes thereto contained in the National Tax Credit Partners, L.P. (the "Partnership" or "Registrant") Annual Report for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2012. Accounting measurements at interim dates inherently involve greater reliance on estimates than at year end.  The results of operations for the interim periods presented are not necessarily indicative of the results expected for the entire year.

In the opinion of the Partnership’s management, the accompanying unaudited financial statements contain all adjustments (consisting primarily of normal recurring items) considered necessary for a fair presentation. The balance sheet at December 31, 2012 has been derived from the audited financial statements at that date but does not include all of the information and disclosures required by generally accepted accounting principles for complete financial statements.

 Organization

The Partnership, formed under the California Revised Limited Partnership Act, was organized on March 7, 1989.  The Partnership was formed to invest primarily in other limited partnerships (the “Local Partnerships”) which own or lease and operate multifamily housing complexes (“Apartment Complexes”) that are eligible for low-income housing tax credits or, in certain cases, for historic rehabilitation tax credits (“Tax Credits”).  The general partner of the Partnership is National Partnership Investments, LLC, a California limited liability company ("NAPICO" or the “General Partner”). The General Partner is a subsidiary of Bethesda Holdings II, LLC, a privately held real estate asset management company (“Bethesda”).

At March 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012, the Partnership had outstanding 23,464 limited partnership interests.

The General Partner has a 1% interest in operating profits and losses of the Partnership.  The limited partners will be allocated the remaining 99% interest in proportion to their respective investments.

The Partnership shall continue in full force and effect until December 31, 2029, unless terminated prior to that date, pursuant to the partnership agreement or law.

Basis of Presentation

The accompanying unaudited financial statements have been prepared in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States.

The Partnership’s management evaluated subsequent events through the time this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q was filed.

Method of Accounting for Investments in Local Partnerships

The investments in Local Partnerships are accounted for using the equity method. 

 Net Loss Per Limited Partnership Interest

Variable Interest Entities

The Partnership consolidates any variable interest entities in which the Partnership holds a variable interest and is the primary beneficiary. Generally, a variable interest entity, or VIE, is an entity with one or more of the following characteristics: (a) the total equity investment at risk is not sufficient to permit the entity to finance its activities without additional subordinated financial support; (b) as a group the holders of the equity investment at risk lack (i) the ability to make decisions about an entity’s activities through voting or similar rights, (ii) the obligation to absorb the expected losses of the entity, or (iii) the right to receive the expected residual returns of the entity; or (c) the equity investors have voting rights that are not proportional to their economic interests and substantially all of the entity’s activities either involve, or are conducted on behalf of, an investor that has disproportionately few voting rights. The primary beneficiary of a VIE is generally the entity that has (a) the power to direct the activities of the VIE that most significantly impact the VIE’s economic performance, and (b) the obligation to absorb losses or the right to receive benefits that could potentially be significant to the VIE.

In determining whether it is the primary beneficiary of a VIE, the Partnership considers qualitative and quantitative factors, including, but not limited to: which activities most significantly impact the VIE’s economic performance and which party controls such activities; the amount and characteristics of the Partnership’s investment; the obligation or likelihood for the Partnership or other investors to provide financial support; and the similarity with and significance to the business activities of the Partnership and the other investors.  Significant judgments related to these determinations include estimates about the current and future fair values and performance of real estate held by these VIEs and general market conditions.

At March 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012, the Partnership held variable interests in 3   VIEs, for which the Partnership was not the primary beneficiary. The Partnership has concluded, based on its qualitative consideration of the partnership agreement, the partnership structure and the role of the general partner in each of the Local Partnerships, that the general partner of each of the Local Partnerships is the primary beneficiary of the respective Local Partnership. In making this determination, the Partnership considered the following factors:

·        the general partners conduct and manage the business of the Local Partnerships;

·        the general partners have the responsibility for and sole discretion over selecting a property management agent for the Local Partnerships’ underlying real estate properties;

·        the general partners are responsible for approving operating and capital budgets for the properties owned by the Local Partnerships;

·        the general partners are obligated to fund any recourse obligations of the Local Partnerships;

·        the general partners are authorized to borrow funds on behalf of the Local Partnerships; and

·        the Partnership, as a limited partner in each of the Local Partnerships, does not have the ability to direct or otherwise significantly influence the activities of the Local Partnerships that most significantly impact such entities’ economic performance.

 NOTE 2 - INVESTMENTS IN AND ADVANCES TO LOCAL PARTNERSHIPS

At March 31, 2013, the Partnership held limited partnership interests in 3 Local Partnerships, located in one state, that owned residential projects consisting of 51 apartment units. The general partners responsible for management of the Local Partnerships (the "Local Operating General Partners") are not affiliated with the General Partner of the Partnership, except as discussed below.

National Tax Credit, LLC ("NTC"), an affiliate of the General Partner, is the Local Operating General Partner of the remaining Local Partnerships and is entitled to one percent of operating profits and losses of the Local Partnerships.  The Partnership is also entitled to receive 50 percent of the net cash flow generated by the Apartment Complexes, subject to repayment of any loans made to the Local Partnerships (including loans provided by NTC or an affiliate), repayment for funding of development deficit and operating deficit guarantees by the Local Operating General Partner or its affiliates and certain priority payments to the Local Operating General Partner.

The Partnership, as a limited partner, does not have a contractual relationship with the Local Partnerships or exercise control over the activities and operations, including refinancing or selling decisions, of the Local Partnerships that would require or allow for consolidation. Accordingly, the Partnership accounts for its investments in the Local Partnerships using the equity method. The Partnership is allocated profits and losses of the Local Partnerships based upon its respective ownership percentage (99%). The Partnership is allocated profits and losses and receives distributions from refinancings and sales in accordance with the Local Partnerships’ partnership agreements. These agreements usually limit the Partnership’s distributions to an amount substantially less than its ownership percentage in the Local Partnership. 

The individual investments are carried at cost plus the Partnership’s share of the Local Partnership’s profits less the Partnership’s share of the Local Partnership’s losses, distributions and impairment charges. The Partnership is not legally liable for the obligations of the Local Partnerships and is not otherwise committed to provide additional support to them. Therefore, it does not recognize losses once the Partnership’s investment in each of the Local Partnerships reaches zero. Distributions from the Local Partnerships are accounted for as a reduction of the investment balance until the investment balance is reduced to zero. Subsequent distributions received are recognized as income in the statements of operations.  There were no such distributions received during the three months ended March 31, 2013 and 2012.

At times, advances are made to Local Partnerships. Advances made by the Partnership to the individual Local Partnerships are considered part of the Partnership's investment in limited partnerships.  Advances made to Local Partnerships for which the investment has been reduced to zero are charged to expense. During the three months ended March 31, 2013, the Partnership advanced approximately $1,000 to one Local Partnership. There were no such advances during the three months ended March 31, 2012.  While not obligated to make any advances to any of the Local Partnerships, the Partnership may make advances in order to protect its economic investment in the Local Partnerships.

For those investments where the Partnership has determined that the carrying value of the Partnership’s investments approximates the estimated fair value of those investments, the Partnership’s policy is to recognize equity in income of the Local Partnerships only to the extent of distributions received and amortization of acquisition costs from those Local Partnerships. Therefore, the Partnership limits its recognition of equity earnings to the amount it expects to ultimately realize.

As of March 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012, the investment balance in the three Local Partnerships had been reduced to zero.

No unaudited condensed statements of operations for the three months ended March 31, 2013 and 2012 are included as there is no information available for Summit I, II and III and due to the sale of the Partnership’s interest in Glenark Landing in November 2012 and Grand Meadows II in August 2012.

On November 13, 2012, the Partnership transferred its limited partnership interest in Glenark Associates Limited Partnership (“Glenark”), a Local Partnership, and received no proceeds for the transfer. The Partnership’s investment balance in Glenark was zero at the date of transfer.

On August 1, 2012, the Partnership assigned its limited partnership interest in Grand Meadows II Limited Dividend Housing Association LP (“Grand Meadows II”), a Local Partnership, for $50,000, which was recognized as gain from sales of limited partnership interests in Local Partnerships during the third quarter of 2012.  The Partnership’s investment balance in Grand Meadows II was zero at the date of assignment.

In 2003, the property owned by Blue Lake was sold without the consent or knowledge of the Partnership and without the requisite recapture bond. The Partnership filed an action against the Local Operating General Partner of the Local Partnership in 2003 and the matter was settled in 2008. Under the terms of the settlement agreement, the Partnership was to receive payments totaling $300,000 by December 2009. The Partnership received $100,000 in July 2008 and no further payments have been received to date. On October 23, 2008, the Partnership obtained a judgment against the Local Operating General Partner of the Local Partnership as a result of the unpaid balance.  The Partnership has been unsuccessful in its attempts to enforce collection of the judgment and does not anticipate that it will receive any further payments on the judgment.  The Partnership had no investment in the Blue Lake Local Partnership at March 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012.

NOTE 3 – TRANSACTIONS WITH AFFILIATED PARTIES

Under the terms of the Amended and Restated Agreement of the Limited Partnership, the Partnership is obligated to the General Partner for the following fees:

(a)   An annual Partnership management fee in an amount equal to 0.5 percent of invested assets (as defined in the Partnership Agreement) as of the beginning of the year is payable to the General Partner. For the three months ended March 31, 2013 and 2012, approximately $9,000 and $22,000, respectively, has been expensed. At March 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012, approximately $1,236,000 and $1,227,000, respectively, is owed to the General Partner and is included in accrued fees due to affiliates.

(b)   A property disposition fee is payable to the General Partner in an amount equal to the lesser of (i) one-half of the competitive real estate commission that would have been charged by unaffiliated third parties providing comparable services in the area where the apartment complex is located, or (ii) 3 percent of the sales price received in connection with the sale or disposition of the apartment complex or local partnership interest, but in no event will the property disposition fee and all amounts payable to unaffiliated real estate brokers in connection with any such sale exceed in the aggregate, the lesser of the competitive rate (as described above) or 6 percent of such sale price. Receipt of the property disposition fee will be subordinated to the distribution of sale or refinancing proceeds by the Partnership until the limited partners have received distributions of sale or refinancing proceeds in an aggregate amount equal to (i) their 10 percent priority return for any year not theretofore satisfied (as defined in the Partnership Agreement) and (ii) an amount equal to the aggregate adjusted investment (as defined in the Partnership Agreement) of the limited partners.  No disposition fees have been paid.

As of March 31, 2013, the fees due to the General Partner exceeded the Partnership’s cash. The Partnership Agreement provides that the fees and advances due to the General Partner may only be paid from the Partnership’s available cash, however, the Partnership still remains liable for all such amounts.

NTC, or another affiliate of the General Partner, is the Local Operating General Partner in the Partnership's three Local Partnerships.  In addition, NTC is either a special limited partner or an administrative general partner in each Local Partnership.

 NOTE 4 – FAIR VALUE OF FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS

Financial Accounting Standards Board Accounting Standards Codification Topic 825, “Financial Instruments”, requires disclosure of fair value information about financial instruments whether or not recognized in the balance sheet, for which it is practicable to estimate fair value. Fair value is defined as the amount at which the instruments could be exchanged in a current transaction between willing parties, other than in a forced or liquidation sale. At March 31, 2013, the Partnership believes that the carrying amount of other assets and liabilities reported on the balance sheet that require such disclosure approximated their fair value due to the short-term maturity of these instruments.

NOTE 5 – CONTINGENCIES

The General Partner is involved in various lawsuits arising from transactions in the ordinary course of business. In the opinion of management and the General Partner, the claims will not result in any material liability to the Partnership.

Operations.

Results of Operations

The Partnership, as a limited partner, does not have a contractual relationship with the Local Partnerships or exercise control over the activities and operations, including refinancing or selling decisions of the Local Partnerships that would require or allow for consolidation.  Accordingly, the Partnership accounts for its investment in the Local Partnerships using the equity method.  Thus the individual investments are carried at cost plus the Partnership’s share of the Local Partnership’s profits less the Partnership’s share of the Local Partnership’s losses, distributions and impairment charges.  However, since the Partnership is not legally liable for the obligations of the Local Partnerships, and is not otherwise committed to providing additional support to them, it does not recognize losses once the Partnership’s investment in each of the Local Partnerships reaches zero. Distributions from the Local Partnerships are accounted for as a reduction of the investment balances until the investment balance is reduced to zero. Subsequent distributions received are recognized as income in the statements of operations.  There were no distributions received during the three months ended March 31, 2013 and 2012. For those investments where the Partnership has determined that the carrying value of the Partnership’s investments approximates the estimated fair value of those investments, the Partnership’s policy is to recognize equity in income of the Local Partnerships only to the extent of distributions received, and amortization of acquisition costs from those Local Partnerships. The Partnership recognized no equity in income or loss from Local Partnerships during the three months ended March 31, 2013 and 2012.

At times, advances are made to Local Partnerships. Advances made by the Partnership to the individual Local Partnerships are considered part of the Partnership's investment in limited partnerships.  Advances made to Local Partnerships for which the investment has been reduced to zero are charged to expense. During the three months ended March 31, 2013, the Partnership advanced approximately $1,000 to one Local Partnership.  There were no such advances from the Partnership to the Local Partnerships during the three months ended March 31, 2012. While not obligated to make any advances to any of the Local Partnerships, the Partnership may make advances in order to protect its economic investment in the Local Partnerships.

At March 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012, the investment balance in the three Local Partnerships had been reduced to zero.

The Partnership’s net loss for the three months ended March 31, 2013 was approximately $38,000 compared to net loss of approximately $40,000 for the three months ended March 31, 2012. The decrease in net loss was due to a decrease in total operating expenses, partially offset by an increase in advance to Local Partnership recognized as expense.

An annual management fee is payable to the General Partner and is calculated at 0.5 percent of the original invested assets of the remaining partnerships.  The management fee represents the annual recurring fee which will be paid to the General Partner for the General Partner’s management of the Partnership's affairs. Management fees were approximately $9,000 and $22,000 for the three months ended March 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively.  The decrease in management fees is due to the sales of limited partnership interests in two Local Partnerships, Glenark Landing in November 2012 and Grand Meadows II in August 2012.

Operating expenses, exclusive of the management fee, consist of legal and accounting fees for services rendered to the Partnership and general and administrative expenses. For the three months ended March 31, 2013 and 2012, legal and accounting fees were approximately $27,000 and $13,000, respectively, and general and administrative expenses were approximately $1,000 and $5,000, respectively.  Legal and accounting fees increased due to an increase in legal costs associated with a review of the Partnership’s investments.  The decrease in general and administrative expenses is primarily due to a decrease in filing fees related to the sale of partnership interests.

Because of (i) the nature of the Apartment Complexes, (ii) the difficulty of predicting the resale market for low-income housing in the future, and (iii) the inability of the Partnership to directly cause the sale of Apartment Complexes by local general partners, but generally only to require such local general partners to use their respective best efforts to find a purchaser for the Apartment Complexes it is not possible at this time to predict whether the liquidation of substantially all of the Partnership’s assets and the disposition of the proceeds, if any, in accordance with the Partnership Agreement will be able to be accomplished promptly. If a Local Partnership is unable to sell an Apartment Complex, it is anticipated that the local general partner will either continue to operate such Apartment Complex or take such other actions as the local general partner believes to be in the best interest of the Local Partnership.

The Partnership, as a limited partner in the Local Partnerships in which it has invested, is subject to the risks incident to the management and ownership of improved real estate.  The Partnership's investments are also subject to adverse general economic conditions, and accordingly, the status of the national economy, including substantial unemployment and concurrent inflation, could increase vacancy levels, rental payment defaults, and operating expenses, which in turn, could substantially increase the risk of operating losses for the Apartment Complexes.

On November 13, 2012, the Partnership transferred its limited partnership interest in Glenark Associates Limited Partnership (“Glenark”), a Local Partnership, and received no proceeds for the transfer. The Partnership’s investment balance in Glenark was zero at the date of transfer.

On August 1, 2012, the Partnership assigned its limited partnership interest in Grand Meadows II Limited Dividend Housing Association LP (“Grand Meadows II”), a Local Partnership, for $50,000, which was recognized as gain from sales of limited partnership interests in Local Partnerships during the third quarter of 2012.  The Partnership’s investment balance in Grand Meadows II was zero at the date of assignment.

In 2003, the property owned by Blue Lake was sold without the consent or knowledge of the Partnership and without the requisite recapture bond. The Partnership filed an action against the Local Operating General Partner of the Local Partnership in 2003 and the matter was settled in 2008. Under the terms of the settlement agreement, the Partnership was to receive payments totaling $300,000 by December 2009. The Partnership received $100,000 in July 2008 and no further payments have been received to date. On October 23, 2008, the Partnership obtained a judgment against the Local Operating General Partner of the Local Partnership as a result of the unpaid balance. The Partnership has been unsuccessful in its attempts to enforce collection of the judgment and does not anticipate that it will receive any further payments on the judgment that it will receive.  The Partnership had no investment in the Blue Lake Local Partnership at March 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012.

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

Other

Bethesda Holdings II, LLC (“Bethesda”) and its affiliates owned 437 limited partnership interests in the Partnership representing 1.86% of the outstanding interests in the Partnership at March 31, 2013. It is possible that Bethesda or its affiliates will acquire additional limited partnership interests in the Partnership either through private purchases or tender offers. Pursuant to the Partnership Agreement, unitholders holding a majority of the limited partnership interests are entitled to take action with respect to a variety of matters, that include, but are not limited to, voting on certain amendments to the Partnership Agreement and voting to remove the General Partner. Although the General Partner owes fiduciary duties to the limited partners of the Partnership, the General Partner also owes fiduciary duties to Bethesda as its sole stockholder. As a result, the duties of the General Partner, as general partner, to the Partnership and its limited partners may come into conflict with the duties of the General Partner to Bethesda as its sole stockholder.

Variable Interest Entities

The Partnership consolidates any variable interest entities in which the Partnership holds a variable interest and is the primary beneficiary. Generally, a variable interest entity, or VIE, is an entity with one or more of the following characteristics: (a) the total equity investment at risk is not sufficient to permit the entity to finance its activities without additional subordinated financial support; (b) as a group the holders of the equity investment at risk lack (i) the ability to make decisions about an entity’s activities through voting or similar rights, (ii) the obligation to absorb the expected losses of the entity, or (iii) the right to receive the expected residual returns of the entity; or (c) the equity investors have voting rights that are not proportional to their economic interests and substantially all of the entity’s activities either involve, or are conducted on behalf of, an investor that has disproportionately few voting rights. The primary beneficiary of a VIE is generally the entity that has (a) the power to direct the activities of the VIE that most significantly impact the VIE’s economic performance, and (b) the obligation to absorb losses or the right to receive benefits that could potentially be significant to the VIE.

In determining whether it is the primary beneficiary of a VIE, the Partnership considers qualitative and quantitative factors, including, but not limited to: which activities most significantly impact the VIE’s economic performance and which party controls such activities; the amount and characteristics of the Partnership’s investment; the obligation or likelihood for the Partnership or other investors to provide financial support; and the similarity with and significance to the business activities of the Partnership and the other investors.  Significant judgments related to these determinations include estimates about the current and future fair values and performance of real estate held by these VIEs and general market conditions.

At March 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012, the Partnership held variable interests in three VIEs, for which the Partnership was not the primary beneficiary. The Partnership has concluded, based on its qualitative consideration of the partnership agreement, the partnership structure and the role of the general partner in each of the Local Partnerships, that the general partner of each of the Local Partnerships is the primary beneficiary of the respective Local Partnership.  In making this determination, the Partnership considered the following factors:

·        the general partners conduct and manage the business of the Local Partnerships;

·        the general partners have the responsibility for and sole discretion over selecting a property management agent for the Local Partnerships’ underlying real estate properties;

·        the general partners are responsible for approving operating and capital budgets for the properties owned by the Local Partnerships;

·        the general partners are obligated to fund any recourse obligations of the Local Partnerships;

·        the general partners are authorized to borrow funds on behalf of the Local Partnerships; and

·        the Partnership, as a limited partner in each of the Local Partnerships, does not have the ability to direct or otherwise significantly influence the activities of the Local Partnerships that most significantly impact such entities’ economic performance.

The three VIEs at March 31, 2013 consist of Local Partnerships that are directly engaged in the ownership and management of three apartment properties with a total of 51 units.  The Partnership is involved with those VIEs as a non-controlling limited partner equity holder. The Partnership’s maximum exposure to loss as a result of its involvement with the unconsolidated VIEs is limited to the Partnership’s recorded investments in and receivables from these VIEs, which was zero at March 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012. The Partnership may be subject to additional losses to the extent of any financial support that the Partnership voluntarily provides in the future.

Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States requires the Partnership to make estimates and assumptions. Judgments and assessments of uncertainties are required in applying the Partnership’s accounting policies in many areas.  The Partnership believes that of its significant accounting policies, the following may involve a higher degree of judgment and complexity.

Method of Accounting for Investments in Limited Partnerships

The Partnership, as a limited partner, does not have a contractual relationship with the Local Partnerships or exercise control over the activities and operations, including refinancing or selling decisions, of the Local Partnerships that would require or allow for consolidation. Accordingly, the Partnership accounts for its investments in the Local Partnerships using the equity method. The Partnership is allocated profits and losses of the Local Partnerships based upon its respective ownership percentage (99%). The Partnership is allocated profits and losses and receives distributions from refinancings and sales in accordance with the Local Partnerships’ partnership agreements. These agreements usually limit the Partnership’s distributions to an amount substantially less than its ownership percentage in the Local Partnership. 

The individual investments are carried at cost plus the Partnership’s share of the Local Partnership’s profits less the Partnership’s share of the Local Partnership’s losses, distributions and impairment charges. The Partnership is not legally liable for the obligations of the Local Partnerships and is not otherwise committed to provide additional support to them. Therefore, it does not recognize losses once its investment in each of the Local Partnerships reaches zero. Distributions from the Local Partnerships are accounted for as a reduction of the investment balance until the investment balance is reduced to zero. When the investment balance has been reduced to zero, subsequent distributions received are recognized as income on the statements of operations.

Item 3.     Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk.

Not applicable.

Item 4.     Controls and Procedures.

(a)   Disclosure Controls and Procedures.

The Partnership’s management, with the participation of the Senior Managing Director and Director of Reporting of Bethesda, who are the equivalent of the Partnership’s principal executive officer and principal financial officer, respectively, has evaluated the effectiveness of the Partnership’s disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”)) as of the end of the period covered by this report. Based on such evaluation, the Senior Managing Director and Director of Reporting of Bethesda, who are the equivalent of the Partnership’s principal executive officer and principal financial officer, respectively, have concluded that, as of the end of such period, the Partnership’s disclosure controls and procedures are effective.

(b)   Changes in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting.

There has been no change in the Partnership’s internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Exchange Act) during the fiscal quarter to which this report relates that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Partnership’s internal control over financial reporting.

Item 6.     Exhibits.

See Exhibit Index.

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.

EXHIBIT INDEX

Exhibit     Description of Exhibit

3         Partnership Agreement (herein incorporated by reference to the Partnership's Form S-11 Registration No. 33-27658).

31.1       Certification of equivalent of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Securities Exchange Act Rules 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a), as Adopted Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

31.2       Certification of equivalent of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Securities Exchange Act Rules 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a), as Adopted Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

32.1       Certification of the equivalent of the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

101        XBRL (Extensible Business Reporting Language). The following materials from National Tax Credit Partners, L.P.’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2013, formatted in XBRL: (i) balance sheets, (ii) statements of operations, (iii) statement of changes in partners’ deficit, (iv) statements of cash flows, and (v) notes to financial statements (1)

(1)        As provided in Rule 406T of Regulation S-T, this information is furnished and not filed for purposes of Sections 11 and 12 of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.