~~Number~~United ofStates ~~GLA~~SECURITIES %AND ~~State~~EXCHANGE ~~Centers~~COMMISSION ~~(sq.~~Washington, ftD.)C. of20549 ~~GLA~~FORM 10------------------------ ------------- -------------- --------------- Georgia 4 950,590 18 New York 1 729,238 14 Texas 2 618,867 12 Tennessee 2 448,691 8 Florida 2 363,789 7 Missouri 1 277,494 5 Iowa 1 277,230 5 Pennsylvania 1 255,059 5 Louisiana 1 245,098 5 North Carolina 2 187,702 4 Arizona 1 184,768 3 Indiana 1 141,051 3 Minnesota 1 134,480 2 Michigan 1 112,420 2 California 1 105,950 2 Maine 2 84,397 2 Alabama 1 80,730 1 New Hampshire 2 61,915 1 West Virginia 1 49,252 1 Massachusetts 1 23,417 --- ------------------------ ------------- -------------- --------------- Total 29 5,332,138 100 ======================== ============= ============== ===============K

Mortgage Debt GLA % Outstanding Fee or Date Opened Location (sq. ft.) Occupied (000's) (2) Ground Lease ------------------- --------------------------------- ----------- ---- ----------- --------------- --------------------- Jun. 1986 Kittery I, ME 59,694 100 $ 6,445 Fee Mar. 1987 Clover, North Conway, NH 11,000 100 --- Fee Nov. 1987 Martinsburg, WV 49,252 73 --- Fee Apr. 1988 LL Bean, North Conway, NH 50,915 100 --- Fee Jul. 1988 Pigeon Forge, TN 94,750 96 --- Ground Lease Aug. 1988 Boaz, AL 80,730 93 --- Fee Jun. 1988 Kittery II, ME 24,703 94 --- Fee Jul. 1989 Commerce, GA 185,750 78 8,723 Fee Oct. 1989 Bourne, MA 23,417 100 --- Fee Feb. 1991 West Branch, MI 112,420 100 7,190 Fee May 1991 Williamsburg, IA 277,230 95 19,767 Fee Feb. 1992 Casa Grande, AZ 184,768 90 --- Fee Dec. 1992 North Branch, MN 134,480 98 --- Fee Feb. 1993 Gonzales, LA 245,098 97 --- Fee May 1993 San Marcos, TX 441,432 97 38,542 Fee Aug. 1994 Riverhead, NY 729,238 98 --- Ground Lease (1) Aug. 1994 Terrell, TX 177,435 96 --- Fee Sep. 1994 Seymour, IN 141,051 73 --- Fee Oct. 1994 (3) Lancaster, PA 255,059 94 14,822 Fee Nov. 1994 Branson, MO 277,494 93 24,000 Fee Nov. 1994 Locust Grove, GA 248,854 97 --- Fee Jan. 1995 Barstow, CA 105,950 62 --- Fee Dec. 1995 Commerce II, GA 342,556 95 29,500 Fee Feb. 1997 (3) Sevierville, TN 353,941 100 --- Ground Lease Sept. 1997 (3) Blowing Rock, NC 105,448 100 9,782 Fee Sep. 1997 (3) Nags Head, NC 82,254 100 6,638 Fee Mar. 1998 (3) Dalton, GA 173,430 94 11,327 Fee Jul. 1998 (3) Fort Meyers, FL 198,789 97 --- Fee Nov. 1999 (3) Fort Lauderdale, FL 165,000 100 --- Fee ------------------- -------------------------------- ------------ ---- -------- --------------- ------------------------ Total 5,332,138 95 $ 176,736 =================== ================================ ============ ==== ======== =============== ======================== (1) The original Riverhead center is subject to a ground lease which may be renewed at our option for up to seven additional terms of five years each. We own the land on which the Riverhead center expansion is located. (2) As of December 31, 2001. The average interest rate, including loan cost amortization, for average debt outstanding for the year ended December 31, 2001 was 8.8% and the weighted average maturity date was March 2007. (3) Represents date acquired by us.

[X]ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2008
OR
[ ]TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the transition period from _________ to _________

Commission file number No.
333-3526-01

TANGER PROPERTIES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
(Exact name of Registrant as specified in its charter)

North Carolina	56-1822494
(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)	(I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)

3200 Northline Avenue, Suite 360	(336) 292-3010
Greensboro, NC 27408	(Registrant’s telephone number)
(Address of principal executive offices)

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: None

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None

~~% of Gross Annualized Average Base Rent No. of Approx. Annualized Annualized Represented Leases GLA Base Rent Base Rent~~ Indicate by ~~Expiring~~check ~~Year~~mark ~~Expiring(1)~~if ~~(sq.~~the ~~ft.)~~registrant ~~(1)~~is ~~per sq. ft. (000's) (2) Leases~~ well-~~-----------------------~~known ~~-----------------~~seasoned ~~----------------- ------------- --------------- -------------- 2002 207 757~~issuer,~~000~~ ~~(3)~~as $defined 12.99 $9,828 14 2003 200 848,000 14.27 12,103 17 2004 232 977,000 14.09 13,763 20 2005 164 736,000 15.26 11,243 16 2006 162 682,000 16.22 11,067 16 2007 75 326,000 14.85 4,837 7 2008 13 76,000 15.91 1,212 2 2009 9 86,000 10.68 917 1 2010 10 59,000 13.28 780 1 2011 10 83,000 11.79 984 1 2012 & thereafter 24 347,000 9.45 3,281 5 ------------------------ ----------- ----------------------- ---------- -------------- ------------------ Total 1,106 4,977,000 $ 14.07 $ 70,015 100 ======================== =========== ======================= ========== ============== ================== (1) Excludes leases that have been entered into but which tenant has not yet taken possession, vacant suites, space under construction and month-to-month leases totaling in Rule ~~the~~405 ~~aggregate approximately 355,000 square feet. (2) Base rent is defined as the minimum payments due, excluding periodic contractual fixed increases and rents calculated based on a percentage~~ of ~~tenants' sales. (3) As of December 31, 2001, approximately 170,000 square feet of~~ the ~~total~~Securities ~~scheduled to expire in 2002 had already renewed~~Act.

Renewed by Existing Re-leased to Total Expiring Tenants New Tenants ----------------------------------- ---------------------------- ---------------------------- % of % of % of GLA Total Center GLA Expiring GLA Expiring Year (sq. ft.) GLA (sq. ft.) GLA (sq. ft.) GLA ---------------- --------------- ---------------- ------------- ----------- ------------ ------------ 2001 684,166 13 560,195 82 55,362 8 2000 690,263 13 520,030 75 67,916 10 1999 715,197 14 606,450 85 22,882 3 1998 548,504 11 407,837 74 38,526 7 1997 238,250 5 195,380 82 18,600 8Yes o No ý

~~Renewals~~Indicate by ofcheck ~~Existing~~mark ~~Leases~~if ~~Stores~~the ~~Re-leased~~registrant tois ~~New~~not ~~Tenants~~required ~~(1)~~to ~~----------------------------------------------------~~file ~~------------------------------------------------------~~reports ~~Average~~pursuant ~~Annualized~~to Section Base Rents Average Annualized Base Rents ($ per sq. ft.) ($ per sq. ft.) -------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------- GLA % GLA Year (sq. ft.) Expiring New Increase (sq. ft.) Expiring New % Change --------- ---------- ----------- --------- ---------- ---------- ----------- --------- ---------- 2001 560,195 $14.08 $14.89 6 268,888 $14.90 $16.43 10 2000 520,030 13~~.66~~ ~~14.18~~or 4Section ~~302,724 14.68~~ 15~~.64 7 1999 606,450 14.36 14.36 -- 240,851 15.51 16.57 7 1998 407,387 13.83 14.07 2 220,890 15.33 13.87~~ (9d) 1997 195,380 14.21 14.41 1 171,421 14.59 13.42 (8) --------------------- (1) The square footage released to new tenants for 2001, 2000, 1999, 1998 and 1997 contains 55,362, 67,916, 22,882, 38,526 and 18,600 square feet, respectively, that was released to new tenants upon expiration of ~~an existing lease during~~ the ~~current year~~Act.

~~Average~~Yes ~~GLA~~o No Open at Aggregate % Annualized Base End of Each Number of Percentage Year Leased(1) Rent per sq. ft. (2) Year Centers Rents (000's) ------------ ----------- ------------------------ ------------------ ----------------- ---------------- 2001 96 $14.22 5,332,000 29 $2,735 2000 96 13.97 5,179,000 29 3,253 1999 97 13.85 5,149,000 31 3,141 1998 97 13.88 5,011,000 31 3,087 1997 98 14.04 4,458,000 30 2,637 --------------------- (1) As of December 31st of each year shown. (2) Represents total base rental revenue divided by Weighted Average GLA of the portfolio, which amount does not take into consideration fluctuations in occupancy throughout the year.ý

~~Occupancy~~Indicate by ~~Costs~~check asmark awhether ~~Year~~the %Registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of ~~Tenant~~the ~~Sales~~Securities ~~------------------------------~~Exchange ~~--------------------------~~Act ~~2001~~of ~~7.1~~1934 ~~2000~~during ~~7.4~~the preceding ~~1999~~12 ~~7.8~~months ~~1998~~(or ~~7.9~~for ~~1997~~such 8.shorter period that the Registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes ý No o

~~Number~~Indicate by ~~GLA~~check %mark ofif ~~Total~~disclosure ~~Tenant~~ of ~~Stores~~delinquent ~~(sq.~~filers ~~ft.)~~pursuant ~~GLA~~to ~~--------------------------------------------~~Item ~~-------------~~405 ~~-------------~~of Regulation S-~~-----------------~~K ~~The~~is ~~Gap,~~not ~~Inc.:~~contained ~~GAP 17 148~~herein,~~702~~ ~~2.8~~and ~~Old~~will ~~Navy~~not 11be ~~147~~contained,~~641~~ ~~2.8~~to ~~Banana~~the ~~Republic~~best of 6Registrant’s 41knowledge,~~324~~ ~~0.8~~in ~~--------~~definitive ~~----------------~~proxy ~~--------------------~~or 34information ~~337,667~~statements incorporated ~~6.3~~by ~~Liz~~reference ~~Claiborne:~~in ~~Liz~~Part ~~Claiborne~~III 23of ~~255,868~~this ~~4.8~~Form ~~Elizabeth 8 28,894 0.5 DKNY Jeans 3 8,820 0.2 Dana Buchman 3 6,600 0.1 Laundry 2 4,333 0.1 Special Brands By Liz Claiborne 1 3,780 0.1 Claiborne Mens 1 3,100 0.1~~ 10-~~-------~~K ~~----------------~~or ~~--------------------~~any 41amendment ~~311,395~~to ~~5.9~~this Form ~~Phillips~~10-~~Van Heusen Corporation: Bass Shoe 20 134,166 2~~K.5 Van Heusen 20 85,197 1.6 Geoffrey Beene Co. Store 11 41,992 0.8 Izod 14 32,017 0.6 -------- ---------------- -------------------- 65 293,372 5.5 Reebok International, Ltd.: Reebok 19 153,461 2.9 Rockport 4 11,900 0.2 Greg Norman 1 3,000 0.1 -------- ---------------- -------------------- 24 168,361 3.2 Bass Pro Outdoor World 1 165,000 3.1 Dress Barn Inc. 18 123,822 2.3 Sara Lee Corporation: L'eggs, Hanes, Bali 24 103,809 1.9 Socks Galore 5 6,230 0.1 Understatements 1 3,000 0.1 -------- ---------------- -------------------- 30 113,039 2.1 American Commercial, Inc: Mikasa Factory Store 13 103,480 1.9 Brown Group Retail, Inc: Factory Brand Shoe 14 81,380 1.5 Naturalizer 6 16,040 0.3 -------- ---------------- -------------------- 20 97,420 1.8 Polo Ralph Lauren: Polo Ralph Lauren 9 74,366 1.4 Polo Jeans 4 15,000 0.3 Club Monaco 1 3,885 0.1 -------- ---------------- -------------------- 14 93,251 1.8 -------------------------------------------- -------- ---------------- -------------------- Total of all tenants listed in table 260 1,806,807 33.9 ============================================ ======== ================ ====================o

~~% of Gross Annualized Base Rent No. of Annualized Annualized Represented Leases GLA Base Rent Base Rent~~ Indicate by ~~Expiring~~check ~~Year~~mark ~~Expiring~~whether ~~(1)~~the ~~(sq.~~registrant ~~ft.)~~is ~~(1)~~a ~~per~~large ~~sq.~~accelerated ~~ft. (000) (2) Leases --------------------------- ----------------- ----------------- ------------------ ---------------- ---------------- 2002 34 112~~filer,~~783~~ $an accelerated ~~21.58 $ 2~~filer,~~434~~ 18a ~~2003~~non-accelerated 18filer ~~80,050~~or ~~19.51~~a ~~1,562~~smaller 11reporting ~~2004 35 153,355 19~~company.59 ~~3,004~~See the 22definitions ~~2005~~of 16“large ~~84,355~~accelerated ~~20.35 1~~filer”,~~717~~ 13“accelerated ~~2006~~filer: 13and ~~39,430~~“smaller reporting ~~23.21~~company” ~~915~~(as 7defined ~~2007~~in 31Rule ~~110,000 21.34 2,347 17 2008 4 20,500 21.06 432 3 2009 2 37,751 10.27 388 3 2010~~ 12b-~~- -- -- -- -- 2011~~ 2 ~~31,000~~of ~~12.31~~the ~~382~~Securities ~~3 2012~~ and ~~thereafter~~Exchange 4Act of ~~48,000 10~~1934).19 ~~489~~o 3Large accelerated ~~----------------------------~~filer o ~~---------~~Accelerated ~~---------------------~~filer ~~------------------~~ý Non-~~--------------~~accelerated ~~--------------------~~filer o ~~Total~~Smaller 159 717,224 $ 19.06 $ 13,670 100 ============================ ========= ===================== ================== =============== ==================== (1) Excludes leases that have been entered into but which tenant has not taken possession, vacant suites and month-to-month leases. (2) Base rent is defined as the minimum payments due, excluding periodic contractual fixed increases and rents calculated based on a percentage of tenants' sales.reporting company

~~2001~~Indicate by ~~2000~~check ~~-----------------------------------~~mark ~~--------------~~whether ~~-----------------~~the ~~First~~registrant ~~Quarter~~is $a ~~.6075~~shell $company ~~.6050~~(as ~~Second~~defined ~~Quarter~~by ~~.6100 .6075 Third Quarter .6100 .6075 Fourth Quarter .6100 .6075~~ Rule 12b-~~----------------------------------~~2 ~~----------------~~of ~~------------------~~the $2Act).~~4375~~ Yes ~~$2.4275~~o No ~~----------------------------------- ---------------- ------------------~~ý

~~Item~~Documents Incorporated 6.By Selected Financial Data 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 ------------------------------------------ ------------- ------------- ------------ ------------ -------------- (In thousands, except per unit and center data) OPERATING DATA Total revenues $ 111,068 $ 108,821 $ 104,016 $ 97,766 $ 85,271 Income before (loss) gain on sale or disposal of real estate and extraordinary item 9,492 12,249 17,070 15,109 17,583 Income before extraordinary item 9,492 5,268 21,211 16,103 17,583 Net income 9,154 5,268 20,866 15,643 17,583 ------------------------------------------ -------------- ------------- ------------- ------------ ------------ UNIT DATA Basic: Income before extraordinary item $ .70 $ .32 $ 1.77 $ 1.30 $ 1.57 Net income $ .67 $ .32 $ 1.74 $ 1.26 $ 1.57 Weighted average units 10,959 10,928 10,894 10,919 10,061 Diluted: Income before extraordinary item $ .70 $ .31 $ 1.77 $ 1.28 $ 1.54 Net income $ .67 $ .31 $ 1.74 $ 1.24 $ 1.54 Weighted average units 10,979 10,953 10,904 11,040 10,171 Distributions paid $ 2.44 $ 2.43 $ 2.42 $ 2.35 $ 2.17 ------------------------------------------ -------------- ------------- ------------- ------------ ------------ BALANCE SHEET DATA Real estate assets, before depreciation $ 599,266 $ 584,928 $ 566,216 $ 529,247 $ 454,708 Total assets 476,079 487,273 489,851 471,568 415,578 Debt 358,195 346,843 329,647 302,485 229,050 Partners' equity 97,877 117,974 141,054 149,363 160,525 ------------------------------------------ -------------- ------------- ------------- ------------ ------------ OTHER DATA EBITDA (1) $ 68,198 $ 67,832 $ 66,133 $ 61,991 $ 52,857 Funds from operations (1) $ 37,768 $ 38,203 $ 41,673 $ 37,048 $ 35,840 Cash flows provided by (used in): Operating activities $ 44,616 $ 38,420 $ 43,169 $ 35,791 $ 39,232 Investing activities $ (23,269) $ (25,815) $ (45,959) $ (79,236) $ (93,636) Financing activities $ (21,476) $ (12,474)$ (3,043) $ 46,172 $ 55,444 Gross leasable area open at year end 5,332 5,179 5,149 5,011 4,458 Number of centers 29 29 31 31 30 ----------------------- (1) EBITDA and Funds from Operations ("FFO") are widely accepted financial indicators used by certain investors and analysts to analyze and compare companies on the basis of operating performance. EBITDA represents earnings before gain (loss) on sale or disposal of real estate, extraordinary item, asset write-down, interest expense, income taxes, depreciation and amortization. FFO is defined as net income (loss), computed in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, before extraordinary items and gains (losses) on sale or disposal of depreciable operating properties, plus depreciation and amortization uniquely significant to real estate. We caution that the calculations of EBITDA and FFO may vary from entity to entity and as such the presentation of EBITDA and FFO by us may not be comparable to other similarly titled measures of other reporting companies. EBITDA and FFO are not intended to represent cash flows for the period. EBITDA and FFO have not been presented as an alternative to operating income or as an indicator of operating performance, and should not be considered in isolation or as a substitute for measures of performance prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.Reference

~~2001~~Part ~~2000~~III incorporates ~~1999~~certain ~~---------------------------------------------------------~~information ~~--------------~~by ~~--------------~~reference ~~---------------~~from ~~GLA~~the ~~open~~definitive atproxy statement ~~end~~ of ~~period~~Tanger ~~(000's)~~Factory ~~5,332 5,179 5,149 Weighted average GLA (000's) (1) 5,299 5,115 4,996~~ Outlet ~~centers in operation 29 29 31 New centers acquired --- --- 1~~ Centers, ~~disposed of or sold --- 2 1 Centers expanded 1 5 5 States operated in at end of period 20 20 22 Occupancy percentage at end of period 96 96 97 Per square foot Revenues Base rentals $14~~Inc.22 ~~$13.97~~to ~~$13.85~~be ~~Percentage~~filed ~~rentals~~with ~~.52~~respect ~~.64~~to ~~.63~~the Annual ~~Expense~~Meeting reimbursements 5.70 5.87 5.59 Other income .52 .79 .76 --------------------------------------------------------- -------------- -------------- --------------- Total revenues 20.96 21.27 20.83 --------------------------------------------------------- -------------- -------------- --------------- Expenses Property operating 6.54 6.57 6.12 General and administrative 1.55 1.44 1.46 Interest 5.69 5.39 4.85 Depreciation and amortization 5.39 5.13 4.97 --------------------------------------------------------- -------------- -------------- --------------- Total expenses 19.17 18.53 17.40 --------------------------------------------------------- -------------- -------------- --------------- Income before(loss)gain on sale or disposal of ~~real~~Shareholders ~~estate~~to ~~and~~be ~~extraordinary~~held ~~item~~May $8, 12009.79 $ 2.74 $ 3.43 --------------------------------------------------------- -------------- -------------- --------------- (1) GLA weighted by months of operations. GLA is not adjusted for fluctuations in occupancy that may occur subsequent to the original opening date.

Contractual Obligations 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Thereafter ---------------------------------- ---------- ----------- ---------- ----------- ----------- -------------- Debt $2,288 $23,785 $63,941 $23,888 $53,899 $190,394 Operating leases 2,264 1,914 1,832 1,824 1,819 64,401 ---------------------------------- ---------- ----------- ---------- ----------- ----------- -------------- $4,552 $25,699 $65,773 $25,712 $55,718 $254,795 ---------------------------------- ---------- ----------- ---------- ----------- ----------- --------------PART I

Commercial Commitments 2003 2004 ----------------------------------- ---------- ----------- Lines of credit $54,050 --- Joint venture guarantee --- $36,200 ----------------------------------- ---------- ----------- $54,050 $36,200 ----------------------------------- ---------- -----------Item 1. Business

2001 2000 1999 -------------------------------------------------------------- ------------ -------------- -------------- Funds from Operations: Net income $ 9,154 $ 5,268 $ 20,866 Adjusted for: Extraordinary item-loss on early extinguishment of debt 338 --- 345 Depreciation and amortization uniquely significant to real estate 28,276 25,954 24,603 Loss (gain) on sale or disposal of real estate --- 6,981 (4,141) -------------------------------------------------------------- ------------ -------------- -------------- Funds from operations (1) $ 37,768 $ 38,203 $ 41,673 Cash flow provided by (used in): Operating activities $ 44,616 $ 38,420 $ 43,169 Investing activities $ (23,269) $ (25,815) $ (45,959) Financing activities $ (21,476) $ (12,474) $ (3,043) Weighted average units outstanding (2) 11,707 11,706 11,698 -------------------------------------------------------------- ------------ -------------- -------------- (1) For the years ended December 31, 2000 and 1999, includes $908 and $687 in gains on sales of outparcels of land. (2) Assumes preferred units of the Operating Partnership and unit options are all converted to limited partnership units.The Company

~~TANGER~~Tanger Properties ~~PROPERTIES~~Limited ~~LIMITED~~Partnership PARTNERSHIP BALANCE SHEETS (In thousands) December 31, 2001 2000 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ASSETS Rental Property Land $ 60,158 $ 59,858 Buildings, improvements and ~~fixtures 539~~subsidiaries,~~108~~ ~~505,554~~a ~~Developments~~North ~~under~~Carolina ~~construction - 19~~limited partnership,~~516~~ ~~-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~~focuses ~~599,266~~exclusively ~~584,928~~on ~~Accumulated depreciation (148~~developing,~~950)~~ ~~(122~~acquiring,~~365)~~ ~~------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rental property~~owning, ~~net~~operating ~~450,316 462,563 Cash~~ and managing ~~cash~~factory ~~equivalents~~outlet ~~503~~shopping ~~632~~centers. We ~~Deferred~~are ~~charges,~~one ~~net~~of ~~11,413~~the ~~8,566~~largest owners ~~Other~~and ~~assets~~operators ~~13,847~~of ~~15,512~~factory ~~-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~~outlet ~~Total~~centers ~~assets~~in $the ~~476,079~~United States. As $of ~~487,273~~December ~~------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- LIABILITIES AND PARTNERS' EQUITY Liabilites Debt Senior~~31, ~~unsecured notes $ 160~~2008,~~509~~ $we ~~150,000~~owned ~~Mortgages~~and ~~payable~~operated ~~176,736~~30 ~~135~~outlet centers,~~313~~ ~~Term~~with ~~note,~~a ~~unsecured~~total -gross ~~20,000~~leasable ~~Lines~~area of ~~credit~~approximately ~~20,950~~8.8 ~~41,530~~million ~~-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~~square feet. These ~~358,195~~factory ~~346,843~~outlet ~~Construction~~centers ~~trade~~were ~~payables~~97% ~~3,722~~occupied ~~9,784 Accounts payable~~ and ~~accrued~~contained over expses 16,285 12,672 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total liabilities 378,202 369,299 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Commitments Partners' Equity General partner 1,~~346~~900 1stores,~~611~~ ~~Limited~~representing ~~partners~~approximately ~~97,504~~370 ~~116,363~~store ~~Accumulated~~brands. We also ~~other~~operated comprehensive loss (973) - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total partners' equity 97,877 117,974 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total liabilities and ~~partners'~~had ~~equity~~partial $ownership ~~476,079~~interests $in ~~487,273~~three ~~-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~~outlet ~~The~~centers totaling ~~accompanying~~approximately ~~notes~~1.4 ~~are~~million ansquare ~~integral part of these financial statements~~feet.

~~TANGER~~We ~~PROPERTIES~~are controlled ~~LIMITED~~by ~~PARTNERSHIP~~Tanger ~~STATEMENTS~~Factory OFOutlet ~~OPERATIONS (In thousands~~Centers, ~~except~~Inc. ~~per~~and ~~unit~~subsidiaries, ~~data) Year Ended December 31~~a fully-integrated, ~~2001~~self-administered ~~2000~~and ~~1999~~ self-~~-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~~managed ~~REVENUES~~real ~~Base~~estate ~~rentals $ 75~~investment trust,~~354~~ $or ~~71,457~~REIT. The $Company ~~69,180~~owns ~~Percentage~~the ~~rentals~~majority ~~2,735~~of ~~3,253~~the ~~3,141~~partnership interests ~~Expense~~issued ~~reimbursements~~by ~~30,207~~the ~~30,046~~Operating 27Partnership,~~910~~ ~~Other~~which ~~income~~we ~~2,772~~refer ~~4,065~~to ~~3,785~~as ~~------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Total revenues 111~~units,~~068~~ through ~~108,821~~its ~~104,016~~two wholly-~~-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~~owned ~~EXPENSES Property operating 34~~subsidiaries,~~639~~ ~~33,623~~the ~~30,585~~Tanger ~~General~~GP Trust and ~~administrative~~the ~~8,231~~Tanger ~~7,366~~LP Trust. The ~~7,298~~Tanger ~~Interest~~GP ~~30,134~~Trust ~~27,565~~controls ~~24,239~~the ~~Depreciation~~Operating ~~and~~Partnership ~~amortization~~as ~~28,572~~its sole ~~26,218~~general ~~24,824~~partner. The ~~Asset~~Tanger ~~write-down~~LP ~~---~~Trust ~~1,800~~holds ~~---~~a ~~------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~~limited ~~Total~~partnership interest. The ~~expenses~~remaining ~~101,576~~units ~~96,572~~are ~~86,946~~held ~~------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~~by ~~Income~~the ~~before~~Tanger ~~(loss)~~family ~~gain~~through ownership ~~on disposal or sale~~ of ~~real~~the ~~estate~~Tanger ~~and~~Family ~~extraordinary~~Limited ~~item~~Partnership. Stanley 9K. Tanger,~~492~~ ~~12,249~~the ~~17,070~~Company’s ~~(Loss)~~Chairman ~~gain on disposal or sale~~ of ~~real~~the ~~estate --- (6~~Board,~~981)~~ ~~4,141~~is ~~------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~~the ~~Income~~sole ~~before~~general ~~extraordinary~~partner ~~item 9,492 5,268 21,211 Extraordinary item - Loss on early extinguishment~~ of ~~debt~~the Tanger ~~(338)~~Family ~~---~~Limited ~~(345)~~Partnership. Unless ~~------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~~the ~~Net~~context ~~income 9~~indicates otherwise,~~154~~ ~~5,268~~the ~~20,866~~term ~~Less~~“Operating ~~applicable~~Partnership” ~~preferred~~refers ~~unit distributions (1,771) (1,823) (1,917) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Income available~~ to ~~partners~~Tanger ~~7,383~~Properties ~~3,445~~Limited Partnership ~~18,949~~and ~~Income~~subsidiaries ~~allocated~~and to the ~~limited~~term ~~partners~~“Company” ~~(7,282)~~refers ~~(3,397) (5,278) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Income allocated~~ to ~~the~~Tanger ~~general~~Factory Outlet ~~partner 101 48 13~~Centers,~~671~~ ~~------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Basic earnings per unit: Income before extraordinary item $ 0~~Inc.70 $and 0subsidiaries.32 The $terms ~~1.77~~“we”, ~~Extraordinary~~“our” ~~item~~and ~~(0.03)~~“us” refer ~~---~~to ~~(0.03)~~the ~~------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~~Operating ~~Net~~Partnership ~~income~~or $the ~~0.67~~Operating $Partnership ~~0.32~~and $the ~~1.74~~Company together, ~~------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~~as ~~Diluted~~the ~~earnings~~text ~~per unit: Income before extraordinary item $ 0~~requires.70 $ 0.31 $ 1.77 Extraordinary item (0.03) --- (0.03) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Net income $ 0.67 $ 0.31 $ 1.74 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

~~TANGER~~As ~~PROPERTIES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP STATEMENTS OF PARTNERS' EQUITY For the Years Ended~~ of December 31, ~~2001~~2008, ~~2000,~~Tanger ~~and~~GP ~~1999~~Trust ~~(In~~owned ~~thousands~~150,000 ~~except~~units ~~unit~~of ~~data)~~the Accumulated Total General Limited Other Partners' Partners Partners Comprehensive Loss Equity ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- BalanceOperating Partnership, ~~December~~Tanger ~~31,~~LP ~~1998~~Trust $owned ~~128~~15,~~746 $ 20~~683,~~617~~751 ~~$ - $ 149,363 Conversion of 3,000 preferred~~ units ~~into 27,029 partnership units --- --- --- --- Issuance~~ of ~~500~~the ~~units~~Operating ~~upon exercise of unit options 12 --- --- 12 Repurchase~~ Partnership and ~~retirement~~the ofTanger ~~48,300~~Family ~~partnership~~Limited ~~units~~Partnership ~~(958)~~owned ~~---~~the ~~---~~remaining ~~(958) Transfer of partnership interest (120~~3,~~557) 120~~033,~~557~~305 units. Each ~~---~~Tanger ~~---~~Family ~~Net~~Limited ~~income~~Partnership ~~15,588~~unit ~~5,278~~is ~~---~~exchangeable for ~~20,866~~two ~~Preferred~~of ~~distributions~~the ~~($21.76~~Company’s ~~per~~common ~~unit) (1~~shares,~~918)~~ ~~---~~subject ~~---~~to ~~(1,918)~~certain ~~Distributions~~limitations to preserve ~~partners~~the ~~($2.42~~Company’s ~~per~~status ~~unit)~~as ~~(18,986)~~a ~~(7,325)~~REIT. In ~~--- (26~~addition,~~311)~~ ~~-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~~Tanger ~~Balance,~~LP ~~December~~Trust owned 313, ~~1999 1~~000,~~927~~000 ~~139,127 --- 141,054 Conversion of 4,670~~ preferred units ~~into~~which ~~42,076~~were ~~partnership~~issued ~~units~~by ~~---~~the ~~---~~Operating ~~---~~Partnership in ~~---~~exchange ~~Net~~for ~~income~~the 48proceeds ~~5,220~~from ~~---~~the ~~5,268~~Company’s ~~Preferred~~issuance ~~distributions~~of ~~($21~~3.870 ~~per~~million ~~unit) --- (1,840) --- (1,840) Distributions to partners ($2~~7.435% Class ~~per~~C ~~unit)~~Cumulative ~~(364)~~Preferred ~~(26~~Shares,~~144)~~ ~~---~~or ~~(26,508)~~Class ~~-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~~C ~~Balance,~~Preferred ~~December~~Shares. If the ~~31,~~Company ~~2000~~redeems ~~1,611~~any ~~116,363~~Class ~~---~~C ~~117,974~~Preferred ~~Comprehensive income: Net income 101 9~~Shares,~~053~~ ~~---~~the ~~9,154~~Operating ~~Unrealized~~Partnership ~~loss~~will redeem onan ~~mark-to-market~~equivalent ofnumber cash flow hedge --- --- (973) (973) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total comprehensive income 101 9,053 (973) 8,181 Issuance of ~~10,800~~preferred units ~~upon~~for ~~---~~the ~~201~~liquidation ~~---~~preference value ~~201~~of ~~exercise~~the ofCompany’s ~~unit~~Class ~~options~~C Preferred ~~distributions ($21~~Shares.96 per unit) --- (1,770) --- (1,770) Distributions to partners ($2.44 per unit) (366) (26,343) --- (26,709) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Balance, December 31, 2001 1,346 97,504 (973) 97,877 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

~~TANGER~~As PROPERTIES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS (In thousands) Year Ended December 31, 2001 2000 1999 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- OPERATING ACTIVITIES Net income $ 9,154 $ 5,268 $ 20,866 Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities: Depreciation and amortization 28,572 26,218 24,824 Amortization of February ~~deferred financing costs~~ 1,~~309~~ 12009,~~264~~ ~~1,005~~the ~~Loss~~Company’s onmanagement ~~early~~beneficially ~~extinguishment~~owned ofapproximately ~~debt 338 --- 345 Asset write-down --- 1,800 --- Loss (gain) on disposal or sale~~ 19% of ~~real~~all ~~estate~~outstanding ~~---~~Company ~~6,981~~common ~~(4,141)~~shares ~~Gain on sale of outparcels of land ---~~ (~~908)~~assuming ~~(687)~~the ~~Straight-line~~Tanger ~~base~~Family ~~rent~~Limited Partnership’s ~~adjustment~~common ~~342~~units 92are ~~(214)~~exchanged ~~Increase~~for ~~(decrease)~~Company ~~due~~common toshares ~~changes~~but ~~in:~~without giving ~~Other~~effect assets 2,261 (2,104) (1,196) Accounts payable and accrued expenses 2,640 (191) 2,367 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Net cash provided by operating activities 44,616 38,420 43,169 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- INVESTING ACTIVITIES Acquisition of rental properties --- --- (15,500) Additions to ~~rental~~the ~~properties~~exercise ~~(20,368) (36,056) (34,224) Additions to investments in joint ventures (4,068) (117) --- Additions to deferred lease costs (1,618) (2,238) (1,862) Net proceeds from sale~~ of ~~real~~any ~~estate~~outstanding ~~723~~share ~~8,598~~and 1,987 Net insurance proceeds from property losses --- 4,046 6,451 Collections from (advances to) officers, net 2,062 (48) (2,811) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Net cash used in investing activities (23,269) (25,815) (45,959) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- FINANCING ACTIVITIES Repurchase of partnership units --- --- (958) Cash distributions paid (28,479) (28,348) (28,229) Proceeds from issuance of debt 279,075 172,595 185,055 Repayment of debt (267,723) (155,399) (157,893) Additions to deferred financing costs (4,550) (1,322) (1,030) Proceeds from exercise of unit options ~~201~~or ~~---~~the 12conversion --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Net cash used in financing activities (21,476) (12,474) (3,043) --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents (129) 131 (5,833) Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of ~~period~~the ~~632~~exchangeable 501 6,334 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Cash and cash equivalents, end of period $ 503 $ 632 $ 501 =========================================================================================================================== The accompanying notes ~~are an integral part of these financial statements~~).

~~2001~~Ownership of ~~2000~~the ~~------------------------------------------------~~Company’s ~~---------------~~common ~~--------------~~shares ~~Assets:~~is ~~Investment~~restricted ~~properties~~to atpreserve ~~cost,~~the ~~net~~Company’s ~~$7,348~~status $as a -REIT ~~Cash~~for ~~and~~federal ~~cash~~income ~~equivalents~~tax ~~136~~purposes. ~~141~~Subject ~~Other~~to ~~assets~~certain 2exceptions,~~199~~ ~~175~~a ~~------------------------------------------------~~person may ~~---------------~~not ~~--------------~~actually ~~Total~~or ~~assets~~constructively ~~$9,683~~own $more ~~316~~than ~~------------------------------------------------~~4% ~~---------------~~of ~~--------------~~the ~~Liabilities~~Company’s ~~and~~common shares ~~Owners'~~or ~~Equity~~9.8% ~~Debt~~of $the 10Company’s $Class -C ~~Accounts~~Preferred ~~payable~~Shares. ~~and~~The ~~other~~Company ~~liabilities~~also operates ~~1,030~~in 85a ~~------------------------------------------------~~manner ~~---------------~~intended ~~--------------~~to ~~------------------------------------------------~~enable ~~---------------~~it ~~--------------~~to ~~Total~~preserve ~~liabilities~~its ~~1,040~~status 85as ~~Owners'~~a ~~equity~~REIT, including, 8among other things,~~643~~ ~~231~~making ~~------------------------------------------------~~distributions ~~---------------~~with ~~--------------~~respect ~~Total~~to ~~liabilities~~its outstanding ~~and~~common ~~owners'~~shares ~~equity~~equal ~~$9,683~~to $at ~~316~~least ~~------------------------------------------------~~90% ~~---------------~~of ~~--------------~~its taxable income each year.

~~2001~~We ~~--------------------------------------------------------------~~are ~~--------------~~a North ~~Net~~Carolina ~~income~~limited $partnership ~~9,154~~that ~~Other~~was ~~comprehensive~~formed ~~income~~in ~~(loss):~~May ~~Cumulative~~1993. Our executive ~~effect~~offices ~~adjustment~~are ofcurrently ~~FAS~~located ~~133~~at ~~adoption~~3200 Northline Avenue, Suite 360, Greensboro, North Carolina, 27408 and our telephone number is (~~300~~336) 292-3010. Our ~~Reclassification~~website tocan ~~earnings~~be onaccessed ~~termination~~at www.tangeroutlet.com. A copy of ~~cash~~our ~~147~~10-K’s, ~~Change~~10-Q’s, in8-K’s ~~fair~~and ~~value~~any amendments thereto can be obtained, free of ~~cash~~charge, ~~flow~~on ~~hedge~~our ~~(820)~~website ~~--------------------------------------------------------------~~as ~~--------------~~soon ~~Other~~as reasonably ~~comprehensive~~practicable ~~loss~~after ~~(973)~~we ~~--------------------------------------------------------------~~file ~~--------------~~such ~~Total~~material ~~comprehensive~~with, ~~income~~or $furnish 8it to,~~181~~ ~~--------------------------------------------------------------~~the Securities ~~--------------~~and Exchange Commission, or the Commission.

2001 2000 ---------------------------------------------- -------------- --------------- Deferred lease costs $ 14,467 $12,849 Deferred financing costs 8,210 6,697 ---------------------------------------------- -------------- --------------- 22,677 19,546 Accumulated amortization (11,264) (10,980) ---------------------------------------------- -------------- --------------- $ 11,413 $ 8,566 ---------------------------------------------- -------------- ---------------Recent Developments

~~2001 2000 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------- --------------- 8.75% Senior~~Washington, Pennsylvania ~~unsecured~~and ~~notes,~~Deer ~~maturing~~Park ~~March~~(Long ~~2001 $ --- $ 75~~Island),~~000~~ ~~7.875%~~New Senior, unsecured notes, maturing October 2004 60,509 75,000 9.125% Senior, unsecured notes, maturing February 2008 100,000 --- Mortgage notes with fixed interest: 9.77%, maturing April 2005 14,822 15,099 9.125%, maturing September 2005 8,723 9,120 7.875%, maturing April 2009 63,968 64,980 7.98%, maturing April 2009 19,303 --- 8.86%, maturing September 2010 16,420 16,614 Mortgage notes with variable interest: LIBOR plus 1.75%, maturing March 2006 53,500 29,500 Term note, unsecured, with variable interest: LIBOR plus 2.25%, maturing January 2002 --- 20,000 Revolving lines of credit with variable interest rates ranging .....from either prime less .25% to prime or from LIBOR plus 1.60% to LIBOR plus 1.75% 20,950 41,530 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------- --------------- $ 358,195 $ 346,843 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------- ---------------York

~~Year~~On ~~Amount~~August 29, %2008, ~~----------------------------------~~we ~~-------------~~held ~~------------~~the ~~2002~~grand $opening 2of our 371,~~288~~000 1square ~~2003~~foot ~~23,785~~outlet 7center located ~~2004~~south 63of Pittsburgh in Washington,~~941~~ 18Pennsylvania. Tenants include ~~2005~~Nike, 23Gap,~~888~~ 7Old ~~2006~~Navy, 53Banana Republic,~~899~~ 15Coach ~~Thereafter~~and ~~190~~others. At December 31,~~394~~ 2008, 52the ~~----------------------------------~~outlet ~~-------------~~center ~~------------~~was $85% ~~358~~leased. Based upon the response by customers at this center’s grand opening events,~~195~~ ~~100~~we ~~----------------------------------~~believe ~~-------------~~there ~~------------~~is tenant interest in the remaining available space and additional signed leases will be completed over time.

~~2001~~On October ~~2000~~23, ~~-------------------------------------------------------------~~2008, ~~Preferred~~we ~~Units~~held ~~80,600~~the 80grand opening of the initial phase of the Deer Park,~~600~~ ~~-------------------------------------------------------------~~New ~~Partnership~~York ~~Units:~~project. The ~~General~~project ~~partner~~contains ~~150~~approximately 685,000 square ~~150~~feet including a 32,000 ~~Limited~~square ~~partners~~foot 10Neiman Marcus Last Call store,~~813~~ which is the first and only one on Long Island. Other tenants include Anne Klein,~~016~~ Banana 10Republic,~~802~~ BCBG,~~216~~ ~~-------------------------------------------------------------~~Christmas ~~Total~~Tree 10Shops,~~963~~ Eddie Bauer,~~016~~ 10Reebok,~~952~~ New York Sports Club and others. Regal Cinemas has also leased 67,~~216~~000 square feet for a 16-~~------------------------------------------------------------~~screen Cineplex, one of the few state of the art cineplexes on Long Island. The project also includes approximately 29,000 square feet of warehouse space that is utilized to support the operations of our tenants. The project was 78% occupied as of December 31, 2008.

2001 2000 1999 --------------------- -------------------------------------------- ------------- ---------------- ------------- NUMERATOR: Income before extraordinary item $ 9,492 $ 5,268 $21,211 Less applicable preferred unit distributions (1,771) (1,823) (1,917) ------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------- ---------------- ------------- Income available to the general and limited partners numerator for basic and diluted earnings per unit 7,721 3,445 19,294 ------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------- ---------------- ------------- DENOMINATOR: Basic weighted average partnership units 10,959 10,928 10,894 Effect Acquisition of ~~outstanding~~Interest ~~unit~~in ~~options~~Myrtle 21Beach 25Highway 1017 ~~------------------------------------------------------------------~~Joint ------------- ---------------- ------------- Diluted weighted average partnership units 10,980 10,953 10,904 ------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------- ---------------- ------------- Basic earnings per unit before extraordinary item $ .70 $ 0.32 $ 1.77 ------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------- ---------------- ------------- Diluted earnings per unit before extraordinary item $ .70 $ 0.31 $ 1.77 ------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------- ---------------- -------------Venture

~~2001~~On January ~~2000~~5, ~~1999~~2009, ~~------------------~~we ~~----------------~~purchased ~~------------~~the ~~-----------------~~remaining ~~----------------~~50% ~~Net~~interest ~~income:~~in Asthe ~~reported~~Myrtle ~~$9,154~~Beach $Hwy 17 ~~5,268~~joint ~~$20,866~~venture ~~Pro~~for ~~forma~~a ~~$8,925~~cash $price ~~4,985~~of $~~20,599 Basic EPS: As reported $ .67 $ .~~32 ~~$ 1~~.740 ~~Pro~~million ~~forma~~which $was ~~.65~~net $of ~~.29~~the assumption $of ~~1.71~~the ~~Diluted~~existing ~~EPS:~~mortgage Asloan ~~reported~~of $ 35.678 $ million.31 The acquisition $was ~~1.74~~funded ~~Pro~~by ~~forma~~amounts $available ~~.65~~under $our ~~.29~~unsecured $lines 1of credit.71

~~2001~~Potential Future 2000 1999 --------------------------- -------------------------- ----------------------- Units Wtd Avg Units Wtd Avg Units Wtd Avg Ex Price Ex Price Ex Price ------------------------------------- ------------- ------------- ------------ ------------- ----------- ----------- Outstanding at beginning 1,406,870 $ 23.63 1,227,490 $ 24.55 1,030,660 $ 25.16 of year Granted --- --- 225,200 18.63 226,800 22.13 Exercised (10,800) 18.625 --- --- (500) 23.80 Forfeited (8,640) 23.66 (45,820) 23.72 (29,470) 26.94 ------------------------------------- -------------- ------------ -------------- ----------- ------------- --------- Outstanding at end of year 1,387,430 $ 23.68 1,406,870 $ 23.63 1,227,490 $ 24.55 ------------------------------------- -------------- ------------ -------------- ----------- ------------- --------- Exercisable at end of year 1,006,490 $ 24.16 858,230 $ 24.19 718,630 $ 23.97 Weighted average fair value of options granted $ --- $ 1.20 $ 1.05Developments

~~2001~~We currently ~~2000~~have ~~1999~~an ~~----------------------------------------~~option ~~-------------~~for ~~------------~~a ~~------------~~new ~~Advertising~~development ~~and~~site ~~promotion~~located $in 9Mebane,~~250~~ $North Carolina ~~9,114~~on $the ~~8,579~~highly ~~Common~~traveled ~~area~~Interstate ~~maintenance~~40/85 13corridor,~~155~~ ~~13,777~~which 12sees over 83,~~296~~000 ~~Real~~cars ~~estate~~daily. The ~~taxes~~site 8is located halfway between the Research Triangle Park area of Raleigh,~~902~~ 7Durham,~~434~~ 7and Chapel Hill,~~396~~ ~~Other~~and ~~operating~~the ~~expenses~~Triad ~~3,332~~area 3of Greensboro,~~298~~ ~~2,314~~High ~~----------------------------------------~~Point ~~-------------~~and Winston-~~-----------~~Salem. During ~~------------~~the $option 34period,~~639~~ we $are ~~33,623~~analyzing $the ~~30,585~~viability ~~----------------------------------------~~of ~~-------------~~the ~~------------~~site ~~------------~~and determining whether to proceed with the development of a center at this location.

~~2002~~We currently $have ~~67,523~~an ~~2003~~option ~~55,147~~for ~~2004~~a ~~43,520~~new ~~2005~~development ~~30,041~~site ~~2006~~located 17in Irving,~~328~~ ~~Thereafter 40~~Texas,~~422~~ which ~~--------------------~~would ~~--------------------~~be $our ~~253~~third in the state. The site is strategically located west of Dallas at the North West quadrant of busy State Highway 114 and Loop 12 and will be the first major project planned for the Texas Stadium Redevelopment Area. It is also adjacent to the upcoming DART light rail line (and station stop) connecting downtown Dallas to the Las Colinas Urban Center,~~981~~ ~~--------------------~~the Irving ~~--------------------~~Convention Center and the Dallas/Fort Worth Airport.

~~2002~~At $this time, 2we are in the initial study period on these potential new locations. As such,~~264~~ ~~2003~~there 1can be no assurance that either of these sites will ultimately be developed. These projects,~~914~~ ~~2004~~if 1realized,~~832~~ would ~~2005~~be 1primarily funded by amounts available under our unsecured lines of credit but could also be funded by other sources of capital such as collateralized construction loans,~~824~~ ~~2006~~public 1debt or equity offerings as necessary or available. In the fourth quarter of 2008,~~819~~ ~~Thereafter~~we 64made the decision to terminate our purchase options in Port St. Lucie,~~401~~ ~~-------------------~~Florida ~~---------------------~~and $Phoenix, Arizona. As 74a result,~~054~~ ~~-------------------~~we ~~---------------------~~recorded a $3.9 million charge relating to our predevelopment costs on these and other projects deemed no longer probable.

~~TANGER~~Store Closings ~~PROPERTIES~~Related LIMITED PARTNERSHIP SCHEDULE III REAL ESTATE AND ACCUMULATED DEPRECIATION For the Year Ended December 31, 2001 (In thousands) ------------------------------------- -------------- ------------------------ ----------------------- Costs Capitalized Subsequent to ~~Initial~~Current ~~cost~~Economic to Acquisition Description Operating Partnership (Improvements) ------------------------------------- -------------- ------------------------ ----------------------- Buildings, Buildings, Outlet Center Improvements Improvements Name Location Encumbrances Land & Fixtures Land & Fixtures ----------------- ------------------- -------------- --------- -------------- -------- -------------- Barstow Barstow, CA -- $3,941 $ 12,533 $ --- $ 1,209 ----------------- ------------------- -------------- --------- -------------- -------- -------------- Blowing Rock Blowing Rock, NC $ 9,782 1,963 9,424 --- 2,185 ----------------- ------------------- -------------- --------- -------------- -------- -------------- Boaz Boaz, AL --- 616 2,195 --- 2,142 ----------------- ------------------- -------------- --------- -------------- -------- -------------- Bourne Bourne, MA --- 899 1,361 --- 290 ----------------- ------------------- -------------- --------- -------------- -------- -------------- Branch North Branch, MN --- 247 5,644 249 4,030 ----------------- ------------------- -------------- --------- -------------- -------- -------------- Branson Branson, MO 24,000 4,557 25,040 --- 7,751 ----------------- ------------------- -------------- --------- -------------- -------- -------------- Casa Grande Casa Grande, AZ --- 753 9,091 --- 1,907 ----------------- ------------------- -------------- --------- -------------- -------- -------------- Clover North Conway, NH --- 393 672 --- 247 ----------------- ------------------- -------------- --------- -------------- -------- -------------- Commerce I Commerce, GA 8,723 755 3,511 492 9,273 ----------------- ------------------- -------------- --------- -------------- -------- -------------- Commerce II Commerce, GA 29,500 1,262 14,046 541 17,838 ----------------- ------------------- -------------- --------- -------------- -------- -------------- Dalton Dalton, GA 11,327 1,641 15,596 --- 444 ----------------- ------------------- -------------- --------- -------------- -------- -------------- Ft. Lauderdale Ft. Lauderdale, FL 9,412 6,986 300 18 ----------------- ------------------- -------------- --------- -------------- -------- -------------- Gonzales Gonzales, LA --- 876 15,895 17 5,248 ----------------- ------------------- -------------- --------- -------------- -------- -------------- Kittery-I Kittery, ME 6,445 1,242 2,961 229 1,339 ----------------- ------------------- -------------- --------- -------------- -------- -------------- Kittery-II Kittery, ME --- 921 1,835 529 597 ----------------- ------------------- -------------- --------- -------------- -------- -------------- Lancaster Lancaster, PA 14,822 3,691 19,907 --- 11,091 ----------------- ------------------- -------------- --------- -------------- -------- -------------- LL Bean North Conway, NH --- 1,894 3,351 --- 1,063 ----------------- ------------------- -------------- --------- -------------- -------- -------------- Locust Grove Locust Grove, GA --- 2,558 11,801 --- 8,365 ----------------- ------------------- -------------- --------- -------------- -------- -------------- Martinsburg Martinsburg, WV --- 800 2,812 --- 1,391 ----------------- ------------------- -------------- --------- -------------- -------- -------------- Nags Head Nags Head, NC 6,638 1,853 6,679 --- 1,747 ----------------- ------------------- -------------- --------- -------------- -------- -------------- Pigeon Forge Pigeon Forge, TN --- 299 2,508 --- 2,046 ----------------- ------------------- -------------- --------- -------------- -------- -------------- Riverhead Riverhead, NY --- --- 36,374 6,152 72,640 ----------------- ------------------- -------------- --------- -------------- -------- -------------- San Marcos San Marcos, TX 38,542 1,801 9,440 17 35,170 ----------------- ------------------- -------------- --------- -------------- -------- -------------- Sanibel Sanibel, FL --- 4,916 23,196 --- 3,014 ----------------- ------------------- -------------- --------- -------------- -------- -------------- Sevierville Sevierville, TN --- --- 18,495 --- 25,823 ----------------- ------------------- -------------- --------- -------------- -------- -------------- Seymour Seymour, IN --- 1,671 13,249 --- 692 ----------------- ------------------- -------------- --------- -------------- -------- -------------- Terrell Terrell, TX --- 778 13,432 --- 5,660 ----------------- ------------------- -------------- --------- -------------- -------- -------------- West Branch West Branch, MI 7,190 350 3,428 121 5,216 ----------------- ------------------- -------------- --------- -------------- -------- -------------- Williamsburg Williamsburg, IA 19,767 706 6,781 716 12,429 ----------------- ------------------- -------------- --------- -------------- -------- -------------- $ 176,736 $ 50,795 $298,243 $9,363 $240,865 ----------------- ------------------- -------------- --------- -------------- -------- --------------Environment

TANGER PROPERTIES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP SCHEDULE III - (Continued) REAL ESTATE AND ACCUMULATED DEPRECIATION For the Year Ended December 31, 2001 (In thousands) ------------------------------------- -------------------------------------- ------------- ------------- -------------- Gross Amount Carried at Close of Period Description 12/31/01 (1) ------------------------------------- -------------------------------------- ------------- ------------- -------------- Life Used to Compute Buildings, Depreciation Outlet Center Improvements Accumulated Date of in Income Name Location Land & Fixtures Total Depreciation Construction Statement ----------------- ------------------- --------- --------------- ------------ ------------- ------------- -------------- Barstow Barstow, CA $3,941 $13,742 $17,683 $4,724 1995 (2) ----------------- ------------------- --------- --------------- ------------ ------------- ------------- -------------- Blowing Rock Blowing Rock, NC 1,963 11,609 13,572 1,693 1997 (3) (2) ----------------- ------------------- --------- --------------- ------------ ------------- ------------- -------------- Boaz Boaz, AL 616 4,337 4,953 2,140 1988 (2) ----------------- ------------------- --------- --------------- ------------ ------------- ------------- -------------- Bourne Bourne, MA 899 1,651 2,550 892 1989 (2) ----------------- ------------------- --------- --------------- ------------ ------------- ------------- -------------- Branch North Branch, MN 496 9,674 10,170 4,010 1992 (2) ----------------- ------------------- --------- --------------- ------------ ------------- ------------- -------------- Branson Branson, MO 4,557 32,790 37,347 11,202 1994 (2) ----------------- ------------------- --------- --------------- ------------ ------------- ------------- -------------- Casa Grande Casa Grande, AZ 753 10,998 11,751 5,199 1992 (2) ----------------- ------------------- --------- --------------- ------------ ------------- ------------- -------------- Clover North Conway, NH 393 919 1,312 533 1987 (2) ----------------- ------------------- --------- --------------- ------------ ------------- ------------- -------------- Commerce I Commerce, GA 1,247 12,784 14,031 5,143 1989 (2) ----------------- ------------------- --------- --------------- ------------ ------------- ------------- -------------- Commerce II Commerce, GA 1,803 31,884 33,687 7,979 1995 (2) ----------------- ------------------- --------- --------------- ------------ ------------- ------------- -------------- Dalton Dalton, GA 1,641 16,040 17,681 2,023 1998 (3) (2) ----------------- ------------------- --------- --------------- ------------ ------------- ------------- -------------- Ft. Lauderdale Ft. Lauderdale, FL 9,712 7,004 16,716 571 1999 (3) (2) ----------------- ------------------- --------- --------------- ------------ ------------- ------------- -------------- Gonzales Gonzales, LA 893 21,143 22,036 8,869 1992 (2) ----------------- ------------------- --------- --------------- ------------ ------------- ------------- -------------- Kittery-I Kittery, ME 1,471 4,300 5,771 2,569 1986 (2) ----------------- ------------------- --------- --------------- ------------ ------------- ------------- -------------- Kittery-II Kittery, ME 1,450 2,432 3,882 1,124 1989 (2) ----------------- ------------------- --------- --------------- ------------ ------------- ------------- -------------- Lancaster Lancaster, PA 3,691 30,998 34,689 8,953 1994 (3) (2) ----------------- ------------------- --------- --------------- ------------ ------------- ------------- -------------- LL Bean North Conway, NH 1,894 4,414 6,308 2,247 1988 (2) ----------------- ------------------- --------- --------------- ------------ ------------- ------------- -------------- Locust Grove Locust Grove, GA 2,558 20,166 22,724 6,470 1994 (2) ----------------- ------------------- --------- --------------- ------------ ------------- ------------- -------------- Martinsburg Martinsburg, WV 800 4,203 5,003 2,250 1987 (2) ----------------- ------------------- --------- --------------- ------------ ------------- ------------- -------------- Nags Head Nags Head, NC 1,853 8,426 10,279 1,526 1997 (3) (2) ----------------- ------------------- --------- --------------- ------------ ------------- ------------- -------------- Pigeon Forge Pigeon Forge, TN 299 4,554 4,853 2,254 1988 (2) ----------------- ------------------- --------- --------------- ------------ ------------- ------------- -------------- Riverhead Riverhead, NY 6,152 109,014 115,166 24,336 1993 (2) ----------------- ------------------- --------- --------------- ------------ ------------- ------------- -------------- San Marcos San Marcos, TX 1,818 44,610 46,428 8,356 1993 (2) ----------------- ------------------- --------- --------------- ------------ ------------- ------------- -------------- Sanibel Sanibel, FL 4,916 26,210 31,126 2,871 1998 (3) (2) ----------------- ------------------- --------- --------------- ------------ ------------- ------------- -------------- Sevierville Sevierville, TN --- 44,318 44,318 6,847 1997 (3) (2) ----------------- ------------------- --------- --------------- ------------ ------------- ------------- -------------- Seymour Seymour, IN 1,671 13,941 15,612 5,360 1994 (2) ----------------- ------------------- --------- --------------- ------------ ------------- ------------- -------------- Terrell Terrell, TX 778 19,092 19,870 6,721 1994 (2) ----------------- ------------------- --------- --------------- ------------ ------------- ------------- -------------- West Branch West Branch, MI 471 8,644 9,115 3,475 1991 (2) ----------------- ------------------- --------- --------------- ------------ ------------- ------------- -------------- Williamsburg Williamsburg, IA 1,422 19,210 20,632 8,613 1991 (2) ----------------- ------------------- --------- --------------- ------------ ------------- ------------- -------------- $60,158 $539,108 $599,266 $148,950 ----------------- ------------------- --------- --------------- ------------ ------------- ------------- -------------- (1) Aggregate cost for federal income tax purposes is approximately $618,886,000 (2) The Operating Partnership generally uses estimated lives ranging from 25 to 33 years for buildings and 15 years for land improvements. Tenant finishing allowances are depreciated over the initial lease term. (3) Represents year acquired

Our country and the world are facing some of the most difficult financial times in recent history. This uncertainty has affected all sectors of business and the retail outlet sector is no exception. Following is a listing of significant tenants that had store closings in 2008 and those that have informed us of their intention to close in the coming year:

2001 2000 1999 -------------- ---------------- ----------------- Balance, beginning of year $584,928 $566,216 $529,247 Acquisition of real estate --- --- 15,500 Improvements 14,338 39,701 31,343 Dispositions and other --- (20,989) (9,874) -------------- ---------------- ----------------- Balance, end of year $599,266 $584,928 $566,216 ============== ================ =================

Tenants	Time period of closing	Square feet	Square feet re-leased	% increase in base rent upon re-lease
Mikasa, Borders, Springmaid, Bombay, WestPoint Stevens, Little Me	1st half 2008	236,000	60%	64%
Geoffrey Beene, Big Dog, Pepperidge Farms	2nd half 2008	93,000	31%	63%
Pfaltzgraff, S&K Menswear, Koret, Sag Harbor, KB Toys	2009	171,000	---	---

~~2001~~Much ~~2000~~of this ~~1999~~space ~~--------------~~is ~~----------------~~being re-~~---------------~~leased ~~Balance,~~with ~~beginning~~substantial ofincreases ~~year~~in $base ~~122~~rental rates. However,~~365~~ $given ~~104,511~~current ~~$84,685~~economic ~~Depreciation~~conditions ~~for~~it may take longer to re-lease the ~~period~~remaining ~~26,585~~space ~~24,239~~and 23more difficult to achieve similar increases in base rental rates. Also,~~095~~ ~~Dispositions~~there may be additional tenants that have not informed us of their intentions and ~~other~~which ~~---~~may ~~(6,385)~~close ~~(3,269)~~stores ~~--------------~~in ~~----------------~~the coming year. There can be no assurances that we will be able to re-~~---------------~~lease such ~~Balance,~~space. While ~~end~~the timing of ~~year~~an ~~$148,950~~economic ~~$122,365~~recovery ~~$104~~is unclear and these conditions may not improve quickly,~~511~~ ~~==============~~we ~~================~~believe ~~================~~in our business and our long-term strategy.

Financing Transactions

On February 15, 2008, our $100.0 million, 9.125% unsecured senior notes matured. We repaid these notes with amounts available under our unsecured lines of credit.

During the first quarter of 2008, we increased the maximum availability under our existing unsecured lines of credit by $125.0 million, bringing our total availability to $325.0 million. The terms of the increases were identical to those included within the existing unsecured lines of credit. Five of our six lines of credit, representing $300.0 million, have maturity dates of June 2011 or later. One line of credit, representing $25.0 million and for which no amounts were outstanding on December 31, 2008 is scheduled to expire in June 2009.

During the second quarter of 2008, we closed on a $235.0 million unsecured three year syndicated term loan facility. Based on our current debt ratings, the facility bears interest of LIBOR plus 160 basis points. Depending on our investment grade debt ratings, the interest rate can vary from LIBOR plus 125 basis points to LIBOR plus 195 basis points.

In June 2008, proceeds from the term loan were used to pay off our mortgage loan with a principal balance of approximately $170.7 million. A prepayment premium, representing interest through the July payment date, of approximately $406,000 was paid at closing. The remaining proceeds of approximately $62.8 million, net of closing costs, were applied against amounts outstanding on our unsecured lines of credit and to settle two interest rate lock protection agreements.

In July 2008 and September 2008, we entered into interest rate swap agreements with Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. and Branch Banking and Trust Company, or BB&T, for notional amounts of $118.0 million and $117.0 million, respectively. The purpose of these swaps was to fix the interest rate on the $235.0 million outstanding under the term loan facility completed in June 2008. The swaps fixed the one month LIBOR rate at 3.605% and 3.70%, respectively. When combined with the current spread of 160 basis points which can vary based on changes in our debt ratings, these swap agreements fix our interest rate on the $235.0 million of variable rate debt at 5.25% until April 1, 2011.

In October 2008, our debt rating was upgraded by the Standard and Poor’s Ratings Services from BBB- to BBB, making the Company one of only two REITs to receive a ratings upgrade in 2008. We currently have an investment grade rating with Moody’s Investors Service of Baa3. Because of this upgrade, one of our line of credit borrowing rates decreased to LIBOR plus 60 basis points. Of the $161.5 million outstanding on our unsecured lines of credit as of December 31, 2008, the borrowing rates range from LIBOR plus 60 basis points to LIBOR plus 75 basis points.

We believe our current balance sheet position is financially sound; however, due to the current weakness in and unpredictability of the capital and credit markets, we can give no assurance that affordable access to capital will exist between now and 2011 when our next debt maturities occur. As a result, our current primary focus is to strengthen our capital and liquidity position by controlling and reducing construction and overhead costs, generating positive cash flows from operations to cover our distributions and reducing outstanding debt.

The Factory Outlet Concept

Factory outlets are manufacturer-operated retail stores that sell primarily first quality, branded products at significant discounts from regular retail prices charged by department stores and specialty stores. Factory outlet centers offer numerous advantages to both consumers and manufacturers. Manufacturers selling in factory outlet stores are often able to charge customers lower prices for brand name and designer products by eliminating the third party retailer. Factory outlet centers also typically have lower operating costs than other retailing formats, which enhance the manufacturer’s profit potential. Factory outlet centers enable manufacturers to optimize the size of production runs while continuing to maintain control of their distribution channels. In addition, factory outlet centers benefit manufacturers by permitting them to sell out-of-season, overstocked or discontinued merchandise without alienating department stores or hampering the manufacturer’s brand name, as is often the case when merchandise is distributed via discount chains.

We believe that factory outlet centers will continue to present attractive opportunities for capital investment in the long-term. We further believe, based upon our contacts with present and prospective tenants that many companies will continue to utilize the factory outlet concept as a profitable distribution vehicle. However, due to present economic conditions and illiquidity in the financial and credit markets, new development or expansion may not provide the attractive investment returns historically achieved.

Our Factory Outlet Centers

Each of our factory outlet centers carries the Tanger brand name. We believe that national manufacturers and consumers recognize the Tanger brand as one that provides factory outlet shopping centers where consumers can trust the brand, quality and price of the merchandise they purchase directly from the manufacturers.

As one of the original participants in this industry, we have developed long-standing relationships with many national and regional manufacturers. Because of our established relationships with many manufacturers, we believe we are well positioned for the long-term.

Our factory outlet centers range in size from 24,619 to 729,315 square feet and are typically located at least 10 miles from major department stores and manufacturer-owned, full-price retail stores. Manufacturers prefer these locations so that they do not compete directly with their major customers and their own stores. Many of our factory outlet centers are located near tourist destinations to attract tourists who consider shopping to be a recreational activity. Our centers are typically situated in close proximity to interstate highways that provide accessibility and visibility to potential customers.

As of February 1, 2009, we had a diverse tenant base comprised of approximately 370 different well-known, upscale, national designer or brand name concepts, such as Polo Ralph Lauren, Off Saks Fifth Avenue, Neiman Marcus, GAP, Banana Republic, Old Navy, Liz Claiborne, Juicy, Kate Spade, Lucky Brand Jeans, Reebok, Tommy Hilfiger, Abercrombie & Fitch, Hollister, Eddie Bauer, Coach Leatherware, Brooks Brothers, BCGB, Michael Kors, Nike and others. Most of the factory outlet stores are directly operated by the respective manufacturer.

No single tenant (including affiliates) accounted for 10% or more of combined base and percentage rental revenues during 2008, 2007 and 2006. As of February 1, 2009, our largest tenant, The Gap Inc., including all of its store concepts, accounted for approximately 8.4% of our leasable square feet. Because our typical tenant is a large, national manufacturer, we have not experienced any significant problems with respect to rent collections or lease defaults.

Revenues from fixed rents and operating expense reimbursements accounted for approximately 91% of our total revenues in 2008. Revenues from contingent sources, such as percentage rents, vending income and miscellaneous income, accounted for approximately 9% of 2008 revenues. In conclusion, only small portions of our revenues are dependent on contingent revenue sources.

Business History

Stanley K. Tanger, the Company’s founder and Chairman of the Board of Directors, entered the factory outlet center business in 1981. Prior to founding our company, Stanley K. Tanger and his son, Steven B. Tanger, our President and Chief Executive Officer, built and managed a successful family owned apparel manufacturing business, Tanger/Creighton Inc., or Tanger/Creighton, which business included the operation of five factory outlet stores. Based on their knowledge of the apparel and retail industries, as well as their experience operating Tanger/Creighton’s factory outlet stores, they recognized that there would be a demand for factory outlet centers where a number of manufacturers could operate in a single location and attract a large number of shoppers.

In 1981, Stanley K. Tanger began developing successful factory outlet centers. Steven B. Tanger joined the Company in 1986. By June 1993, the Tangers had developed 17 centers totaling approximately 1.5 million square feet. In June 1993, we completed our initial public offering, making Tanger Factory Outlet Centers, Inc. the first publicly traded outlet center company. Since our initial public offering, we have grown our portfolio through the strategic development, expansion and acquisition of outlet centers and are now one of the largest owner operators of factory outlet centers in the country.

Business Strategy

The Operating Partnership has been built on a firm foundation of strong and enduring business relationships coupled with conservative business practices. We partner with many of the world’s best known and most respected retailers and manufacturers. By fostering and maintaining strong tenant relationships with these successful, high volume companies, we have been able to solidify our position as a leader in the outlet industry for more than a quarter century. The confidence and trust that we have developed with our retail partners from the very beginning has allowed us to forge the impressive retail alliances that we enjoy today with approximately 370 brand name manufacturers.

Nothing takes the place of experience. We have had a solid track record of success in the outlet industry for the past 28 years. In 1993, Tanger led the way by becoming the industry’s first outlet center company to be publicly traded. Our seasoned team of real estate professionals utilizes the knowledge and experience that we have gained to give us a competitive advantage and a history of accomplishments in the manufacturers’ outlet business.

We are proud to report that as of December 31, 2008, our wholly- owned outlet centers were 97% occupied with average tenant sales of $328 per square foot. Our properties have had an average occupancy rate of 95% or greater on December 31st of each year since 1981. The ability to achieve this level of performance is a testament to our long-standing relationships, industry experience and our expertise in the development and operation of manufacturers' outlet centers.

Growth Strategy

Growth doesn’t happen by chance. Our goal is to build shareholder value through a comprehensive, conservative plan for sustained, long-term growth. We focus our efforts on increasing rents in our existing centers, renovation and expansion of our mature centers and reaching new markets through the ground-up development or acquisition of new outlet centers.

Increasing Rents at Existing Centers

Our leasing team implements an ongoing strategy designed to positively impact our bottom line. This is accomplished through the aggressive marketing of available space to maintain our standard for high occupancy levels. Leases are negotiated to provide for inflation-based contractual rent increases or periodic fixed contractual rent increases and percentage rents. Due to the overall high performance of our shopping centers, we have historically been able to renew leases at higher base rents per square-foot and attract stronger, more popular brands to replace under performing tenants.

Developing New Centers and Expanding Existing Centers

We believe that there continue to be opportunities to introduce the Tanger brand in untapped or under-served markets across the United States of America in the long-term. As we search the country looking for new markets, we do our homework and determine site viability on a timely and cost-effective basis. Our 28 years of outlet industry experience, extensive development expertise and strong retail relationships give us a distinct competitive advantage. Keeping our shopping centers across the nation vibrant and growing is a key part of our formula for success. In order to maintain our reputation as the premiere outlet shopping destination in the markets that we serve, we have an ongoing program of renovations and expansions taking place at our outlet centers coast to coast. We hope that the current difficult conditions will moderate over time but the timing of an economic recovery is unclear and these conditions may not improve quickly. While we expect development to continue to be important to the growth of our portfolio in the long-term, we expect decreasing levels of development activity in 2009 as compared to prior years.

We follow a general set of guidelines when evaluating opportunities for the development or acquisition of new centers. This typically includes seeking locations within markets that have at least 1 million people residing within a 30 to 40 mile radius with an average household income of at least $65,000 per year, frontage on a major interstate or roadway that has excellent visibility and a traffic count of at least 55,000 cars per day. Leading tourist, vacation and resort markets that receive at least 5 million visitors annually are also on our development radar and are closely evaluated. Although our current goal is to target sites that are large enough to support centers with approximately 75 stores totaling at least 300,000 square feet, we maintain the flexibility to vary our minimum requirements based on the unique characteristics of a site and our prospects for future growth and success.

In order to help ensure the viability of proceeding with a project, we gauge the interest of our retail partners first. Historically, we required that at least 50% of the space in each center is pre-leased prior to acquiring the site and beginning construction. Given the current economic environment, we are taking a cautionary approach to development in order to insure the success of our future projects. Our pre-leasing policy is consistent with our conservative financing perspective and the discipline we impose upon ourselves. Construction of a new factory outlet center has normally taken us nine to twelve months from groundbreaking to the opening of the first tenant stores. Construction for expansion and renovation to existing properties typically takes less time, usually between six to nine months depending on the scope of the project.

Acquiring Centers

As a means of creating a presence in key markets and to create unitholder value, we may selectively choose to acquire individual properties or portfolios of properties that meet our strategic investment criteria. We believe that our extensive experience in the outlet center business, access to capital markets, familiarity with real estate markets and our management experience will allow us to evaluate and execute our acquisition strategy successfully over time. Through our tenant relationships, our leasing professionals have the ability to implement a remerchandising strategy when needed to increase occupancy rates and value. We believe that our managerial skills, marketing expertise and overall outlet industry experience will also allow us to add long-term value and viability to these centers.

Operating Strategy

Increasing cash flow to enhance the value of our properties and operations remains a primary business objective. Through targeted marketing and operational efficiencies, we strive to improve sales and profitability for our tenants and our shopping centers as a whole. Achieving higher base and percentage rents and generating additional income from temporary leasing, vending and other sources also remains an important focus and goal.

Leasing

The long-standing retailer relationships that we enjoy allow us the ability to provide our shoppers with a collection of the world’s most popular outlet stores. Tanger customers shop and save on their favorite brand name merchandise including men's, women's and children's ready-to-wear, lifestyle apparel, footwear, jewelry & accessories, tableware, housewares, luggage and domestic goods. In order that our centers can perform at a high level, our leasing professionals continually monitor and evaluate tenant mix, store size, store location and sales performance. They also work to assist our tenants through re-sizing and re-location of retail space within each of our centers for maximum sales of each retail unit across our portfolio.

Marketing

Our marketing plans deliver compelling, well-crafted messages or enticing promotions and events to targeted audiences for tangible, meaningful and measurable results. Our plans are based on a basic measure of success – increase sales and traffic for our retail partners and we will create successful centers. Utilizing a strategic mix of print, radio, television, direct mail, website, internet advertising and public relations, we consistently reinforce the message that “Tanger is the place to shop for the best brands and the biggest outlet savings - direct from the manufacturer”. Our marketing efforts are also designed to build loyalty with current Tanger shoppers and create awareness with potential customers. The majority of consumer-marketing expenses incurred by us are reimbursable by our tenants.

Capital Strategy

We believe we achieve a strong and flexible financial position by attempting to: (1) manage our leverage position relative to our portfolio when pursuing new development and expansion opportunities, (2) extend and sequence debt maturities, (3) manage our interest rate risk through a proper mix of fixed and variable rate debt, (4) maintain access to our liquidity by using our lines of credit in a conservative manner and (5) preserve internally generated sources of capital by strategically divesting our underperforming assets and maintaining a conservative distribution payout ratio.

Our goal is to retain the ability to raise additional capital, including public debt or equity, to pursue attractive investment opportunities that may arise and to otherwise act in a manner that we believe to be in our unitholders’ best interests. We believe our current balance sheet position is financially sound; however, due to the current weakness and unpredictability in the capital and credit markets, we can give no assurance that affordable access to capital will exist between now and 2011 when our next debt maturities occur. As a result, our current primary focus is to strengthen our capital and liquidity position by controlling and reducing construction and overhead costs, generating positive cash flows from operations to cover our distributions and reducing outstanding debt.

At the Company’s 2007 Annual Shareholders’ Meeting, shareholders approved an increase in the Company’s authorized common shares from 50.0 million to 150.0 million and added four additional classes of preferred shares with an authorized number of four million shares each. All proceeds from the Company’s common and preferred share issuances are contributed to the Operating Partnership in exchange for common and preferred units. We, together with the Company, have a joint shelf registration that allows us to register unspecified amounts of different classes of securities on Form S-3. We intend to update our shelf registration during the second quarter of 2009. To generate capital to reinvest into other attractive investment opportunities, we may also consider the use of additional operational and developmental joint ventures, the sale or lease of outparcels on our existing properties and the sale of certain properties that do not meet our long-term investment criteria. Based on cash provided by operations, existing credit facilities, ongoing negotiations with certain financial institutions and our ability to sell debt or equity subject to market conditions, we believe that we have access to the necessary financing to fund the planned capital expenditures during 2009.

Competition

We carefully consider the degree of existing and planned competition in a proposed area before deciding to develop, acquire or expand a new center. Our centers compete for customers primarily with factory outlet centers built and operated by different developers, traditional shopping malls and full- and off-price retailers. However, we believe that the majority of our customers visit factory outlet centers because they are intent on buying name-brand products at discounted prices. Traditional full- and off-price retailers are often unable to provide such a variety of name-brand products at attractive prices.

Tenants of factory outlet centers typically avoid direct competition with major retailers and their own specialty stores, and, therefore, generally insist that the outlet centers be located not less than 10 miles from the nearest major department store or the tenants’ own specialty stores. For this reason, our centers compete only to a very limited extent with traditional malls in or near metropolitan areas.

We compete with two large national owners of factory outlet centers and numerous small owners. During the last several years, the factory outlet industry has been consolidating with smaller, less capitalized operators struggling to compete with, or being acquired by, larger, national factory outlet operators. High barriers to entry in the factory outlet industry, including the need for extensive relationships with premier brand name manufacturers, have minimized the number of new factory outlet centers. This consolidation trend and the high barriers to entry, along with our national presence, access to capital and extensive tenant relationships, have allowed us to grow our business and improve our market position.

Corporate and Regional Headquarters

We rent space in an office building in Greensboro, North Carolina in which our corporate headquarters are located. In addition, we rent a regional office in New York City, New York under a lease agreement and sublease agreement to better service our principal fashion-related tenants, many of whom are based in and around that area.

We maintain offices and employ on-site managers at 31 centers. The managers closely monitor the operation, marketing and local relationships at each of their centers.

Insurance

We believe that as a whole our properties are covered by adequate comprehensive liability, fire, flood, earthquake and extended loss insurance provided by reputable companies with commercially reasonable and customary deductibles and limits. Northline Indemnity, LLC, or Northline, a wholly-owned captive insurance subsidiary of the Operating Partnership, is responsible for losses up to certain levels for property damage (including wind damage from hurricanes) prior to third-party insurance coverage. Specified types and amounts of insurance are required to be carried by each tenant under their lease agreement with us. There are however, types of losses, like those resulting from wars or nuclear radiation, which may either be uninsurable or not economically insurable in some or all of our locations. An uninsured loss could result in a loss to us of both our capital investment and anticipated profits from the affected property.

Employees

As of February 1, 2009, we had 207 full-time employees, located at our corporate headquarters in North Carolina, our regional office in New York and our 31 business offices. At that date, we also employed 233 part-time employees at various locations.

Item 1A. Risk Factors

Risks Related to our Business

We face competition for the acquisition of factory outlet centers, and we may not be able to complete acquisitions that we have identified.

One component of our business strategy is expansion through acquisitions, and we may not be successful in completing acquisitions that are consistent with our strategy. We compete with institutional pension funds, private equity investors, other REITs, small owners of factory outlet centers, specialty stores and others who are engaged in the acquisition, development or ownership of factory outlet centers and stores. These competitors may affect the supply/demand dynamics and, accordingly, increase the price we must pay for factory outlet centers we seek to acquire. These competitors may succeed in acquiring those factory outlet centers themselves. Also, our potential acquisition targets may find our competitors to be more attractive acquirers because they may have greater marketing and financial resources, may be willing to pay more, or may have a more compatible operating philosophy. In addition, the number of entities competing for factory outlet centers may increase in the future, which would increase demand for these factory outlet centers and the prices we must pay to acquire them. If we pay higher prices for factory outlet centers, our profitability may be reduced. Also, once we have identified potential acquisitions, such acquisitions are subject to the successful completion of due diligence, the negotiation of definitive agreements and the satisfaction of customary closing conditions. We cannot assure you that we will be able to reach acceptable terms with the sellers or that these conditions will be satisfied.

The economic performance and the market value of our factory outlet centers are dependent on risks associated with real property investments.

Real property investments are subject to varying degrees of risk. The economic performance and values of real estate may be affected by many factors, including changes in the national, regional and local economic climate, inflation, unemployment rates, consumer confidence, local conditions such as an oversupply of space or a reduction in demand for real estate in the area, the attractiveness of the properties to tenants, competition from other available space, our ability to provide adequate maintenance and insurance and increased operating costs.

Real property investments are relatively illiquid.

Our factory outlet centers represent a substantial portion of our total consolidated assets. These assets are relatively illiquid. As a result, our ability to sell one or more of our factory outlet centers in response to any changes in economic or other conditions is limited. If we want to sell a factory outlet center, there can be no assurance that we will be able to dispose of it in the desired time period or that the sales price will exceed the cost of our investment.

Our earnings and therefore our profitability are entirely dependent on rental income from real property.

Substantially all of our income is derived from rental income from real property. Our income and funds for distribution would be adversely affected if a significant number of our tenants were unable to meet their obligations to us or if we were unable to lease a significant amount of space in our centers on economically favorable lease terms. In addition, the terms of factory outlet store tenant leases traditionally have been significantly shorter than in other retail segments. There can be no assurance that any tenant whose lease expires in the future will renew such lease or that we will be able to re-lease space on economically favorable terms.

We are subject to the risks associated with debt financing.

We are subject to the risks associated with debt financing, including the risk that the cash provided by our operating activities will be insufficient to meet required payments of principal and interest. If the national and world-wide financial crisis continues, disruptions in the capital and credit markets may adversely affect our operations, including the ability to fund the planned capital expenditures and potential new developments or acquisitions. Further, there is the risk that we will not be able to repay or refinance existing indebtedness or that the terms of any refinancing will not be as favorable as the terms of existing indebtedness. If we are unable to access capital markets to refinance our indebtedness on acceptable terms, we might be forced to dispose of properties on disadvantageous terms, which might result in losses.

We are substantially dependent on the results of operations of our retailers.

Our operations are necessarily subject to the results of operations of our retail tenants. A portion of our rental revenues are derived from percentage rents that directly depend on the sales volume of certain tenants. Accordingly, declines in these tenants' results of operations would reduce the income produced by our properties. If the sales of our retail tenants decline sufficiently, such tenants may be unable to pay their existing rents as such rents would represent a higher percentage of their sales. Any resulting leasing delays, failures to make payments or tenant bankruptcies could result in the termination of such tenants' leases.

A number of companies in the retail industry, including some of our tenants, have declared bankruptcy or have voluntarily closed certain of their stores in recent years. The bankruptcy of a major tenant or number of tenants may result in the closing of certain affected stores, and we may not be able to re-lease the resulting vacant space for some time or for equal or greater rent. Such bankruptcy could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and could result in a lower level of funds for distribution.

The Company is required by law to make distributions to its shareholders and therefore we must make distributions to the Company.

To obtain the favorable tax treatment associated with its qualification as a REIT, generally, the Company is required to distribute to its common and preferred shareholders at least 90.0% of its net taxable income (excluding capital gains) each year. The Company depends upon distributions or other payments from us to make distributions to its common and preferred shareholders.

We may be unable to develop new factory outlet centers or expand existing factory outlet centers successfully.

We continue to develop new factory outlet centers and expand factory outlet centers as opportunities arise. However, there are significant risks associated with our development activities in addition to those generally associated with the ownership and operation of established retail properties. While we have policies in place designed to limit the risks associated with development, these policies do not mitigate all development risks associated with a project. These risks include the following:

• significant expenditure of money and time on projects that may be delayed or never be completed;

• higher than projected construction costs;

• shortage of construction materials and supplies;

•	failure to obtain zoning, occupancy or other governmental approvals or to the extent required, tenant approvals; and

•	late completion because of construction delays, delays in the receipt of zoning, occupancy and other approvals or other factors outside of our control.

Any or all of these factors may impede our development strategy and adversely affect our overall business.

An uninsured loss or a loss that exceeds our insurance policies on our factory outlet centers or the insurance policies of our tenants could subject us to lost capital or revenue on those centers.

Some of the risks to which our factory outlet centers are subject, including risks of war and earthquakes, hurricanes and other natural disasters, are not insurable or may not be insurable in the future. Should a loss occur that is uninsured or in an amount exceeding the combined aggregate limits for the insurance policies noted above or in the event of a loss that is subject to a substantial deductible under an insurance policy, we could lose all or part of our capital invested in and anticipated revenue from one or more of our factory outlet centers, which could adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition, as well as our ability to make distributions to our unitholders.

Under the terms and conditions of our leases, tenants generally are required to indemnify and hold us harmless from liabilities resulting from injury to persons and contamination of air, water, land or property, on or off the premises, due to activities conducted in the leased space, except for claims arising from negligence or intentional misconduct by us or our agents. Additionally, tenants generally are required, at the tenant's expense, to obtain and keep in full force during the term of the lease, liability and property damage insurance policies issued by companies acceptable to us. These policies include liability coverage for bodily injury and property damage arising out of the ownership, use, occupancy or maintenance of the leased space. All of these policies may involve substantial deductibles and certain exclusions. Therefore, an uninsured loss or loss that exceeds the insurance policies of our tenants could also subject us to lost capital or revenue.

We may be subject to environmental regulation.

Under various federal, state and local laws, ordinances and regulations, we may be considered an owner or operator of real property and may be responsible for paying for the disposal or treatment of hazardous or toxic substances released on or in our property or disposed of by us, as well as certain other potential costs which could relate to hazardous or toxic substances (including governmental fines and injuries to persons and property). This liability may be imposed whether or not we knew about, or were responsible for, the presence of hazardous or toxic substances.

Historically high fuel prices may impact consumer travel and spending habits.

Our markets recently experienced historically high fuel prices. Most shoppers use private automobile transportation to travel to our factory outlet centers and many of our centers are not easily accessible by public transportation. Increasing fuel costs may reduce the number of trips to our centers thus reducing the amount spent at our centers. Many of our factory outlet center locations near tourist destinations may experience an even more acute reduction of shoppers if there were a reduction of people opting to drive to vacation destinations. Such reductions in traffic could adversely impact our percentage rents and ability to renew and release space at current rental rates.

Increasing fuel costs may also reduce disposable income and decrease demand for retail products. Such a decrease could adversely affect the results of operations of our retail tenants and adversely impact our percentage rents and ability to renew and release space at current rental rates.

Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments

There are no unresolved staff comments from the Commission.

Item 2. Properties

As of February 1, 2009, our wholly-owned portfolio consisted of 31 outlet centers totaling 9.2 million square feet located in 21 states. We operate and own interests in two other centers totaling approximately 950,000 square feet through unconsolidated joint ventures. Our centers range in size from 24,619 to 729,315 square feet. The centers are generally located near tourist destinations or along major interstate highways to provide visibility and accessibility to potential customers.

We believe that the centers are well diversified geographically and by tenant and that we are not dependent upon any single property or tenant. Our Foley, Alabama and Riverhead, New York centers are the only properties that represented more than 10% of our consolidated total assets or consolidated total revenues as of December 31, 2008. See “Business and Properties - Significant Property”.

We have an ongoing strategy of acquiring centers, developing new centers and expanding existing centers. See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations--Liquidity and Capital Resources” for a discussion of the cost of such programs and the sources of financing thereof.

With the acquisition of the remaining 50% interest in the Myrtle Beach Hwy 17 joint venture in January 2009, we now have one center which serves as collateral for a mortgage note payable. Of the 31 outlet centers in our wholly-owned portfolio, we own the land underlying twenty-seven and have ground leases on four. The land on which the Sevierville center is located is subject to long-term ground leases expiring in 2046. The land parcel on which the original Riverhead center is located, approximately 47 acres, is also subject to a ground lease with an initial term that was automatically renewed for an additional five years in 2004, with renewal at our option for up to six more additional terms of five years each. Terms on the Riverhead center ground lease are renewed automatically unless we give notice otherwise. The land parcel on which the Riverhead center expansion is located, containing approximately 43 acres, is owned by us. The 2.7 acre land parcel on which part of the Rehoboth Beach center is located, is also subject to a ground lease with an initial term expiring in 2044, with renewal at our option for additional terms of twenty years each. The approximately 40 acre land parcel on which the Myrtle Beach Hwy 17 center is located is subject to a ground lease with an initial term that expires in 2026 and contains provisions for seven successive renewal options of ten years each.

The initial term of our typical tenant lease averages approximately five years. Generally, leases provide for the payment of fixed monthly rent in advance. There are often contractual base rent increases during the initial term of the lease. In addition, the rental payments are customarily subject to upward adjustments based upon tenant sales volume. Most leases provide for payment by the tenant of real estate taxes, insurance, common area maintenance, advertising and promotion expenses incurred by the applicable center. As a result, the majority of our operating expenses for the centers are borne by the tenants.

The following table summarizes certain information with respect to our wholly-owned outlet centers as of February 1, 2009.

State	Number of Centers	Square Feet	% of Square Feet
South Carolina	4	1,569,268	17
Georgia	3	826,643	9
New York	1	729,315	8
Pennsylvania	2	625,678	7
Texas	2	619,806	7
Delaware	1	568,869	6
Alabama	1	557,185	6
Michigan	2	436,751	5
Tennessee	1	419,038	4
Missouri	1	302,992	3
Utah	1	298,379	3
Connecticut	1	291,051	3
Louisiana	1	282,403	3
Iowa	1	277,230	3
Oregon	1	270,280	3
Illinois	1	256,514	3
New Hampshire	1	245,563	3
Florida	1	198,950	2
North Carolina	2	186,413	2
California	1	171,300	2
Maine	2	84,313	1
Total	31	9,217,941	100

The following table summarizes certain information with respect to our existing outlet centers in which we have an ownership interest as of February 1, 2009. Except as noted, all properties are fee owned.

Location	Square Feet	% Occupied
Wholly-Owned Outlet Centers
Riverhead, New York (1)	729,315	97
Rehoboth, Delaware (1)	568,869	98
Foley, Alabama	557,185	92
San Marcos, Texas	442,006	98
Myrtle Beach Hwy 501, South Carolina	426,417	88
Sevierville, Tennessee (1)	419,038	98
Myrtle Beach Hwy 17, South Carolina (1)	402,442	100
Hilton Head, South Carolina	388,094	89
Washington, Pennsylvania	370,526	83
Charleston, South Carolina	352,315	94
Commerce II, Georgia	347,025	94
Howell, Michigan	324,631	98
Branson, Missouri	302,992	96
Park City, Utah	298,379	100
Locust Grove, Georgia	293,868	97
Westbrook, Connecticut	291,051	96
Gonzales, Louisiana	282,403	100
Williamsburg, Iowa	277,230	99
Lincoln City, Oregon	270,280	95
Tuscola, Illinois	256,514	80
Lancaster, Pennsylvania	255,152	100
Tilton, New Hampshire	245,563	98
Fort Meyers, Florida	198,950	96
Commerce I, Georgia	185,750	72
Terrell, Texas	177,800	97
Barstow, California	171,300	100
West Branch, Michigan	112,120	98
Blowing Rock, North Carolina	104,235	100
Nags Head, North Carolina	82,178	97
Kittery I, Maine	59,694	100
Kittery II, Maine	24,619	100
	9,217,941	95 (2)
Unconsolidated Joint Ventures
Wisconsin Dells, Wisconsin (50% owned)	264,929	97
Deer Park, New York (33.3% owned) (3)	684,952	78

(1)	These properties or a portion thereof are subject to a ground lease.

(2)	Excludes the occupancy rate at our Washington, Pennsylvania outlet center which opened during the third quarter of 2008 and has not yet stabilized.

(3)	Includes a 29,253 square foot warehouse adjacent to the property utilized to support the operations of the retail tenants.

Lease Expirations

The following table sets forth, as of February 1, 2009, scheduled lease expirations for our wholly-owned outlet centers, assuming none of the tenants exercise renewal options.

Year	No. of Leases Expiring	Approx. Square Feet(1)	Average Annualized Base Rent per sq. ft	Annualized Base Rent (2)	% of Gross Annualized Base Rent Represented by Expiring Leases
2009	178	689,000	$ 17.09	$ 11,777,000	8
2010	318	1,315,000	17.98	23,642,000	16
2011	324	1,503,000	16.75	25,168,000	16
2012	313	1,491,000	16.90	25,191,000	16
2013	330	1,488,000	19.39	28,859,000	19
2014	126	643,000	16.82	10,815,000	7
2015	40	179,000	18.50	3,311,000	2
2016	45	194,000	20.61	3,999,000	3
2017	63	269,000	20.93	5,630,000	4
2018	63	286,000	27.77	7,942,000	5
2019 & thereafter	48	271,000	23.63	6,404,000	4
	1,848	8,328,000	$18.34	$152,738,000	100

(1)	Excludes leases that have been entered into but which tenant has not yet taken possession, vacant suites, space under construction, temporary leases and month-to-month leases totaling in the aggregate approximately 890,000 square feet.
(2)	Annualized base rent is defined as the minimum monthly payments due as of February 1, 2009 annualized, excluding periodic contractual fixed increases and rents calculated based on a percentage of tenants’ sales.

Rental and Occupancy Rates

The following table sets forth information regarding the expiring leases for our wholly-owned outlet centers during each of the last five calendar years.

	Total Expiring		Renewed by Existing Tenants
Year	Square Feet	% of Total Center Square Feet	Square Feet	% of Expiring Square Feet
2008	1,350,000	16	1,103,000	82
2007	1,572,000	19	1,246,000	79
2006	1,760,000	21	1,466,000	83
2005	1,812,000	22	1,525,000	84
2004	1,790,000	20	1,571,000	88

The following tables set forth the weighted average base rental rate increases per square foot on both a cash and straight-line basis for our wholly-owned outlet centers upon re-leasing stores that were turned over or renewed during each of the last five calendar years.

Cash Basis (excludes periodic, contractual fixed rent increases)

	Renewals of Existing Leases						Stores Re-leased to New Tenants (1)
		Average Annualized Base Rents								Average Annualized Base Rents
		($ per sq. ft.)								($ per sq. ft.)
Year	Square Feet	Expiring	New	% Increase		Square Feet			Expiring			New	% Increase
2008	1,103,000	$ 17.33	$ 19.69	14	492,000			$ 18.39			$ 24.48		33
2007	1,246,000	$ 16.11	$ 17.85	11	610,000			$ 17.07			$ 22.26		30
2006	1,466,000	$ 15.91	$ 17.22	8	465,000			$ 16.43			$ 19.16		17
2005	1,525,000	$ 15.44	$ 16.37	6	419,000			$ 16.56			$ 17.74		7
2004	1,571,000	$ 13.63	$ 14.40	6	427,000			$ 16.43			$ 17.27		5

Straight-line Basis (includes periodic, contractual fixed rent increases) (2)

	Renewals of Existing Leases						Stores Re-leased to New Tenants (1)
		Average Annualized Base Rents								Average Annualized Base Rents
		($ per sq. ft.)								($ per sq. ft.)
Year	Square Feet	Expiring	New	% Increase		Square Feet			Expiring			New	% Increase
2008	1,103,000	$ 17.29	$ 20.31	17	492,000			$ 18.03			$ 25.97		44
2007	1,246,000	$ 15.94	$ 18.15	14	610,000			$ 16.75			$ 23.41		40
2006	1,466,000	$ 15.65	$ 17.43	11	465,000			$ 16.19			$ 19.90		23

(1)	The square footage released to new tenants for 2008, 2007, 2006, 2005 and 2004 contains 139,000, 164,000, 129,000, 112,000 and 94,000 square feet, respectively, that was released to new tenants upon expiration of an existing lease during the current year.
(2)	Information not available prior to 2006.

Occupancy Costs

We believe that our ratio of average tenant occupancy cost (which includes base rent, common area maintenance, real estate taxes, insurance, advertising and promotions) to average sales per square foot is low relative to other forms of retail distribution. The following table sets forth for tenants that report sales, for each of the last five years, tenant occupancy costs per square foot as a percentage of reported tenant sales per square foot for our wholly-owned centers.

Year	Occupancy Costs as a % of Tenant Sales
2008	8.2
2007	7.7
2006	7.4
2005	7.5
2004	7.3

Tenants

The following table sets forth certain information for our wholly-owned centers with respect to our ten largest tenants and their store concepts as of February 1, 2009.

Tenant		Number of Stores	Square Feet	% of Total Square Feet
The Gap, Inc.:
	Old Navy	22	331,512	3.6
	GAP	25	242,128	2.6
	Banana Republic	20	167,542	1.8
	Gap Kids	6	35,349	0.4
		73	776,531	8.4
Phillips-Van Heusen Corporation:
	Bass Shoe	29	186,518	2.0
	Van Heusen	28	113,357	1.2
	Calvin Klein, Inc.	14	76,891	0.9
	Izod	18	48,952	0.5
	Geoffrey Beene Co. Store	3	13,380	0.2
		92	439,098	4.8
VF Outlet Inc.:
	VF Outlet	8	199,541	2.2
	Nautica Factory Stores	20	95,916	1.0
	Vans	4	12,000	0.1
	Nautica Kids	2	5,841	*
		34	313,298	3.3
Nike:
	Nike	21	295,724	3.2
	Cole-Haan	3	9,223	0.1
	Converse	1	3,158	*
		25	308,105	3.3
Adidas:
	Reebok	22	208,058	2.3
	Adidas	8	74,030	0.8
	Rockport	4	12,046	0.1
		34	294,134	3.2
Liz Claiborne:
	Liz Claiborne	23	240,409	2.6
	Lucky Brand Jeans	4	12,106	0.1
	DKNY Jeans	2	5,820	0.1
	Juicy	2	5,275	0.1
	Liz Claiborne Women	1	3,100	0.1
	Liz Golf	1	2,884	*
	Kate Spade	1	2,500	*
		34	272,094	3.0
Dress Barn, Inc.:
	Dress Barn	25	199,553	2.2
	Maurice’s	9	36,027	0.4
	Dress Barn Woman	3	18,572	0.2
	Dress Barn Petite	2	9,570	0.1
		39	263,722	2.9
Carter’s:
	OshKosh B”Gosh	24	122,282	1.3
	Carter’s	23	107,223	1.2
		47	229,505	2.5
Jones Retail Corporation:
	Nine West	21	53,827	0.6
	Jones Retail Corporation	16	56,020	0.6
	Easy Spirit	18	48,675	0.5
	Kasper	12	29,803	0.3
	Anne Klein	8	19,605	0.2
		75	207,930	2.2
Polo Ralph Lauren:
	Polo Ralph Lauren	21	189,669	2.1
	Polo Jeans Outlet	1	5,000	0.1
	Polo Ralph Lauren Children	1	3,000	*
		23	197,669	2.2

Total of all tenants listed in table		476	3,302,086	35.8

* Less than 0.1%.

Significant Property

The Foley, Alabama and Riverhead, New York centers are the only properties that comprise more than 10% of our consolidated gross revenues or consolidated total assets. The Foley outlet center, acquired in December 2003, represented 10% of our consolidated total assets as of December 31, 2008. The Foley outlet center is 557,185 square feet and underwent a major reconfiguration and renovation in 2007 and 2008. The Riverhead center, originally constructed in 1994, represented 12% of our consolidated total revenues for the year ended December 31, 2008. The Riverhead center is 729,315 square feet.

Tenants at the Foley and Riverhead outlet centers principally conduct retail sales operations. The following table shows occupancy and certain base rental information related to these properties as of December 31, 2008, 2007 and 2006:

Center Occupancy	2008	2007	2006
Foley, AL	93%	97%	98%
Riverhead, NY	98%	100%	100%

Average base rental rates per weighted average square foot	2008	2007	2006
Foley, AL	$ 19.18	$ 19.13	$ 18.23
Riverhead, NY	$ 25.36	$ 23.59	$ 23.09

Depreciation on the outlet centers is computed on the straight-line basis over the estimated useful lives of the assets. We generally use estimated lives ranging from 25 to 33 years for buildings, 15 years for land improvements and seven years for equipment. Expenditures for ordinary maintenance and repairs are charged to operations as incurred while significant renovations and improvements, including tenant finishing allowances, which improve and/or extend the useful life of the asset are capitalized and depreciated over their estimated useful life. At December 31, 2008, the net federal tax basis of the Foley and Riverhead centers was approximately $123.0 million and $69.8 million, respectively. Real estate taxes assessed on these centers during 2008 amounted to $4.1 million. Real estate taxes for 2009 are estimated to be approximately $4.2 million.

The following table sets forth, as of February 1, 2009, combined, scheduled lease expirations at the Foley and Riverhead outlet centers assuming that none of the tenants exercise renewal options:

Year		No. of Leases Expiring (1)		Square Feet (1)		Annualized Base Rent per Square Foot	Annualized Base Rent (2)	% of Gross Annualized Base Rent Represented by Expiring Leases
2009	28		100,000		$ 23.86		$ 2,386,000	9
2010	42		171,000		23.25		3,975,000	15
2011	32		156,000		19.57		3,053,000	11
2012	55		249,000		22.76		5,667,000	21
2013	38		205,000		23.13		4,741,000	17
2014	19		103,000		19.06		1,963,000	7
2015	8		36,000		25.67		924,000	3
2016	8		25,000		28.88		722,000	3
2017	11		47,000		30.36		1,427,000	5
2018	11		43,000		31.79		1,367,000	5
2019 and thereafter	6		34,000		31.38		1,067,000	4
Total	258		1,169,000		$ 23.35		$ 27,292,000	100

(1) Excludes leases that have been entered into but which tenant has not taken possession, vacant suites, temporary leases and month-to-month leases totaling in the aggregate approximately 117,000 square feet.

(2) Annualized base rent is defined as the minimum monthly payments due as of February 1, 2009, excluding periodic contractual fixed increases and rents calculated based on a percentage of tenants’ sales.

Item 3.

Legal Proceedings

We are subject to legal proceedings and claims that have arisen in the ordinary course of our business and have not been finally adjudicated. In our opinion, the ultimate resolution of these matters will have no material effect on our results of operations or financial condition.

Item 4.

Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders

There were no matters submitted to a vote of security holders, through solicitation of proxies or otherwise, during the fourth quarter of the fiscal year ended December 31, 2008.

EXECUTIVE OFFICERS OF THE COMPANY

The Operating Partnership does not have any officers. The following table sets forth certain information concerning the executive officers of the Company which controls the Operating Partnership through its ownership of the general partner, Tanger GP Trust:

NAME	AGE	POSITION
Stanley K. Tanger	85	Founder and Chairman of the Board of Directors
Steven B Tanger	60	Director, President and Chief Executive Officer
Frank C. Marchisello, Jr.	50	Executive Vice President – Chief Financial Officer and Secretary
Joseph N. Nehmen	60	Senior Vice President – Operations
Carrie A. Warren	46	Senior Vice President – Marketing
Kevin M. Dillon	50	Senior Vice President – Construction and Development
Lisa J. Morrison	49	Senior Vice President – Leasing
James F. Williams	44	Senior Vice President – Controller
Virginia R. Summerell	50	Vice President – Treasurer and Assistant Secretary

The following is a biographical summary of the experience of the executive officers of the Company:

Stanley K. Tanger. Mr. Tanger is the founder and Chairman of the Board of Directors of the Company. He also served as Chief Executive Officer from inception of the Company to December 2008 and President from inception to December 1994. Mr. Tanger opened one of the country’s first outlet shopping centers in Burlington, North Carolina in 1981. Before entering the factory outlet center business, Mr. Tanger was President and Chief Executive Officer of his family’s apparel manufacturing business, Tanger/Creighton, Inc., for 30 years.

Steven B. Tanger. Mr. Tanger is a director of the Company and was named President and Chief Executive Officer effective January 1, 2009. Mr. Tanger served as President and Chief Operating Officer from January 1, 1995 to December 2008. Previously, Mr. Tanger served as Executive Vice President from 1986 to December 1994. He has been with Tanger-related companies for most of his professional career, having served as Executive Vice President of Tanger/Creighton for 10 years. He is responsible for all phases of project development, including site selection, land acquisition and development, leasing, marketing and overall management of existing outlet centers. Mr. Tanger is a graduate of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and the Stanford University School of Business Executive Program. Mr. Tanger is the son of Stanley K. Tanger.

Frank C. Marchisello, Jr. Mr. Marchisello was named Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer in April 2003 and was additionally named Secretary in May 2005. Previously he was named Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer in January 1999 after being named Vice President and Chief Financial Officer in November 1994. Previously, he served as Chief Accounting Officer from January 1993 to November 1994. He was employed by Gilliam, Coble & Moser, certified public accountants, from 1981 to 1992, the last six years of which he was a partner of the firm in charge of various real estate clients. Mr. Marchisello is a graduate of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and is a certified public accountant.

Joseph H. Nehmen. Mr. Nehmen was named Senior Vice President - Operations in January 1999. He joined the Company in September 1995 and was named Vice President of Operations in October 1995. Mr. Nehmen has over 20 years experience in private business. Prior to joining Tanger, Mr. Nehmen was owner of Merchants Wholesaler, a privately held distribution company in St. Louis, Missouri. He is a graduate of Washington University. Mr. Nehmen is the son-in-law of Stanley K. Tanger and brother-in-law of Steven B. Tanger.

Carrie A. Warren. Ms. Warren was named Senior Vice President - Marketing in May 2000. Previously, she held the position of Vice President – Marketing from September 1996 to May 2000 and Assistant Vice President - Marketing from December 1995 to September 1996. Prior to joining Tanger, Ms. Warren was with Prime Retail, L.P. for 4 years where she served as Regional Marketing Director responsible for coordinating and directing marketing for five outlet centers in the southeast region. Prior to joining Prime Retail, L.P., Ms. Warren was Marketing Manager for North Hills, Inc. for five years and also served in the same role for the Edward J. DeBartolo Corp. for two years. Ms. Warren is a graduate of East Carolina University.

Kevin M. Dillon. Mr. Dillon was named Senior Vice President – Construction and Development in August 2004. Previously, he held the positions of Vice President – Construction and Development from May 2002 to August 2004, Vice President – Construction from October 1997 to May 2002, Director of Construction from September 1996 to October 1997 and Construction Manager from November 1993, the month he joined the Company, to September 1996. Prior to joining the Company, Mr. Dillon was employed by New Market Development Company for six years where he served as Senior Project Manager. Prior to joining New Market, Mr. Dillon was the Development Director of Western Development Company where he spent 6 years.

Lisa J. Morrison. Ms. Morrison was named Senior Vice President – Leasing in August 2004. Previously, she held the positions of Vice President – Leasing from May 2001 to August 2004, Assistant Vice President of Leasing from August 2000 to May 2001 and Director of Leasing from April 1999 until August 2000. Prior to joining the Company, Ms. Morrison was employed by the Taubman Company and Trizec Properties, Inc. where she served as a leasing agent. Her major responsibilities include managing the leasing strategies for our operating properties, as well as expansions and new development. She also oversees the leasing personnel and the merchandising and occupancy for Tanger properties.

James F. Williams. Mr. Williams was named Senior Vice President and Controller in February 2006. Mr. Williams joined the Company in September 1993, was named Controller in January 1995 and was also named Assistant Vice President in January 1997 and Vice President in April 2004. Prior to joining the Company Mr. Williams was the Financial Reporting Manager of Guilford Mills, Inc. from April 1991 to September 1993 and was employed by Arthur Andersen for 5 years from 1987 to 1991. Mr. Williams graduated from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in December 1986 and is a certified public accountant.

Virginia R. Summerell. Ms. Summerell was named Vice President, Treasurer and Assistant Secretary of the Company in May 2005. Since joining the Company in August 1992, she has held various positions including Treasurer, Assistant Secretary and Director of Finance. Her major responsibilities include developing and maintaining banking relationships, oversight of all project and corporate finance transactions and management of treasury systems. Previously she served as a Vice President and in other capacities at Bank of America and its predecessors in Real Estate and Corporate Lending for nine years. Ms. Summerell is a graduate of Davidson College and holds an MBA from the Babcock School at Wake Forest University.

PART II

Item 5.

Market For Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Shareholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

Market Information

There is no established public trading market for our common or preferred units. As of December 31, 2008, the Company’s wholly-owned subsidiaries, Tanger GP Trust and Tanger LP Trust, owned 15,833,751 common units and Tanger Family Limited Partnership owned 3,033,305 common units as a limited partner. We made distributions per common unit during 2008 and 2007 as follows:

	2008	2007
First Quarter	$ .72	$ .68
Second Quarter	.76	.72
Third Quarter	.76	.72
Fourth Quarter	.76	.72
	$ 3.00	$ 2.84

Distributions

The Company operates in a manner intended to enable it to qualify as a REIT under the Internal Revenue Code, or the Code. A REIT is required to distribute at least 90% of its taxable income to its shareholders each year. The Company depends upon distributions or payments from us to make distributions to its common and preferred shareholders. The Company intends to continue to qualify as a REIT and to distribute substantially all of its taxable income to its shareholders through the payment of regular quarterly dividends. Certain of our debt agreements limit the payment of distributions such that distributions shall not exceed funds from operations, or FFO, as defined in the agreements, for the prior fiscal year on an annual basis or 95% of FFO on a cumulative basis.

Securities Authorized for Issuance under Equity Compensation Plans

The information required by this Item is set forth in Part III Item 12 of this document.

Purchases of Equity Securities by the Issuer and Affiliated Purchasers

During 1998, the Company’s Board of Directors authorized the repurchase of up to $6 million of the Company’s common shares. The timing and amount of the repurchases is at the discretion of management. The Company has not made any repurchases since 1999 and the amount authorized for future repurchases remaining at December 31, 2007 totaled $4.8 million. Any amounts required to repurchase the Company’s common shares will be funded by us by redeeming one unit for every two common shares repurchased.

Item 6. Selected Financial Data

				2008		2007		2006		2005	2004
			(in thousands, except per unit and center data)
OPERATING DATA
	Total revenues		$ 245,391		$ 228,765		$ 210,962		$ 197,949		$ 189,651
	Operating income		78,904		71,565		68,942		73,769		68,961
	Income from continuing operations		32,403		32,972		29,435		7,678		7,742
	Net income		32,403		33,090		43,633		6,077		8,626
SHARE DATA
	Basic:
		Income from continuing operations	$ 1.44		$ 1.48		$ 1.31		$ .14		$ .47
		Net income available to common
		unitholders	$ 1.44		$ 1.49		$ 2.08		$ .32		$ .52
		Weighted average common units	18,575		18,444		18,333		17,223		16,555
	Diluted:
		Income from continuing operations	$ 1.43		$ 1.45		$ 1.29		$ .14		$ .47
		Net income available to common
		unitholders	$ 1.43		$ 1.46		$ 2.06		$ .32		$ .52
		Weighted average common units	18,715		18,868		18,574		17,341		16,650
	Common distributions paid		$ 3.00		$ 2.84		$ 2.69		$ 2.56		$ 2.49
BALANCE SHEET DATA
	Real estate assets, before depreciation		$ 1,399,529		$ 1,287,137		$ 1,216,847		$ 1,152,866		$1,077,393
	Total assets		1,121,569		1,059,978		1,040,635		1,000,363		936,105
	Debt		795,319		706,345		678,579		663,607		488,007
	Partners’ equity		257,377		282,937		313,700		299,581		196,754

OTHER DATA
	Cash flows provided by (used in):
		Operating activities	$ 96,964		$ 98,609		$ 88,354		$ 83,912		$ 84,774
		Investing activities	$ (133,483)		$ (84,803)		$ (63,336)		$ (336,563)		$ 2,607
		Financing activities	$ 39,078		$ (19,826)		$ (19,531)		$ 251,488		$ (93,156)

	Gross Leasable Area Open:
		Wholly-owned	8,820		8,398		8,388		8,261		5,066
		Partially-owned (consolidated)	---		---		---		---		3,271
		Partially-owned (unconsolidated)	1,352		667		667		402		402
		Managed	---		---		293		64		105

	Number of outlet centers:
		Wholly-owned	30		29		30		31		23
		Partially-owned (consolidated)	---		---		---		---		9
		Partially-owned (unconsolidated)	3		2		2		1		1
		Managed	---		---		3		1		3

In December 2003, COROC Holdings, LLC, or COROC, a joint venture in which we initially had a one-third ownership interest and consolidated for financial reporting purposes under the provisions of FIN 46R, purchased the 3.3 million square foot Charter Oak portfolio of outlet center properties for $491.0 million. In November 2005, we purchased for $286.0 million (including acquisition costs) the remaining two-thirds interest in this joint venture. The transaction was funded with a combination of Company common and preferred shares and senior unsecured notes.

Item 7.

Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

Cautionary Statements

Certain statements made below are forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act and Section 21E of the Exchange Act. We intend such forward-looking statements to be covered by the safe harbor provisions for forward-looking statements contained in the Private Securities Reform Act of 1995 and included this statement for purposes of complying with these safe harbor provisions. Forward-looking statements, which are based on certain assumptions and describe our future plans, strategies and expectations, are generally identifiable by use of the words ‘believe’, ‘expect’, ‘intend’, ‘anticipate’, ‘estimate’, ‘project’, or similar expressions. You should not rely on forward-looking statements since they involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors which are, in some cases, beyond our control and which could materially affect our actual results, performance or achievements. Factors which may cause actual results to differ materially from current expectations include, but are not limited to, those set forth under Item 1A – Risk Factors.

The following discussion should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements appearing elsewhere in this report. Historical results and percentage relationships set forth in the consolidated statements of operations, including trends which might appear, are not necessarily indicative of future operations.

General Overview

At December 31, 2008, we had 30 wholly-owned centers in 21 states totaling 8.8 million square feet compared to 29 centers in 21 states totaling 8.4 million square feet as of December 31, 2007. The changes in the number of centers, square feet and states are due to the following events:

			No. of Centers	Square feet (000’s)	States
As of December 31, 2007			29	8,398	21
	Center expansion:
		Barstow, California	---	55	---
	New development:
		Washington, Pennsylvania	1	371	---
	Other		---	(4)	---
As of December 31, 2008			30	8,820	21

Results of Operations

2008 Compared to 2007

Base rentals increased $12.2 million, or 8%, in the 2008 period compared to the 2007 period. Our base rental income increase was due mainly to increases in rental rates on lease renewals and incremental rents from re-tenanting vacant space. During the 2008 period, we executed 377 leases totaling approximately 1.6 million square feet at an average increase of 26% in base rental rates. This compares to our execution of 460 leases totaling approximately 1.9 million square feet at an average increase of 23% in base rental rates during the 2007 period. Base rentals also increased approximately $2.1 million due to the August 2008 opening of our new outlet center in Washington, Pennsylvania located south of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. In addition, during the fourth quarter of 2007 and first quarter of 2008, we added approximately 144,000 square feet of expansion space at existing outlet centers. The 2008 period includes a full year effect of additional base rent from these expansions.

In addition, the amount of termination fees recognized in the 2008 period was approximately $1.5 million higher when compared to the 2007 period due to several tenants terminating leases early. Payments received from the early termination of leases are recognized as revenue from the time the payment is receivable until the tenant vacates the space.

The values of the above and below market leases recorded as a result of our property acquisitions are amortized and recorded as either an increase (in the case of below market leases) or a decrease (in the case of above market leases) to rental income over the remaining term of the associated lease. For the 2008 period, we recorded $356,000 to rental income for the net amortization of market lease values compared with $1.1 million for the 2007 period. If a tenant vacates its space prior to the contractual termination of the lease and no rental payments are being made on the lease, any unamortized balance of the related above or below market lease value will be written off and could materially impact our net income positively or negatively. At December 31, 2008, the net liability representing the amount of unrecognized below market lease values totaled approximately $560,000.

Percentage rentals, which represent revenues based on a percentage of tenants' sales volume above predetermined levels (the "breakpoint"), decreased $1.7 million or 19%. Sales were negatively impacted by the general weakness in the U.S. economy during the 2008 period. Reported same-space sales per square foot for the twelve months ended December 31, 2008, excluding our center in Foley, Alabama and on Highway 501 in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, both of which have been going through major renovations, were $336 per square foot, a 1.6% decrease over the prior year. Same-space sales is defined as the weighted average sales per square foot reported in space open for the full duration of each comparison period. In addition, percentage rentals were negatively impacted by a significant number of tenants that renewed their leases at much higher base rental rates and, accordingly, had increases to their contractual breakpoint levels used in determining their percentage rentals. This essentially transformed a variable rent component into a fixed rent component.

Expense reimbursements represent the contractual recovery from tenants of certain common area maintenance, insurance, property tax, promotional, advertising and management expenses. Accordingly, these reimbursements generally fluctuate consistently with the related reimbursable property operating expenses to which they relate. Expense reimbursements increased $6.0 million, or 9%, in the 2008 period compared to the 2007 period. The 2008 period includes an increase in termination fees related to recoverable expenses of $738,000 compared to 2007. Excluding termination fees related to recoverable expenses and abandoned due diligence costs included in property operating expenses, expense reimbursements, expressed as a percentage of property operating expenses were 91% and 89% in the 2008 and 2007 periods, respectively. This increase is due to higher caps on recoveries of reimbursable expenses negotiated upon the renewal of leases by tenants.

Property operating expenses increased by $7.5 million, or 10%, in the 2008 period as compared to the 2007 period. Of this increase, $2.2 million relates incrementally to our Washington, PA outlet center which opened in August 2008. We also incurred a $3.9 million charge relating to due diligence costs associated with potential development and acquisition opportunities that we no longer deemed probable as compared to $646,000 in the 2007 period. Our common area maintenance costs increased as a result of higher snow removal costs and higher costs related to operating our mall offices at our outlet centers. Also, property taxes were higher at several centers where expansions completed during the fourth quarter of 2007 were included in the 2008 period valuation. Finally, our Charleston, SC outlet center, which opened in August 2006, was reassessed during 2008 for the first time at its completed value.

General and administrative expenses increased $3.3 million, or 17%, in the 2008 period as compared to the 2007 period. As a percentage of total revenues, general and administrative expenses were 9% and 8% in the 2008 and 2007 periods, respectively. The increase is primarily due to the amortization of share based compensation from restricted shares issued in late February 2008. In addition, the bonus compensation for the 2008 period was higher compared to the 2007 period based on an increase in the eligible bonus percentage for executives.

Depreciation and amortization decreased $1.5 million in the 2008 period compared to the 2007 period. Depreciation expense was unusually high during 2007, due to the reconfiguration of our center in Foley, Alabama. As a part of this plan, approximately 42,000 square feet of gross leasable area was relocated within the property. The depreciable useful lives of the buildings demolished were shortened to coincide with their demolition dates throughout the first three quarters of 2007 and this was accounted for as a change in accounting estimate. Accelerated depreciation recognized related to the reconfiguration was $6.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2007. The expected decrease in expense from the 2007 period from the acceleration was partially offset by additional depreciation from expansion assets placed in service during the fourth quarter of 2007 at several existing outlet centers and from the Washington, PA outlet center, which opened during August 2008.

Interest expense decreased $1.6 million, or 4%, in the 2008 period compared to the 2007 period. During June of 2008, we entered into a $235.0 million unsecured three year term loan facility. After entering into interest rate swap protection agreements, the facility bears a weighted average interest rate of 5.25%. The proceeds from this transaction were used to repay a $170.7 million secured mortgage bearing an effective interest rate of 5.18% and amounts outstanding under our unsecured lines of credit. We utilized unsecured lines of credit in February 2008 to repay our $100.0 million, 9.125% unsecured senior notes. Due to the above transactions and the decline in LIBOR rates during the year, we incurred a lower weighted average borrowing rate on a comparable basis between the 2008 and 2007 periods, which more than offset the increase in average debt outstanding from our expansion and development activities.

During the second quarter of 2008, we settled two interest rate lock protection agreements which were intended to fix the U.S. Treasury index at an average rate of 4.62% for 10 years for an aggregate $200 million of new public debt which was expected to be issued in July 2008. We originally entered into these agreements in 2005. Upon the closing of the LIBOR based unsecured term loan facility, we determined that we were unlikely to execute such a U.S. Treasury based debt offering. The settlement of the interest rate lock protection agreements, at a total cost of $8.9 million, was reflected as a loss on settlement of U.S. treasury rate locks in our consolidated statements of operations.

Equity in earnings of unconsolidated joint ventures decreased $621,000, or 42%, in the 2008 period as compared to the 2007 period. During the fourth quarter of 2008, the Tanger outlet center developed and operated by the joint venture, Deer Park, in which we have a 33.3% ownership interest, opened. The outlet center was approximately 78% occupied as of December 31, 2008. We recorded an equity loss of approximately $1.6 million related to Deer Park due to start up costs of operations and grand opening expenses. This loss was offset by increases in equity in earnings over the 2007 period from Myrtle Beach Hwy 17 and Wisconsin Dells. These increases were due to higher rental rates on lease renewals at Myrtle Beach Hwy 17 as well as lower interest rates and higher termination fees at Wisconsin Dells. The Myrtle Beach Hwy 17 and Wisconsin Dells outlet centers were both 100% occupied at December 31, 2008.

Discontinued operations includes the results of operations and gains on sale of real estate of our Boaz, Alabama outlet center which was sold in 2007.

2007 Compared to 2006

Base rentals increased $8.7 million, or 6%, in the 2007 period compared to the 2006 period. Our base rental income increased $5.5 million due to increases in rental rates on lease renewals and incremental rents from re-tenanting vacant space. During 2007, we executed 460 leases totaling 1.9 million square feet at an average increase of 23%. This compares to our execution of 479 leases totaling 1.9 million square feet at an average increase of 14% during 2006. Base rentals also increased approximately $3.7 million related to a full year of operations for our outlet center in Charleston, South Carolina, which opened in August 2006. However, decreases were recognized in the net amortization of above or below market leases totaling $317,000.

The values of the above and below market leases are amortized and recorded as either an increase (in the case of below market leases) or a decrease (in the case of above market leases) to rental income over the remaining term of the associated lease. For the 2007 period, we recorded $1.1 million to rental income for the net amortization of market lease values compared with $1.5 million for the 2006 period. If a tenant vacates its space prior to the contractual termination of the lease and no rental payments are being made on the lease, any unamortized balance of the related above or below market lease value will be written off and could materially impact our net income positively or negatively. At December 31, 2007, the net liability representing the amount of unrecognized below market lease values totaled $916,000.

Percentage rentals, which represent revenues based on a percentage of tenants' sales volume above predetermined levels (the "breakpoint"), increased $1.6 million or 22%. The increase is due partially to the addition of high volume tenants during the last twelve months that have exceeded their breakpoints. Reported same-space sales per square foot for the twelve months ended December 31, 2007 were $342 per square foot, a 1.2% increase over the prior year ended December 31, 2006. Same-space sales is defined as the weighted average sales per square foot reported in space open for the full duration of each comparison period. Our ability to attract high volume tenants to many of our outlet centers continues to improve the average sales per square foot throughout our portfolio.

Expense reimbursements, which represent the contractual recovery from tenants of certain common area maintenance, insurance, property tax, promotional, advertising and management expenses generally fluctuate consistently with the related reimbursable property operating expenses to which they relate. Expense reimbursements increased $7.6 million, or 13%, in the 2007 period versus the 2006 period. During 2006, we incurred a $1.5 million charge when we wrote off due diligence costs related to an abandoned potential acquisition. These costs were included in other property operating expenses. The acquisition due diligence costs were incurred in connection with structuring, performing due diligence and submitting a proposal to acquire a significant portfolio from a public REIT that was exploring its strategic alternatives. The bid was requested, but ultimately not accepted, by the public REIT. Excluding these abandoned acquisition costs, expense reimbursements, expressed as a percentage of property operating expenses, were 88% and 87% respectively, in the 2007 and 2006 periods. The reimbursement percentage increase is due to decreases during 2007 in miscellaneous non-reimbursable expenses such as state franchise and excise taxes.

Property operating expenses increased by $7.6 million, or 11%, in the 2007 period as compared to the 2006 period, excluding the $1.5 million charge mentioned in the previous paragraph. Of this increase, $2.2 million relates incrementally to our Charleston, South Carolina outlet center which opened in August 2006. In addition, our common area maintenance costs increased as a result of higher snow removal costs and higher costs related to operating our mall offices at the outlet centers in our portfolio. Further, our fiscal 2007 property insurance premiums increased significantly upon renewal and remained at that level for the fiscal 2008 renewal. Also, several high performing centers experienced significant property tax increases upon revaluation.

General and administrative expenses increased $2.3 million, or 14%, in the 2007 period as compared to the 2006 period. The increase is primarily due to compensation expense related to restricted shares issued during the 2007 period as well as an increase in bonus compensation for senior executives in the 2007 period. As a percentage of total revenues, general and administrative expenses were 8% in both the 2007 and 2006 periods.

Depreciation and amortization increased from $57.0 million in the 2006 period to $63.8 million in the 2007 period. A full year of depreciation and amortization related to the assets at our outlet center in Charleston, South Carolina which opened in August 2006 accounted for $2.0 million of the increase. Also, during the first quarter of 2007, our Board of Directors formally approved a plan to reconfigure our center in Foley, Alabama. As a part of this plan, approximately 42,000 square feet was relocated within the property by September 2007. The depreciable useful lives of the buildings demolished were shortened to coincide with their demolition dates throughout the first three quarters of 2007 and the change in estimated useful life was accounted for as a change in accounting estimate. Accelerated depreciation recognized related to the reconfiguration was $6.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2007. These increases were offset by a decrease in lease cost amortization of approximately $2.0 million, primarily related to the amortization of the intangibles from the COROC acquisitions in 2003 and 2005.

Equity in earnings of unconsolidated joint ventures increased $205,000, or 16%, in the 2007 period as compared to the 2006 period. During August 2006, we opened a 264,900 square foot center in Wisconsin Dells, Wisconsin, which is owned by Tanger Wisconsin Dells, in which we have a 50% ownership interest and account for as an unconsolidated joint venture under the equity method. This center was open for all of 2007 which resulted in the increase in our equity in earnings of unconsolidated joint ventures.

Discontinued operations includes the results of operations and gains on sale of real estate of our Boaz, Alabama; Pigeon Forge, Tennessee and North Branch, Minnesota centers, which were sold in 2007 and 2006, respectively. The following table summarizes the results of operations and gains on sale of real estate for the 2007 and 2006 periods:

Summary of discontinued operations	2007	2006
Operating income from discontinued operations	$ 112	$ 365
Gain on sale of real estate	6	13,833
Discontinued operations	$ 118	$ 14,198

Liquidity and Capital Resources

Operating Activities

Net cash provided by operating activities was $97.0 million, $98.6 million and $88.4 million for the years ended December 31, 2008, 2007 and 2006, respectively. Property rental income represents our primary source of net cash provided by operating activities. Rental and occupancy rates are the primary factors that influence property rental income levels. During the past years we have experienced a consistent overall portfolio occupancy level between 95% and 98% with strong base rental rate growth. Cash from operations in 2008 decreased due to the cash settlement of the interest rate lock protection agreements, at a total cost of $8.9 million. Excluding this cash settlement, net cash provided by operating activities would have increased $7.3 million in the 2008 period compared to the 2007 period.

Investing Activities

During the 2008 period, we completed construction of our outlet center in Washington, PA near Pittsburgh and had several existing center reconfigurations and renovations underway. During the 2007 period, we completed approximately 89,000 square feet of expansion space at existing centers and incurred significant initial construction costs at the Washington, PA site. During the 2006 period, we completed our outlet center in Charleston, SC and sold of our centers in Pigeon Forge, TN and North Branch, MN. These development activities have caused net cash used in investing activities to increase from $63.3 million in 2006, to $84.8 million in 2007 and $133.5 million in 2008. In addition in 2008, we made capital contributions of $1.6 million to the Deer Park joint venture to complete the development of the project which opened in October 2008. Each of the ventures partners made equal contributions.

Financing Activities

Long-term debt is our primary method of financing the projects mentioned in the investing activities section as we derive the majority of our operating cash flows from our operating leases over an average of five years. During 2008, we were successful in closing a $235.0 million, three year unsecured term loan facility. We also extended and increased our unsecured lines of credit with several major financial institutions. We now have a borrowing capacity under our unsecured lines of credit of $325.0 million. We repaid $100.0 million of 9.125% senior unsecured bonds and a $170.7 million mortgage loan during 2008. The combination of these transactions enabled us to provide $39.1 million of net cash from financing activities in the 2008 period for funding of the aforementioned development compared to using $19.8 million in the 2007 period and $19.5 million in the 2006 period. See “Financing Arrangements” for further discussion of the above transactions.

Current Developments and Dispositions

We intend to continue to grow our portfolio by developing, expanding or acquiring additional outlet centers. In the section below, we describe the new developments that are either currently planned, underway or recently completed. However, you should note that any developments or expansions that we, or a joint venture that we are involved in, have planned or anticipated may not be started or completed as scheduled, or may not result in accretive net income or funds from operations. In addition, we regularly evaluate acquisition or disposition proposals and engage from time to time in negotiations for acquisitions or dispositions of properties. We may also enter into letters of intent for the purchase or sale of properties. Any prospective acquisition or disposition that is being evaluated or which is subject to a letter of intent may not be consummated, or if consummated, may not result in an increase in net income or funds from operations.

WHOLLY-OWNED CURRENT DEVELOPMENTS

Washington, Pennsylvania

On August 29, 2008, we held the grand opening of our 371,000 square foot outlet center located south of Pittsburgh in Washington, Pennsylvania. Tenants include Nike, Gap, Old Navy, Banana Republic, Coach and others. At December 31, 2008 the outlet center was 85% leased. Based upon the response by customers at this center’s grand opening events, we believe there is tenant interest in the remaining available space and additional signed leases will be completed over time. Tax incremental financing bonds have been issued related to the Washington project of which we have received approximately $16.4 million. We receive proceeds from the tax increment financing bonds as we incur qualifying expenditures during construction of the center.

Expansions at Existing Centers

During the second quarter of 2008, we completed a 62,000 square foot expansion at our center located in Barstow, California. As of December 31, 2008, the center contained a total of approximately 171,000 square feet, including the newly opened expansion space. The outlet center is 100% occupied.

During the fourth quarter of 2008, we began an expansion of approximately 23,000 square feet at our Commerce II, Georgia center. This expansion is projected to be open during the second quarter of 2009.

Commitments to complete construction of the Washington, PA development, the expansion in Commerce II, GA, along with renovations at centers in Myrtle Beach Hwy 501, South Carolina; Lincoln City, Oregon; Park City, Utah and Foley, Alabama and other capital expenditure requirements amounted to approximately $11.3 million at December 31, 2008. Commitments for construction represent only those costs contractually required to be paid by us. These projects will be primarily funded by amounts available under our unsecured lines of credit but could also be funded by other sources of capital such as collateralized construction loans, public debt or equity offerings as necessary or available.

Potential Future Developments

We currently have an option for a new development site located in Mebane, North Carolina on the highly traveled Interstate 40/85 corridor, which sees over 83,000 cars daily. The site is located halfway between the Research Triangle Park area of Raleigh, Durham, and Chapel Hill, and the Triad area of Greensboro, High Point and Winston-Salem. During the option period we will be analyzing the viability of the site and determining whether to proceed with the development of a center at this location.

We currently have an option for a new development site located in Irving, Texas, which would be our third in the state. The site is strategically located west of Dallas at the North West quadrant of busy State Highway 114 and Loop 12 and will be the first major project planned for the Texas Stadium Redevelopment Area. It is also adjacent to the upcoming DART light rail line (and station stop) connecting downtown Dallas to the Las Colinas Urban Center, the Irving Convention Center and the Dallas/Fort Worth Airport.

At this time, we are in the initial study period on these potential new locations. As such, there can be no assurance that either of these sites will ultimately be developed. These projects, if realized, would be primarily funded by amounts available under our unsecured lines of credit but could also be funded by other sources of capital such as collateralized construction loans, public debt or equity offerings as necessary or available. In the fourth quarter of 2008, we made the decision to terminate our purchase options in Port St. Lucie, Florida and Phoenix, Arizona. As a result, we recorded a $3.9 million charge relating to our predevelopment costs on these and other projects deemed no longer probable.

WHOLLY-OWNED DISPOSITIONS

In October 2007, we completed the sale of our property in Boaz, AL. Net proceeds received from the sale of the property were approximately $2.0 million. We recorded a gain on sale of real estate of approximately $6,000.

During the first quarter of 2006, we completed the sale of two outlet centers located in Pigeon Forge, TN and North Branch, MN. Net proceeds received from the sales of the centers were approximately $20.2 million. We recorded gains on sales of real estate of $13.8 million associated with these sales during the first quarter of 2006.

Financing Arrangements

On February 15, 2008, our $100.0 million, 9.125% unsecured senior notes matured. We repaid these notes with amounts available under our unsecured lines of credit.

In July 2008 and September 2008, we entered into interest rate swap agreements with Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. and BB&T for notional amounts of $118.0 million and $117.0 million, respectively. The purpose of these swaps was to fix the interest rate on the $235.0 million outstanding under the term loan facility completed in June 2008. The swaps fixed the one month LIBOR rate at 3.605% and 3.70%, respectively. When combined with the current spread of 160 basis points which can vary based on changes in our debt ratings, these swap agreements fix our interest rate on the $235.0 million of variable rate debt at 5.25% until April 1, 2011.

In October 2008, we were upgraded by the Standard and Poor’s Ratings Services from BBB- to BBB, making us one of only two REITs to receive a ratings upgrade in 2008. We currently have an investment grade rating with Moody’s Investors Service of Baa3. Because of this upgrade, one of our line of credit borrowing rates decreased to LIBOR plus 60 basis points. Of the $161.5 million outstanding on our unsecured lines of credit as of December 31, 2008, the borrowing rates range from LIBOR plus 60 basis points to LIBOR plus 75 basis points.

In February 2006, the Company completed the sale of an additional 800,000 Class C Preferred Shares with net proceeds of approximately $19.4 million. The proceeds, which were contributed to us in exchange for 800,000 preferred units, were used to repay amounts outstanding on our unsecured lines of credit. After the offering, there were 3,000,000 Company Class C Preferred Shares (and Operating Partnership preferred units) outstanding.

In August 2006, the Operating Partnership issued $149.5 million of exchangeable senior unsecured notes that mature on August 15, 2026. The notes bear interest at a fixed coupon rate of 3.75%. The notes are exchangeable into the Company’s common shares, at the option of the holder, at a current exchange ratio, subject to adjustment if the Company changes its dividend rate in the future, of 27.6856 shares per $1,000 principal amount of notes (or a current exchange price of $36.1198 per common share). The notes are senior unsecured obligations of the Operating Partnership and are guaranteed by the Company on a senior unsecured basis. On and after August 18, 2011, holders may exchange their notes for cash in an amount equal to the lesser of the exchange value and the aggregate principal amount of the notes to be exchanged, and, at our option, Company common shares, cash or a combination thereof for any excess. Note holders may exchange their notes prior to August 18, 2011 only upon the occurrence of specified events. In addition, on August 18, 2011, August 15, 2016 or August 15, 2021, note holders may require us to repurchase the notes for an amount equal to the principal amount of the notes plus any accrued and unpaid interest up to, but excluding, the repurchase date. In no event will the total number of Company common shares issuable upon exchange exceed 4.9 million, subject to adjustments for dividend rate changes. Accordingly, the Company has reserved those shares.

We intend to retain the ability to raise additional capital, including public debt or equity, to pursue attractive investment opportunities that may arise and to otherwise act in a manner that we believe to be in our shareholders’ best interests. We have no significant maturities of debt until 2011. During the third quarter of 2006, we, together with the Company, updated our joint shelf registration where we will be able to register unspecified amounts of different classes of securities on Form S-3. We intend to update our shelf registration during the second quarter of 2009. To generate capital to reinvest into other attractive investment opportunities, we may also consider the use of additional operational and developmental joint ventures, the sale or lease of outparcels on our existing properties and the sale of certain properties that do not meet our long-term investment criteria. Based on cash provided by operations, existing credit facilities, ongoing negotiations with certain financial institutions and our ability to sell debt or equity subject to market conditions, we believe that we have access to the necessary financing to fund the planned capital expenditures during 2009.

We anticipate that adequate cash will be available to fund our operating and administrative expenses, regular debt service obligations, and the payment of distributions in order for the Company to maintain its status as a REIT for both the short and long-term. Although we receive most of our rental payments on a monthly basis, distributions to unitholders are made quarterly and interest payments on the senior, unsecured notes are made semi-annually. Amounts accumulated for such payments will be used in the interim to reduce any outstanding borrowings under the existing lines of credit or invested in short-term money market or other suitable instruments.

Contractual Obligations and Commercial Commitments

The following table details our contractual obligations over the next five years and thereafter as of December 31, 2008 (in thousands):

Contractual
Obligations		2009	2010	2011	2012	2013	Thereafter	Total
Debt (1)		$ ---	$ ---	$ 396,500	$ ---	$ ---	$ 399,500	$ 796,000
Operating leases		4,372	4,206	3,703	3,044	2,760	76,312	94,397
Preferred unit
	distributions (2)	5,625	80,625	---	---	---	---	86,250
Interest payments (3)		35,205	35,205	25,939	20,981	20,981	103,631	241,942
		$ 45,202	$ 120,036	$ 426,142	$24,025	$ 23,741	$ 579,443	$ 1,218,589

(1)	These amounts represent total future cash payments related to debt obligations outstanding as of December 31, 2008.

(2)

Preferred unit distributions reflect distributions on our preferred units on which we pay an annual distribution of $1.875 per unit on 3,000,000 outstanding preferred units as of December 31, 2007. The preferred units will be redeemed from the Company to the extent that the Company redeems its Class C Preferred Shares for $25.00 per share after the respective optional redemption date. The future obligations include future distributions on preferred shares/units through the optional redemption date and the redemption amount is included on the optional redemption date.

(3)

These amounts represent future interest payments related to our debt obligations based on the fixed and variable interest rates specified in the associated debt agreements. All of our variable rate debt agreements are based on the one month LIBOR rate. For purposes of calculating future interest amounts on variable interest rate debt, the one month LIBOR rate as of December 31, 2008 was used.

In addition to the contractual payment obligations shown in the table above, should we decide to exercise our purchase option in 2009 related to the Mebane, NC property, described previously in the “Potential Future Developments” section, we expect to spend approximately $62.9 million in 2009 and beyond on the project. We also expect to spend approximately $3.2 million in 2009 to complete an expansion of 23,000 square feet at our Commerce II, GA center and an additional $10.2 million to complete various renovation projects throughout our portfolio. The timing of these expenditures may vary due to delays in construction or acceleration of the opening date of a particular project. These amounts would be primarily funded by amounts available under our unsecured lines of credit but could also be funded by other sources of capital such as collateralized construction loans, public debt or equity offerings as necessary or available.

Our debt agreements require the maintenance of certain ratios, including debt service coverage and leverage, and limit the payment of dividends such that dividends and distributions will not exceed funds from operations, as defined in the agreements, for the prior fiscal year on an annual basis or 95% on a cumulative basis. We have historically been and currently are in compliance with all of our debt covenants. We expect to remain in compliance with all our existing debt covenants; however, should circumstances arise that would cause us to be in default, the various lenders would have the ability to accelerate the maturity on our outstanding debt.

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

The following table details certain information as of December 31, 2008 about various unconsolidated real estate joint ventures in which we have an ownership interest:

Joint Venture	Center Location	Opening Date	Ownership %	Square Feet	Carrying Value of Investment (in millions) (1)	Total Joint Venture Debt (in millions)
Myrtle Beach Hwy 17	Myrtle Beach, South Carolina	2002	50%	402,442	$(0.4)	$35.8

Wisconsin Dells	Wisconsin Dells, Wisconsin	2006	50%	264,929	$5.6	$25.3

Deer Park	Deer Park, Long Island NY	2008	33.3%	684,952	$4.3	$242.4

(1) The carrying value of our investment in Myrtle Beach Hwy 17 as of December 31, 2008 was reduced by approximately $823,000 which represented our portion of the fair value of the interest rate swap derivative held by this joint venture.

We may issue guarantees for the debt of a joint venture in order for the joint venture to obtain funding or to obtain funding at a lower cost than could be obtained otherwise. We are party to a joint and several guarantee with respect to the construction loan obtained by the Wisconsin Dells joint venture during the first quarter of 2006, which currently has a balance of $25.3 million. We are also party to a joint and several guarantee with respect to the loans obtained by the Deer Park joint venture which currently have a balance of $242.4 million. As of December 31, 2008, our pro-rata portion of the Myrtle Beach Hwy 17 mortgage secured by the center is $17.9 million. There is no guarantee provided for the Myrtle Beach Hwy 17 mortgage by us.

Each of the above ventures contains provisions where a venture partner can trigger certain provisions and force the other partners to either buy or sell their investment in the joint venture. Should this occur, we may be required to sell the property to the venture partner or incur a significant cash outflow in order to maintain ownership of these outlet centers.

Myrtle Beach Hwy 17

The Myrtle Beach Hwy 17 joint venture, in which we had a 50% ownership interest, has owned a Tanger Outlet Center located on Highway 17 in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina since June 2002. The Myrtle Beach center now consists of approximately 402,000 square feet and has over 90 name brand tenants.

During March 2005, Myrtle Beach Hwy 17 entered into an interest rate swap agreement with Bank of America with a notional amount of $35 million for five years. Under this agreement, the joint venture receives a floating interest rate based on the 30 day LIBOR index and pays a fixed interest rate of 4.59%. This swap effectively changes the rate of interest on $35 million of variable rate mortgage debt to a fixed rate of 5.99% for the contract period.

In April 2005, the joint venture obtained non-recourse, permanent financing to replace the construction loan debt that was utilized to build the outlet center. The new mortgage amount is $35.8 million with a rate of LIBOR + 1.40%. The note is for a term of five years with payments of interest only. In April 2010, the joint venture has the option to extend the maturity date of the loan two more years until 2012. All debt incurred by this unconsolidated joint venture is collateralized by its property.

On January 5, 2009, we purchased the remaining 50% interest in the Myrtle Beach Hwy 17 joint venture for a cash price of $32.0 million which was net of the assumption of the existing mortgage loan of $35.8 million. The acquisition was funded by amounts available under our unsecured lines of credit. See Note 19, Subsequent Events, for more information regarding the acquisition.

Wisconsin Dells

In March 2005, we established the Wisconsin Dells joint venture to construct and operate a Tanger Outlet center in Wisconsin Dells, Wisconsin. The 264,900 square foot center opened in August 2006. In February 2006, in conjunction with the construction of the center, Wisconsin Dells entered into a three-year, interest-only mortgage agreement with a one-year maturity extension option. In November 2008, the joint venture exercised its option to extend the maturity of the mortgage to February 24, 2010. The option to extend became effective February 24, 2009. As of December 31, 2008 the loan had a balance of $25.3 million with a floating interest rate based on the one month LIBOR index plus 1.30%. The construction loan incurred by this unconsolidated joint venture is collateralized by its property as well as joint and several guarantees by us and designated guarantors of our venture partner.

Deer Park

In October 2003, we, and two other members each having a 33.3% ownership interest, established a joint venture to develop and own a shopping center in Deer Park, New York. On October 23, 2008, we held the grand opening of the initial phase of the project. The shopping center contains approximately 656,000 square feet including a 32,000 square foot Neiman Marcus Last Call store, which is the first and only one on Long Island. Other tenants include Anne Klein, Banana Republic, BCBG, Christmas Tree Shops, Eddie Bauer, Reebok, New York Sports Club and others. Regal Cinemas has also leased 67,000 square feet for a 16-screen Cineplex, one of the few state of the art cineplexes on Long Island.

In May 2007, the joint venture closed on the project financing which is structured in two parts. The first is a $269.0 million loan collateralized by the property as well as limited joint and several guarantees by all three venture partners. The second is a $15.0 million mezzanine loan secured by the pledge of the partners’ equity interests. The weighted average interest rate on the financing is one month LIBOR plus 1.49%. Over the life of the loans, if certain criteria are met, the weighted average interest rate can decrease to one month LIBOR plus 1.23%. The loans had a combined balance of $240.0 million as of December 31, 2008 and are scheduled to mature in May 2011 with a one year extension option at that date. The joint venture entered into two interest rate swap agreements during June 2007. The first swap is for a notional amount of $49.0 million and the second was a forward starting interest rate swap agreement with escalating notional amounts that totaled $121.0 million as of December 31, 2008. The agreements expire on June 1, 2009. These swaps effectively change the rate of interest on up to $170.0 million of variable rate construction debt to a fixed rate of 6.75%.

In June 2008, we, and our two other partners in the Deer Park joint venture, each having a 33.3% ownership interest, formed a separate joint venture to acquire a 29,000 square foot warehouse adjacent to the shopping center to support the operations of the shopping center’s tenants. This joint venture acquired the warehouse for a purchase price of $3.3 million. The venture also closed on a construction loan of for $2.3 million with a variable interest rate of LIBOR plus 1.85% and a maturity of May 2011.

The table above combines the operational and financial information of both ventures. During 2008, we made additional capital contributions of $1.6 million to the Deer Park joint ventures. Both of the other venture partners made equity contributions equal to ours. After making the above contribution, the total amount of equity contributed by each venture partner to the projects was approximately $4.8 million.

The original purchase of the property in 2003 was in the form of a sale-leaseback transaction, which consisted of the sale of the property to Deer Park for $29 million, including a 900,000 square foot industrial building, which was then leased back to the seller under an operating lease agreement. At the end of the lease in May 2005, the tenant vacated the building. However, the tenant had not satisfied all of the conditions necessary to terminate the lease. Deer Park is currently in litigation to recover from the tenant approximately $5.9 million for fourteen months of lease payments and additional rent reimbursements related to property taxes. In addition, Deer Park is seeking other damages and will continue to do so until recovered.

The following table details our share of the debt maturities of the unconsolidated joint ventures as of December 31, 2008 (in thousands):

Joint Venture	Our Portion of Joint Venture Debt	Maturity Date	Interest Rate
Myrtle Beach Hwy 17	$17,900	4/7/2010	LIBOR + 1.40%
Wisconsin Dells	$12,625	2/24/2010	LIBOR + 1.30%
Deer Park	$80,790	5/17/2011	LIBOR + 1.375-3.50%

Related Party Transactions

As noted above in “Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements”, we are 50% owners of the Myrtle Beach Hwy 17 and Wisconsin Dells joint ventures and a 33.3% owner in the Deer Park joint venture. These joint ventures pay us management, leasing, marketing and development fees, which we believe approximate current market rates, for services provided to the joint ventures. During 2008, 2007 and 2006, we recognized the following fees (in thousands):

		Year Ended December 31,
		Year Ended December 31,
		2008	2007	2006
Fee:
	Management	$ 1,516	$ 534	$ 410
	Leasing	60	26	188
	Marketing	185	108	86
	Development	---	---	304
Total Fees		$ 1,761	$ 668	$ 988

Tanger Family Limited Partnership is a related party which holds a limited partnership interest in and is the minority owner of the Operating Partnership. Stanley K. Tanger, the Company’s Chairman of the Board, is the sole general partner of the Tanger Family Limited Partnership. The only material related party transaction with the Tanger Family Limited Partnership is the payment of quarterly distributions of earnings which aggregated $9.1 million, $8.6 million and $8.1 million for the years ended December 31, 2008, 2007 and 2006, respectively.

Critical Accounting Policies

We believe the following critical accounting policies affect our more significant judgments and estimates used in the preparation of our consolidated financial statements.

Principles of Consolidation

The consolidated financial statements include our accounts, our wholly-owned subsidiaries, as well as the Operating Partnership and its subsidiaries. Intercompany balances and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation. Investments in real estate joint ventures that represent non-controlling ownership interests are accounted for using the equity method of accounting.

In 2003, the Financial Accounting Standards Board, or FASB, issued FASB Interpretation 46R, “Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities (revised December 2003)—an interpretation of ARB No. 51”, or FIN 46R, which clarifies the application of existing accounting pronouncements to certain entities in which equity investors do not have the characteristics of a controlling financial interest or do not have sufficient equity at risk for the entity to finance its activities without additional subordinated financial support from other parties. The provisions of FIN 46R were effective for all variable interests in variable interest entities in 2004 and thereafter.

Acquisition of Real Estate

In accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 141 “Business Combinations”, or FAS 141, we allocate the purchase price of acquisitions based on the fair value of land, building, tenant improvements, debt and deferred lease costs and other intangibles, such as the value of leases with above or below market rents, origination costs associated with the in-place leases, and the value of in-place leases and tenant relationships, if any. We depreciate the amount allocated to building, deferred lease costs and other intangible assets over their estimated useful lives, which generally range from three to 33 years. The values of the above and below market leases are amortized and recorded as either an increase (in the case of below market leases) or a decrease (in the case of above market leases) to rental income over the remaining term of the associated lease. The values of below market leases that are considered to have renewal periods with below market rents are amortized over the remaining term of the associated lease plus the renewal periods. The value associated with in-place leases is amortized over the remaining lease term and tenant relationships is amortized over the expected term, which includes an estimated probability of the lease renewal. If a tenant vacates its space prior to the contractual termination of the lease and no rental payments are being made on the lease, any unamortized balance of the related deferred lease costs is written off. The tenant improvements and origination costs are amortized as an expense over the remaining life of the lease (or charged against earnings if the lease is terminated prior to its contractual expiration date). We assess fair value based on estimated cash flow projections that utilize appropriate discount and capitalization rates and available market information.

If we do not allocate appropriately to the separate components of rental property, deferred lease costs and other intangibles or if we do not estimate correctly the total value of the property or the useful lives of the assets, our computation of depreciation and amortization expense may be significantly understated or overstated.

Cost Capitalization

In accordance with SFAS No. 91 “Accounting for Nonrefundable Fees and Costs Associated with Originating or Acquiring Loans and Initial Direct Costs of Leases—an amendment of FASB Statements No. 13, 60, and 65 and a rescission of FASB Statement No. 17”, we capitalize all incremental, direct fees and costs incurred to originate operating leases, including certain general and overhead costs, as deferred charges. The amount of general and overhead costs we capitalize is based on our estimate of the amount of costs directly related to executing these leases. We amortize these costs to expense over the estimated average minimum lease term of five years.

We capitalize all costs incurred for the construction and development of properties, including certain general and overhead costs and interest costs. The amount of general and overhead costs we capitalize is based on our estimate of the amount of costs directly related to the construction or development of these assets. Direct costs to acquire assets are capitalized once the acquisition becomes probable.

If we incorrectly estimate the amount of costs to capitalize, we could significantly overstate or understate our financial condition and results of operations.

Impairment of Long-Lived Assets

Rental property held and used by us is reviewed for impairment in the event that facts and circumstances indicate the carrying amount of an asset may not be recoverable. In such an event, we compare the estimated future undiscounted cash flows associated with the asset to the asset’s carrying amount, and if less, recognize an impairment loss in an amount by which the carrying amount exceeds its fair value. If we do not recognize impairments at appropriate times and in appropriate amounts, our consolidated balance sheet may overstate the value of our long-lived assets. We believe that no impairment existed at December 31, 2008.

On a periodic basis, we assess whether there are any indicators that the value of our investments in unconsolidated joint ventures may be impaired. An investment is impaired only if management’s estimate of the value of the investment is less than the carrying value of the investments, and such decline in value is deemed to be other than temporary. To the extent impairment has occurred, the loss shall be measured as the excess of the carrying amount of the investment over the value of the investment. Our estimates of value for each joint venture investment are based on a number of assumptions that are subject to economic and market uncertainties including, among others, demand for space, competition for tenants, changes in market rental rates and operating costs of the property. As these factors are difficult to predict and are subject to future events that may alter our assumptions, the values estimated by us in our impairment analysis may not be realized.

Revenue Recognition

Base rentals are recognized on a straight-line basis over the term of the lease. Substantially all leases contain provisions which provide additional rents based on each tenants’ sales volume (“percentage rentals”) and reimbursement of the tenants’ share of advertising and promotion, common area maintenance, insurance and real estate tax expenses. Percentage rentals are recognized when specified targets that trigger the contingent rent are met. Expense reimbursements are recognized in the period the applicable expenses are incurred. Payments received from the early termination of leases are recognized as revenue from the time payment is receivable until the tenant vacates the space.

New Accounting Pronouncements

In December 2007, the FASB issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 141 (revised 2007) “Business Combinations”, or FAS 141R. FAS 141R is effective for fiscal years beginning on or after December 15, 2008, which means that we will adopt FAS 141R on January 1, 2009. FAS 141R replaces FAS 141 “Business Combinations” and requires that the acquisition method of accounting (which FAS 141 called the purchase method) be used for all business combinations for which the acquisition date is on or after January 1, 2009, as well as for an acquirer to be identified for each business combination. FAS 141R establishes principles and requirements for how the acquirer: (i) recognizes and measures in its financial statements the identifiable assets acquired, the liabilities assumed, and any non-controlling interest in the acquiree; (ii) recognizes and measures the goodwill acquired in the business combination or a gain from a bargain purchase; and (iii) determines what information to disclose to enable users of financial statements to evaluate the nature and financial affects of the business combination. On January 5, 2009, we acquired the remaining 50% interest in the Myrtle Beach Hwy 17 joint venture for a cash purchase price of $32.0 million, which was net of the assumption of the existing mortgage loan of $35.8 million. The accounting for this acquisition of interest in a joint venture is covered by the guidance for FAS 141R. See Note 18, Subsequent Events, for further explanation and details of the transaction.

In December 2007, the FASB issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 160 “Non-controlling Interests in Consolidated Financial Statements, an amendment of ARB No. 51”, or FAS 160. FAS 160 is effective for fiscal years beginning on or after December 15, 2008, which means that we will adopt FAS 160 on January 1, 2009. This statement amends ARB 51 to establish accounting and reporting standards for the non-controlling interest in a subsidiary and for the deconsolidation of a subsidiary. FAS 160 clarifies that a noncontrolling interest in a subsidiary should be reported as equity in the consolidated balance sheet and the minority interest's share of earnings is included in consolidated net income. The calculation of earnings per share will continue to be based on income amounts attributable to the controlling interest. FAS 160 requires retroactive adoption of the presentation and disclosure requirements for existing minority interests. All other requirements of FAS 160 shall be applied prospectively. The adoption of FAS 160 will not have a material effect on our consolidated financial statements.

In March 2008, the FASB issued Statement No. 161, “Disclosures about Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities—an amendment of FASB Statement No. 133”, or FAS 161. FAS 161 requires entities that utilize derivative instruments to provide qualitative disclosures about their objectives and strategies for using such instruments, as well as any details of credit-risk-related contingent features contained within derivatives. FAS 161 also requires entities to disclose additional information about the amounts and location of derivatives located within the financial statements, how the provisions of FAS 133 have been applied, and the impact that hedging activities have on an entity’s financial position, financial performance, and cash flows. FAS 161 is effective for fiscal years and interim periods beginning after November 15, 2008, with early application encouraged. We currently provide many of the disclosures required by FAS 161 in our financial statements and therefore, we believe that upon adoption the only impact on our financial statements will be further enhancement of our disclosures.

In April 2008, the FASB issued Staff Position No. FAS 142-3, “Determination of the Useful Life of Intangible Assets”, or FSP 142-3. FSP 142-3 amends the factors to be considered in developing renewal or extension assumptions used to determine the useful life of an identified intangible asset under FASB Statement No. 142, “Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets”, and requires expanded disclosure related to the determination of intangible asset useful lives. FSP 142-3 is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2008. We are currently evaluating the impact of adoption of FSP 142-3 on our consolidated financial position, results of operations and cash flows.

In May 2008, the FASB issued Staff Position No. APB 14-1,”Accounting for Convertible Debt Instruments that May be Settled in Cash Upon Conversion”, or FSP APB 14-1. FSP APB 14-1 requires that the liability and equity components of convertible debt instruments that may be settled in cash upon conversion (including partial cash settlement) be separately accounted for in a manner that reflects an issuer's nonconvertible debt borrowing rate. Under FSP APB 14-1 the value assigned to the debt component must be the estimated fair value of a similar nonconvertible debt. FSP APB 14-1 is effective for financial statements issued for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2008, and interim periods within those fiscal years. Early adoption is not permitted. Retrospective application to all periods presented is required except for instruments that were not outstanding during any of the periods that will be presented in the annual financial statements for the period of adoption but were outstanding during an earlier period. The resulting debt discount is amortized over the period during which the debt is expected to be outstanding (i.e., through the first optional redemption date) as additional non-cash interest expense. The adoption of FSP APB 14-1 in the first quarter of 2009 will result in approximately $.14 per unit (net of incremental capitalized interest) of additional non-cash interest expense for the year ended 2008 related to our $149.5 million in convertible debt which was issued during the third quarter of 2006.

Funds from Operations

Funds from Operations, or FFO, represents income before extraordinary items and gains (losses) on sale or disposal of depreciable operating properties, plus depreciation and amortization uniquely significant to real estate and after adjustments for unconsolidated partnerships and joint ventures.

FFO is intended to exclude historical cost depreciation of real estate as required by Generally Accepted Accounting Principles, or GAAP, which assumes that the value of real estate assets diminishes ratably over time. Historically, however, real estate values have risen or fallen with market conditions. Because FFO excludes depreciation and amortization unique to real estate, gains and losses from property dispositions and extraordinary items, it provides a performance measure that, when compared year over year, reflects the impact to operations from trends in occupancy rates, rental rates, operating costs, development activities and interest costs, providing perspective not immediately apparent from net income.

We present FFO because we consider it an important supplemental measure of our operating performance and believe it is frequently used by securities analysts, investors and other interested parties in the evaluation of REITs, many of which present FFO when reporting their results. FFO is widely used by us and others in our industry to evaluate and price potential acquisition candidates. The National Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts, Inc., of which we are a member, has encouraged its member companies to report their FFO as a supplemental, industry-wide standard measure of REIT operating performance. In addition, a percentage of bonus compensation to certain members of management is based on our FFO performance.

FFO has significant limitations as an analytical tool, and you should not consider it in isolation, or as a substitute for analysis of our results as reported under GAAP. Some of these limitations are:

§	FFO does not reflect our cash expenditures, or future requirements, for capital expenditures or contractual commitments;

§	FFO does not reflect changes in, or cash requirements for, our working capital needs;

§	Although depreciation and amortization are non-cash charges, the assets being depreciated and amortized will often have to be replaced in the future, and FFO does not reflect any cash requirements for such replacements;

§	FFO, which includes discontinued operations, may not be indicative of our ongoing operations; and

§	Other companies in our industry may calculate FFO differently than we do, limiting its usefulness as a comparative measure.

Because of these limitations, FFO should not be considered as a measure of discretionary cash available to us to invest in the growth of our business or our distribution paying capacity. We compensate for these limitations by relying primarily on our GAAP results and using FFO only supplementally.

Below is a reconciliation of net income to FFO for the years ended December 31, 2008, 2007 and 2006 as well as other data for those respective periods (in thousands):

			2008	2007	2006
Funds from Operations:
Net income			$ 32,403	$ 33,090	$ 43,633
Adjusted for:
	Depreciation and amortization
		attributable to discontinued operations	---	145	307
	Depreciation and amortization uniquely significant
		to real estate – consolidated	61,962	63,506	56,747
	Depreciation and amortization uniquely significant
		to real estate – unconsolidated joint ventures	3,165	2,611	1,825
	(Gain) loss on sale of real estate		---	(6)	(13,833)
Funds from operations (1)			97,530	99,346	88,679
Preferred share distributions			(5,625)	(5,625)	(5,433)
Funds from operations available to common unitholders			$ 91,905	$ 93,721	$ 83,246
Weighted average units outstanding (2)			18,715	18,868	18,574

(1) The year ended December 31, 2006 includes gains on sales of outparcels of land of $402.

(2) Includes the dilutive effect of options, restricted unit awards and exchangeable notes.

Economic Conditions and Outlook

The majority of our leases contain provisions designed to mitigate the impact of inflation. Such provisions include clauses for the escalation of base rent and clauses enabling us to receive percentage rentals based on tenants’ gross sales (above predetermined levels, which we believe often are lower than traditional retail industry standards) which generally increase as prices rise. Most of the leases require the tenant to pay their share of property operating expenses, including common area maintenance, real estate taxes, insurance and advertising and promotion, thereby reducing exposure to increases in costs and operating expenses resulting from inflation.

While we believe factory outlet stores will continue to be a profitable and fundamental distribution channel for many brand name manufacturers, some retail formats are more successful than others. As typical in the retail industry, certain tenants have closed, or will close, certain stores by terminating their lease prior to its natural expiration or as a result of filing for protection under bankruptcy laws.

We renewed 82% of the 1,350,000 square feet that came up for renewal in 2008 with the existing tenants at a 17% increase in the average base rental rate compared to the expiring rate. We also re-tenanted 492,000 square feet during 2008 at a 44% increase in the average base rental rate.

During 2009, we have approximately 1,498,000 square feet, or 16%, of our wholly-owned portfolio coming up for renewal. If we were unable to successfully renew or release a significant amount of this space on favorable economic terms, the loss in rent could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations.

Existing tenants’ sales have remained stable and renewals by existing tenants have remained strong. As of February 1, 2009, the existing tenants have already renewed approximately 648,000, or 43%, of the square feet scheduled to expire in 2009. In addition, we continue to attract and retain additional tenants. Our factory outlet centers typically include well-known, national, brand name companies. By maintaining a broad base of creditworthy tenants and a geographically diverse portfolio of properties located across the United States, we reduce our operating and leasing risks. No one tenant (including affiliates) accounts for more than 6% of our combined base and percentage rental revenues. Accordingly, we do not expect any material adverse impact on our results of operations and financial condition as a result of leases to be renewed or stores to be released.

However, in the first quarter of 2008, thirty-eight stores were vacated that were occupied by six tenants, representing a gross leasable area of approximately 236,000 square feet. Sales for these tenants averaged only $165 per square foot, with an average base rental rate of $16 per square foot. Approximately 60% of this space has now been released at base rental rates averaging 64% higher than the average rent being paid by the previous tenants.

During the second quarter of 2008 we had three tenants (Geoffrey Beene, Big Dog and Pepperidge Farms) announce plans to close stores throughout their outlet portfolios for various reasons. Within our portfolio, this represents thirty-two stores containing approximately 93,000 square feet. These stores represent some of the least productive stores in terms of sales per square foot in our portfolio and have average base rental rates of approximately $18.00 per square foot. Slightly less than half of these stores closed before the end of 2008, and the remaining stores closed in January 2009. Approximately 31% of this space has been released at base rental rates averaging 63% higher than the $18.00 average rent being paid by the previous tenants.

As a result of the current poor economic environment, we have received notice from a number of additional tenants of their plans to close stores. These tenants include Pfaltzgraff, S&K Menswear, Koret, Sag Harbor and KB Toys. The combined space occupied by these tenants represents forty-one stores totaling approximately 171,000 square feet, which representing approximately 2.0% of our wholly-owned portfolio.

Much of this space is being re-leased with substantial increases in base rental rates. However, given current economic conditions it may take longer to re-lease the remaining space and more difficult to achieve similar increases in base rental rates. Also, there may be additional tenants that have not informed us of their intentions and which may close stores in the coming year. There can be no assurances that we will be able to re-lease such space. While the timing of an economic recovery is unclear and these conditions may not improve quickly, we believe in our business and our long-term strategy.

As of both December 31, 2008 and 2007, occupancy at our wholly-owned centers was 97% and 98%, respectively. Consistent with our long-term strategy of re-merchandising centers, we will continue to hold space off the market until an appropriate tenant is identified. While we believe this strategy will add value to our centers in the long-term, it may reduce our average occupancy rates in the near term.

Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk

Market Risk

We are exposed to various market risks, including changes in interest rates. Market risk is the potential loss arising from adverse changes in market rates and prices, such as interest rates. We may periodically enter into certain interest rate protection and interest rate swap agreements to effectively convert floating rate debt to a fixed rate basis and to hedge anticipated future financings. We do not enter into derivatives or other financial instruments for trading or speculative purposes.

In July 2008 and September 2008, we entered into LIBOR based interest rate swap agreements with Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. and BB&T for notional amounts of $118.0 million and $117.0 million, respectively. The purpose of these swaps was to fix the interest rate on the $235.0 million outstanding under the term loan facility completed in June 2008. The swaps fixed the one month LIBOR rate at 3.605% and 3.70%, respectively. When combined with the current spread of 160 basis points which can vary based on changes in our debt ratings, these swap agreements fix our interest rate on the $235.0 million of variable rate debt at 5.25% until April 1, 2011. The fair value of the interest rate swap agreements represents the estimated receipts or payments that would be made to terminate the agreement. At December 31, 2008, the fair value of these contracts was $11.8 million. If the one month LIBOR rate decreased 1%, the fair value would be approximately $17.2 million. The fair value is based on dealer quotes, considering current interest rates, remaining term to maturity and our credit standing.

As of December 31, 2008, 20% of our outstanding debt had variable interest rates that were not covered by an interest rate derivative agreement and was therefore subject to market fluctuations. A change in the LIBOR rate of 100 basis points would result in an increase or decrease of approximately $1.6 million in interest expense on an annual basis. The information presented herein is merely an estimate and has limited predictive value. As a result, the ultimate effect upon our operating results of interest rate fluctuations will depend on the interest rate exposures that arise during the period, our hedging strategies at that time and future changes in the level of interest rates.

The estimated fair value of our debt, consisting of senior unsecured notes, exchangeable notes, unsecured term credit facilities and unsecured lines of credit, at December 31, 2008 and 2007 was $711.8 million and $723.3 million, respectively, and its recorded value was $795.3 million and $706.3 million, respectively. A 1% increase from prevailing interest rates at December 31, 2008 and 2007 would result in a decrease in fair value of total debt of approximately $37.4 million and $38.2 million, respectively. Fair values were determined, based on level 2 inputs as defined by FAS 157, using discounted cash flow analyses with an interest rate or credit spread similar to that of current market borrowing arrangements.

Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data

The information required by this Item is set forth on the pages indicated in Item 15(a) below.

Item 9.

Changes in and Disagreements With Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure

Not applicable.

Item 9A. Controls and Procedures

(a)	Evaluation of disclosure control procedures.

The Chief Executive Officer, Steven B. Tanger (Principal Executive Officer), and Vice President, Treasurer and Assistant Secretary, Frank C. Marchisello Jr. (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer) of Tanger GP Trust, sole general partner of the Registrant, evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures on December 31, 2008 and concluded that, as of that date, the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures were effective to ensure that the information the registrant is required to disclose in its filings with the Commission under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized and reported, within the time periods specified in the Commission’s rules and forms, and to ensure that information required to be disclosed by the registrant in the reports that it files under the Exchange Act is accumulated and communicated to the registrant’s management, including its principal executive officer and principal financial officer, as appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.

(b)	Management’s report on internal control over financial reporting.

Internal control over financial reporting, as such term is defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Exchange Act, is a process designed by, or under the supervision of, the principal executive officer and principal financial officer, or persons performing similar functions, and effected by the board of trustees, management and other personnel, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. The Operating Partnership’s management, with the participation of the principal executive officer and principal financial officer, has established and maintained policies and procedures designed to maintain the adequacy of the Operating Partnership’s internal control over financial reporting, and includes those policies and procedures that:

(1)

Pertain to the maintenance of records that in reasonable detail accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the Operating Partnership;

(2)

Provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the Operating Partnership are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and trustees of the Operating Partnership; and

(3)

Provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use or disposition of the Operating Partnership’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.

Management of the Operating Partnership’s general partner has evaluated the effectiveness of the Operating Partnership’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2008 based on the criteria established in a report entitled Internal Control—Integrated Framework, issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Based on our assessment and those criteria, the Operating Partnership’s management has concluded that the Operating Partnership’s internal control over financial reporting was effective as of December 31, 2008.

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree or compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

The effectiveness of the Operating Partnership’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2008 has been audited by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, as stated in their report which appears herein.

(c)

There were no changes in our internal control over financial reporting identified in connection with the evaluation required by paragraph (d) of Exchange Act Rules 13a-15 or 15d-15 that occurred during our last fiscal quarter ended December 31, 2008 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.

Item 9B. Other Information

All information required to be disclosed in a report on Form 8-K during the fourth quarter of 2008 was reported.

PART III

Certain information required by Part III is omitted from this Report in that the registrant’s majority owner, the Company, will file a definitive proxy statement pursuant to Regulation 14A, or the Proxy Statement, not later than 120 days after the end of the fiscal year covered by this Report, and certain information included therein is incorporated herein by reference. Only those sections of the Proxy Statement which specifically address the items set forth herein are incorporated by reference.

Item 10.

Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance

The Operating Partnership does not have any directors or officers. The information concerning the Company’s directors required by this Item is incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Proxy Statement to be filed with respect to the Company’s Annual Meeting of Shareholders which is expected to be held on May 8, 2009.

The information concerning the Company’s executive officers required by this Item is incorporated herein by reference to the section in Part I, Item 4, entitled “Executive Officers of the Company”.

The information regarding compliance with Section 16 of the Exchange Act is incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Proxy Statement to be filed with respect to the Company’s Annual Meeting of Shareholders which is expected to be held on May 8, 2009.

The information concerning the Company’s Code of Ethics required by this Item is incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Proxy Statement to be filed with respect to the Company’s Annual Meeting of Shareholders which is expected to be held on May 8, 2009.

The information concerning the Company’s corporate governance required by this Item is incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Proxy Statement to be filed with respect to the Company’s Annual Meeting of Shareholders which is expected to be held on May 8, 2009

Item 11. Executive Compensation

The information required by this Item is incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Proxy Statement to be filed with respect to the Company’s Annual Meeting of Shareholders which is expected to be held on May 8, 2009.

Item 12.

Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Shareholder Matters.

The information required by this Item is incorporated by reference herein to the Company’s Proxy Statement to be filed with respect to the Company’s Annual Meeting of Shareholders which is expected to be held on May 8, 2009.

The following table provides information as of December 31, 2008 with respect to compensation plans under which the Operating Partnership’s equity securities are authorized for issuance:

Plan Category	(a) Number of Securities to be Issued Upon Exercise of Outstanding Options, Warrants and Rights	(b) Weighted Average Exercise Price of Outstanding Options, Warrants and Rights	(c) Number of Securities Remaining Available for Future Issuance Under Equity Compensation Plans (Excluding Securities Reflected in Column (a))
Equity compensation plans approved by security holders	109,228	$37.36	771,025
Equity compensation plans not approved by security holders	---	---	---
Total	109,228	$37.36	771,025

Item 13.

Certain Relationships, Related Transactions and Director Independence

Item 14. Principal Accounting Fees and Services

The information required by Item 9(e) of Schedule 14A is incorporated herein by reference to the Company’s Proxy Statement to be filed with respect to the Company’s Annual Meeting of Shareholders which is expected to be held on May 8, 2009.

PART IV

Item 15. Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules

(a) Documents filed as a part of this report:

Financial Statements

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm	F-1
Consolidated Balance Sheets-December 31, 2008 and 2007	F-2
Consolidated Statements of Operations-
Years Ended December 31, 2008, 2007 and 2006	F-3
Consolidated Statements of Partners’ Equity-
Years Ended December 31, 2008, 2007 and 2006	F-4
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows-
Years Ended December 31, 2008, 2007 and 2006	F-5
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements	F-6 to F-23

2. Financial Statement Schedule

Schedule III
Real Estate and Accumulated Depreciation	F-24 to F-25

All other schedules have been omitted because of the absence of conditions under which they are required or because the required information is given in the above-listed financial statements or notes thereto.

3. Exhibits

Exhibit No. Description

3.3	Amended and Restated Agreement of Limited Partnership for Tanger Properties Limited Partnership dated November 11, 2005. (Incorporated by reference to the exhibits to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated November 21, 2005.)

4.1	Form of Senior Indenture. (Incorporated by reference to the exhibits to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated March 6, 1996.)

4.1A	Form of First Supplemental Indenture (to Senior Indenture). (Incorporated by reference to the exhibits to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated March 6, 1996.)

4.1B	Form of Second Supplemental Indenture (to Senior Indenture) dated October 24, 1997 among Tanger Properties Limited Partnership, Tanger Factory Outlet Centers, Inc. and State Street Bank & Trust Company. (Incorporated by reference to the exhibits to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated October 24, 1997.)

4.1C	Form of Third Supplemental Indenture (to Senior Indenture) dated February 15, 2001. (Incorporated by reference to the exhibits to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated February 16, 2001.)

4.1D	Form of Fourth Supplemental Indenture (to Senior Indenture) dated November 5, 2005. (Incorporated by reference to the exhibits to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006.)

4.1E	Form of Fifth Supplemental Indenture (to Senior Indenture) dated August 16, 2006. (Incorporated by reference to the exhibits to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006.)

10.1	Amended and Restated Incentive Award Plan of Tanger Factory Outlet Centers, Inc. and Tanger Properties Limited Partnership, effective May 14, 2004. (Incorporated by reference to the Appendix A of the Company’s definitive proxy statement filed on Schedule 14A dated April 12, 2004.)

10.4	Form of Unit Option Agreement between the Operating Partnership and certain employees. (Incorporated by reference to the exhibits to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1993.)

10.5	Amended and Restated Employment Agreement for Stanley K. Tanger, as of December 29, 2008. (Incorporated by reference to the exhibits to the Operating Partnership’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated January 5, 2009.)

10.6	Amended and Restated Employment Agreement for Steven B. Tanger, as of December 29, 2008. (Incorporated by reference to the exhibits to the Operating Partnership’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated January 5, 2009.)

10.7	Amended and Restated Employment Agreement for Frank C. Marchisello, Jr., as of December 29, 2008. (Incorporated by reference to the exhibits to the Operating Partnership’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated January 5, 2009.)

10.8	Amended and Restated Employment Agreement for Lisa J. Morrison, as of December 29, 2008. (Incorporated by reference to the exhibits to the Operating Partnership’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated January 5, 2009.)

10.9	Amended and Restated Employment Agreement for Joe Nehmen, as of December 29, 2008. (Incorporated by reference to the exhibits to the Operating Partnership’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated January 5, 2009.)

10.11	Registration Rights Agreement among the Company, the Tanger Family Limited Partnership and Stanley K. Tanger. (Incorporated by reference to the exhibits to the Company’s Registration Statement on Form S-11 filed May 27, 1993, as amended.)

10.11A	Amendment to Registration Rights Agreement among the Company, the Tanger Family Limited Partnership and Stanley K. Tanger. (Incorporated by reference to the exhibits to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1995.)


10.11B	Second Amendment to Registration Rights Agreement among the Company, the Tanger Family Limited Partnership and Stanley K. Tanger dated September 4, 2002. (Incorporated by reference to the exhibits to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003.)

10.11C	Third Amendment to Registration Rights Agreement among the Company, the Tanger Family Limited Partnership and Stanley K. Tanger dated December 5, 2003. (Incorporated by reference to the exhibits to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003.)

10.11D	Fourth Amendment to Registration Rights Agreement among the Company, the Tanger Family Limited Partnership and Stanley K. Tanger dated August 8, 2006. (Incorporated by reference to the exhibits to the Company’s Registration Statement on Form S-3, dated August 9, 2006.)

10.12	Agreement Pursuant to Item 601(b)(4)(iii)(A) of Regulation S-K. (Incorporated by reference to the exhibits to the Company’s Registration Statement on Form S-11 filed May 27, 1993, as amended.)

10.13	Assignment and Assumption Agreement among Stanley K. Tanger, Stanley K. Tanger & Company, the Tanger Family Limited Partnership, the Operating Partnership and the Company. (Incorporated by reference to the exhibits to the Company’s Registration Statement on Form S-11 filed May 27, 1993, as amended.)

10.15	COROC Holdings, LLC Limited Liability Company Agreement dated October 3, 2003. (Incorporated by reference to the exhibits to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated December 8, 2003.)

10.16	Form of Shopping Center Management Agreement between owners of COROC Holdings, LLC and Tanger Properties Limited Partnership. (Incorporated by reference to the exhibits to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated December 8, 2003.)

10.17	Form of Restricted Share Agreement between the Company and certain Officers. (Incorporated by reference to the exhibits to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008.)

10.18	Form of Restricted Share Agreement between the Company and certain Officers with certain performance criteria vesting. (Incorporated by reference to the exhibits to the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2005.)

10.18A	Form of Amendment to Restricted Share Agreement between the Company and certain Officers with certain performance criteria vesting. (Incorporated by reference to the exhibits to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008.)

10.19	Form of Restricted Share Agreement between the Company and certain Directors. (Incorporated by reference to the exhibits to the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2005.)

10.20	Purchase Agreement between Tanger Factory Outlet Centers, Inc. and Cohen & Steers Capital Management, Inc. relating to a registered direct offering of 3,000,000 of the Company’s common shares dated August 30, 2005. (Incorporated by reference to the exhibits to the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated August 30, 2005.)

10.21	Term loan credit agreement dated June 10, 2008 between Tanger Properties Limited Partnership and Banc of America Securities LLC and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. with Bank of America, N.A. serving as Administrative Agent and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. serving as Syndication Agent (Incorporated by reference to the exhibits of the Company’s current report on Form 8-K dated June 11, 2008.)

21.1	List of Subsidiaries.

23.1	Consent of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP.

31.1	Principal Executive Officer Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes - Oxley Act of 2002.

31.2	Principal Financial Officer Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes - Oxley Act of 2002.

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

32.2	Principal Financial Officer Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes - Oxley Act of 2002.

SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) 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.

TANGER PROPERTIES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP

By: Tanger GP Trust, its sole general partner

By:/s/ Steven B. Tanger

Steven B. Tanger

President and Chief Executive Officer

February 27, 2009

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the Registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated:

Signature	Title	Date

/s/ Stanley K. Tanger Stanley K. Tanger	Chairman of the Board of Trustees	February 27, 2009

/s/ Steven B. Tanger Steven B. Tanger	Trustee, President and Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)	February 27, 2009

/s/ Frank C. Marchisello, Jr. Frank C. Marchisello Jr.	Vice President, Treasurer and Assistant Secretary (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)	February 27, 2009

/s/ Jack Africk Jack Africk	Trustee	February 27, 2009

/s/ Williams G. Benton William G. Benton	Trustee	February 27, 2009

/s/ Bridget Ryan Berman Bridget Ryan Berman	Trustee	February 27, 2009

/s/ Thomas E. Robinson Thomas E. Robinson	Trustee	February 27, 2009
/s/ Allan L. Schuman Allan L. Schuman	Trustee	February 27, 2009

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

To the Partners of Tanger Properties Limited Partnership:

In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements listed in the index appearing under Item 15(a)(1) present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Tanger Properties Limited Partnership and its subsidiaries at December 31, 2008 and 2007, and the results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2008 in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. In addition, in our opinion, the financial statement schedule listed in the index appearing under Item 15(a)(2) presents fairly, in all material respects, the information set forth therein when read in conjunction with the related consolidated financial statements. Also in our opinion, the Operating Partnership maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2008, based on criteria established in Internal Control - Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). The Operating Partnership's management is responsible for these financial statements and financial statement schedule, for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, included in Management's Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting included under Item 9A(b). Our responsibility is to express opinions on these financial statements, on the financial statement schedule, and on the Operating Partnership's internal control over financial reporting based on our integrated audits. We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audits to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement and whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects. Our audits of the financial statements included examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, and evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. Our audit of internal control over financial reporting included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, and testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk. Our audits also included performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinions.

A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A company’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (i) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (ii) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (iii) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Greensboro, North Carolina

February 27, 2009

F-1

TANGER PROPERTIES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS

(in thousands)


								December 31,

								2008			2007
ASSETS
		Rental property
				Land				$	135,689		$	130,075
				Buildings, improvements and fixtures					1,260,017			1,104,459
				Construction in progress					3,823			52,603
									1,399,529			1,287,137
			Accumulated depreciation						(359,298	)		(312,638	)
					Rental property, net				1,040,231			974,499
		Cash and cash equivalents							4,952			2,393
		Investments in unconsolidated joint ventures							9,457			10,695
		Deferred charges, net							37,942			44,804
		Other assets							28,987			27,587
							Total assets	$	1,121,569		$	1,059,978

LIABILITIES AND PARTNERS’ EQUITY
Liabilities
	Debt
			Senior, unsecured notes (net of discount of $681 and $759, respectively)					$	398,819		$	498,741
			Unsecured term loan						235,000			---
			Mortgages payable (including premium of $0 and $1,046, respectively)						---			173,724
			Unsecured lines of credit						161,500			33,880
					Total debt				795,319			706,345
		Construction trade payables							11,968			23,813
		Accounts payable and accrued expenses							56,905			46,883
					Total liabilities				864,192			777,041

Commitments and contingencies

Partners’ equity
		General partner							(209	)		24
		Limited partners							269,066			290,430
		Accumulated other comprehensive loss							(11,480	)		(7,517	)
					Total partners’ equity				257,377			282,937
						Total liabilities and partners’ equity		$	1,121,569		$	1,059,978

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

F - 2

TANGER PROPERTIES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS

(in thousands, except per unit data)


				For the years ended December 31,

				2008			2007			2006
REVENUES
		Base rentals		$	159,068		$	146,824		$	138,101
		Percentage rentals			7,058			8,757			7,182
		Expense reimbursements			72,004			65,978			58,397
		Other income			7,261			7,206			7,282
			Total revenues		245,391			228,765			210,962

EXPENSES
		Property operating			81,897			74,383			68,302
		General and administrative			22,264			19,007			16,706
		Depreciation and amortization			62,326			63,810			57,012
			Total expenses		166,487			157,200			142,020
Operating income				78,904			71,565			68,942
		Interest expense (including prepayment premium and deferred loan cost write off of $406 and $917 in 2008 and 2006, respectively)			38,443			40,066			40,775
		Loss on settlement of U.S. treasury rate locks			8,910			---			---
Income before equity in earnings of
		unconsolidated joint ventures and
		discontinued operations			31,551			31,499			28,167
Equity in earnings of unconsolidated joint ventures					852			1,473			1,268
Income from continuing operations					32,403			32,972			29,435
Discontinued operations					---			118			14,198
Net income					32,403			33,090			43,633
Less applicable preferred unit distributions					(5,625	)		(5,625	)		(5,433	)
Net income available to common unitholders					26,778			27,465			38,200
Income allocated to limited partners					26,561			27,242			37,887
Income allocated to general partner				$	217		$	223		$	313

Basic earnings per common unit:
	Income from continuing operations			$	1.44		$	1.48		$	1.31
	Net income				1.44			1.49			2.08

Diluted earnings per common unit:
	Income from continuing operations			$	1.43		$	1.45		$	1.29
	Net income				1.43			1.46			2.06

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

F - 3

TANGER PROPERTIES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF PARTNERS’ EQUITY

(in thousands, except unit and per unit data)

		General partner	Limited partners	Deferred compensation	Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)	Total partners’ equity
Balance, December 31, 2005		$ 317	$ 301,803	$ (5,501)	$ 2,962	$ 299,581
Comprehensive income:
	Net income	313	43,320	-	-	43,633
	Other comprehensive income	-	-	-	924	924
	Total comprehensive income	313	43,320	-	924	44,557
Reclassification of deferred compensation		-	(5,501)	5,501	-	-
Compensation under Incentive Award Plan		-	2,675	-	-	2,675
Issuance of 65,310 common units upon
	exercise of options	-	2,381	-	-	2,381
Issuance of 800,000 preferred units in
	in exchange for the proceeds from the
	Company’s preferred share offering	-	19,445	-	-	19,445
Grant of 81,000 restricted unit awards,
	net of forfeitures	-	-	-	-	-
Preferred distributions ($1.8802 per preferred unit)		-	(5,262)	-	-	(5,262)
Common distributions ($2.685 per common unit)		(403)	(49,274)	-	-	(49,677)
Balance, December 31, 2006		227	309,587	-	3,886	313,700
Comprehensive income:
	Net income	223	32,867	-	-	33,090
	Other comprehensive (loss)	-	-	-	(11,403)	(11,403)
	Total comprehensive income	223	32,867	-	(11,403)	21,687
Compensation under Incentive Award Plan		-	4,059	-	-	4,059
Issuance of 58,953 common units upon
	exercise of options	-	2,085	-	-	2,085
Grant of 85,000 restricted units,
	net of forfeitures	-	-	-	-	-
Preferred distributions ($1.875 per preferred unit)		-	(5,625)	-	-	(5,625)
Common distribution ($2.84 per common unit)		(426)	(52,543)	-	-	(52,969)
Balance, December 31, 2007		24	290,430	-	(7,517)	282,937
Comprehensive income:
	Net income	217	32,186	-	-	32,403
	Other comprehensive (loss)	-	-	-	(3,963)	(3,963)
	Total comprehensive income	217	32,186	-	(3,963)	28,440
Compensation under Incentive Award Plan		-	5,392	-	-	5,392
Issuance of 74,130 common units upon
	exercise of options	-	2,647	-	-	2,647
Grant of 95,000 restricted units		-	-	-	-	-
Preferred distributions ($1.875 per preferred unit)		-	(5,625)	-	-	(5,625)
Common distributions ($3.00 per common unit)		(450)	(55,964)	-	-	(56,414)
Balance, December 31, 2008		$(209)	$ 269,066	$ -	$ (11,480)	$ 257,377

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

F - 4

TANGER PROPERTIES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

(in thousands)


				For the years ended December 31,

				2008			2007			2006
OPERATING ACTIVITIES:
	Net income			$	32,403		$	33,090		$	43,633
	Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities:
		Depreciation and amortization (including discontinued operations)			62,380			63,954			57,319
		Amortization of deferred financing costs			1,705			1,738			1,702
		Equity in earnings of unconsolidated joint ventures			(852	)		(1,473	)		(1,268	)
		Distributions received from unconsolidated joint ventures			3,540			3,220			2,300
		Loss on settlement of U.S. treasury rate locks			8,910			---			---
		Compensation expense related to restricted units and options granted			5,392			4,059			2,675
		Amortization of debt premiums and discounts, net			(1,245	)		(2,584	)		(2,507	)
		Gain on sale of real estate			---			(6	)		(13,833	)
		Gain on sale of outparcels of land			---			---			(402	)
		Net accretion of market rent rate adjustment			(356	)		(1,147	)		(1,464	)
		Straight-line base rent adjustment			(3,195	)		(2,868	)		(2,219	)
	Increases (decreases) due to changes in:
		Other assets			(1,082	)		(4,780	)		222
		Accounts payable and accrued expenses			(10,636	)		5,406			2,196
			Net cash provided by operating activities		96,964			98,609			88,354
INVESTING ACTIVITIES:
	Additions of rental properties				(127,298	)		(85,030	)		(79,434	)
	Additions to investments in unconsolidated joint ventures				(1,577	)		---			(2,020	)
	Return of equity from unconsolidated joint ventures				---			1,281			---
	Additions to deferred lease costs				(4,608	)		(3,086	)		(3,260	)
	Net proceeds from sales of real estate				---			2,032			21,378
			Net cash used in investing activities		(133,483	)		(84,803	)		(63,336	)
FINANCING ACTIVITIES:
	Cash distributions paid				(62,039	)		(58,594	)		(54,939	)
	Net proceeds from sale of preferred shares				---			---			19,445
	Contributions from the sole general partner				759,645			152,000			279,175
	Repayments of debt				(669,703	)		(121,911	)		(261,942	)
	Additions to deferred financing costs				(2,166	)		(534	)		(4,157	)
	Proceeds from tax increment financing				10,693			7,128			505
	Proceeds from exercise of options				2,648			2,085			2,382
			Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities		39,078			(19,826	)		(19,531	)
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents					2,559			(6,020	)		5,487
Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of year					2,393			8,413			2,926
Cash and cash equivalents, end of year				$	4,952		$	2,393		$	8,413

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

F - 5

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

1.	Organization of the Operating Partnership

Tanger Properties Limited Partnership and subsidiaries, a North Carolina limited partnership, focuses exclusively on developing, acquiring, owning, operating and managing factory outlet shopping centers. We are one of the largest owners and operators of factory outlet centers in the United States. As of December 31, 2008, we owned and operated 30 outlet centers, with a total gross leasable area of approximately 8.8 million square feet. All references to gross leasable area and square feet contained in the notes to the consolidated financial statements are unaudited. These factory outlet centers were 97% occupied and contained over 1,900 stores, representing approximately 370 store brands. Also, we operated and had partial ownership interests in three outlet centers totaling approximately 1.4 million square feet.

We are controlled by Tanger Factory Outlet Centers, Inc. and subsidiaries, a fully-integrated, self-administered and self-managed real estate investment trust, or REIT. The Company owns the majority of the partnership interests issued by the Operating Partnership, which we refer to as units, through its two wholly-owned subsidiaries, the Tanger GP Trust and the Tanger LP Trust. The Tanger GP Trust controls the Operating Partnership as its sole general partner. The Tanger LP Trust holds a limited partnership interest. The remaining units are held by the Tanger family through ownership of the Tanger Family Limited Partnership. Stanley K. Tanger, the Company’s Chairman of the Board, is the sole general partner of the Tanger Family Limited Partnership. Unless the context indicates otherwise, the term “Operating Partnership” refers to Tanger Properties Limited Partnership and subsidiaries and the term “Company” refers to Tanger Factory Outlet Centers, Inc. and subsidiaries. The terms “we”, “our” and “us” refer to the Operating Partnership or the Operating Partnership and the Company together, as the text requires.

As of December 31, 2008, Tanger GP Trust owned 150,000 units of the Operating Partnership, Tanger LP Trust owned 15,683,751 units of the Operating Partnership and the Tanger Family Limited Partnership owned the remaining 3,033,305 units. Each Tanger Family Limited Partnership unit is exchangeable for two of the Company’s common shares, subject to certain limitations to preserve the Company’s status as a REIT. In addition, Tanger LP Trust owned 3,000,000 preferred units which were issued by the Operating Partnership in exchange for the proceeds from the Company’s issuance of 3.0 million 7.5% Class C Cumulative Preferred Shares, or Class C Preferred Shares. If the Company redeems any Class C Preferred Shares, the Operating Partnership will redeem an equivalent number of preferred units for the liquidation preference value of the Company’s Class C Preferred Shares.

2. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies

Principles of Consolidation - The consolidated financial statements include our accounts and our wholly-owned subsidiaries. Intercompany balances and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation. Investments in real estate joint ventures that represent non-controlling ownership interests are accounted for using the equity method of accounting.

In 2003, the Financial Accounting Standards Board, or FASB, issued FASB Interpretation No. 46 (Revised 2003): “Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities: An Interpretation of ARB No. 51”, or FIN 46R, which clarifies the application of existing accounting pronouncements to certain entities in which equity investors do not have the characteristics of a controlling financial interest or do not have sufficient equity at risk for the entity to finance its activities without additional subordinated financial support from other parties. The provisions of FIN 46R were effective for all variable interests in variable interest entities in 2004 and thereafter. We have evaluated the Deer Park, Wisconsin Dells and Myrtle Beach Hwy 17 joint ventures, Note 4, and have determined that, under the current facts and circumstances, we are not required to consolidate these entities under the provisions of FIN 46R.

Related Parties – We account for related party transactions under the guidance of FASB Statement No. 57 “Related Party Disclosures”. The Tanger Family Limited Partnership, see Note 1, is a related party which holds a limited partnership interest in and is the minority owner of the Operating Partnership. Stanley K. Tanger, the Company’s Chairman of the Board, is the sole general partner of the Tanger Family Limited Partnership. The only material related party transaction with the Tanger Family Limited Partnership is the payment of quarterly distributions of earnings which were approximately $9.1 million, $8.6 million and $8.1 million for the years ended December 31, 2008, 2007 and 2006, respectively.

The nature of our relationships and the related party transactions for our unconsolidated joint ventures are discussed in Note 4.

F - 6

Use of Estimates - The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates.

Operating Segments - We aggregate the financial information of all centers into one reportable operating segment because the centers all have similar economic characteristics and provide similar products and services to similar types and classes of customers.

Rental Property - Rental properties are recorded at cost less accumulated depreciation. Costs incurred for the construction and development of properties, including certain general and overhead costs, are capitalized. The amount of general and overhead costs capitalized is based on our estimate of the amount of costs directly related to the construction or development of these assets. Direct costs to acquire assets are capitalized once the acquisition becomes probable. Depreciation is computed on the straight-line basis over the estimated useful lives of the assets. We generally use estimated lives ranging from 25 to 33 years for buildings and improvements, 15 years for land improvements and seven years for equipment. Expenditures for ordinary maintenance and repairs are charged to operations as incurred while significant renovations and improvements, including tenant finishing allowances, which improve and/or extend the useful life of the asset are capitalized and depreciated over their estimated useful life. Interest costs are capitalized during periods of active construction for qualified expenditures based upon interest rates in place during the construction period until construction is substantially complete. Capitalized interest costs are amortized over lives which are consistent with the constructed assets.

In accordance with FASB Statement No. 141 “Business Combinations”, or FAS 141, we allocate the purchase price of acquisitions based on the fair value of land, building, tenant improvements, debt and deferred lease costs and other intangibles, such as the value of leases with above or below market rents, origination costs associated with the in-place leases, the value of in-place leases and tenant relationships, if any. We depreciate the amount allocated to building, deferred lease costs and other intangible assets over their estimated useful lives, which generally range from three to 33 years. The values of the above and below market leases are amortized and recorded as either an increase (in the case of below market leases) or a decrease (in the case of above market leases) to rental income over the remaining term of the associated lease. The values of below market leases that are considered to have renewal periods with below market rents are amortized over the remaining term of the associated lease plus the renewal periods. The value associated with in-place leases is amortized over the remaining lease term and tenant relationships is amortized over the expected term, which includes an estimated probability of the lease renewal. If a tenant vacates its space prior to the contractual termination of the lease and no rental payments are being made on the lease, any unamortized balance of the related intangibles is written off. The tenant improvements and origination costs are amortized as an expense over the remaining life of the lease (or charged against earnings if the lease is terminated prior to its contractual expiration date). We assess fair value based on estimated cash flow projections that utilize appropriate discount and capitalization rates and available market information.

Buildings, improvements and fixtures consist primarily of permanent buildings and improvements made to land such as landscaping and infrastructure and costs incurred in providing rental space to tenants. Interest costs capitalized during 2008, 2007 and 2006 amounted to $1.6 million, $1.7 million and $2.2 million, respectively, and internal development costs capitalized amounted to $1.8 million, $1.4 million and $944,000, respectively. Depreciation expense related to rental property included in income from continuing operations for each of the years ended December 31, 2008, 2007 and 2006 was $49.8 million, $50.4 million and $40.2 million, respectively.

The pre-construction stage of project development involves certain costs to secure land control and zoning and complete other initial tasks essential to the development of the project. Direct costs to acquire assets are capitalized once the acquisition becomes probable. These costs are transferred from other assets to construction in progress when the pre-construction tasks are completed. Costs of unsuccessful pre-construction or acquisition efforts are charged to operations when the project is no longer probable.

Cash and Cash Equivalents - All highly liquid investments with an original maturity of three months or less at the date of purchase are considered to be cash equivalents. Cash balances at a limited number of banks may periodically exceed insurable amounts. We believe that we mitigate our risk by investing in or through major financial institutions. Recoverability of investments is dependent upon the performance of the issuer. At December 31, 2008 and 2007, respectively, we had cash equivalent investments in highly liquid money market accounts at major financial institutions of $1.4 million and $1.0 million.

Deferred Charges – Deferred charges includes deferred lease costs and other intangible assets consisting of fees and costs incurred, including certain general and overhead costs, to originate operating leases and are amortized over the average minimum lease term of 5 years. Deferred lease costs and other intangible assets also include the value of leases and origination costs deemed to have been acquired in real estate acquisitions in accordance with FAS 141. See “Rental Property” under this section above for a discussion. Deferred financing costs include fees and costs incurred to obtain long-term financing and are amortized over the terms of the respective loans using the straight line method which approximates the effective interest method. Unamortized deferred financing costs are charged to expense when debt is retired before the maturity date.

F - 7

Guarantees of Indebtedness - In November 2002, the FASB issued Interpretation No. 45, “Guarantors Accounting and Disclosure Requirements for Guarantees, Including Indirect Guarantees of Indebtedness of Others”, or FIN 45, which addresses the disclosure to be made by a guarantor in its interim and annual financial statements about its obligations under guarantees. FIN 45 applies to all guarantees entered into or modified after December 31, 2002. Based on this criterion, the guarantees of indebtedness by us in Deer Park and Wisconsin Dells, see Note 4, are accounted for under the provisions of FIN 45. FIN 45 requires the guarantor to recognize a liability for the non-contingent component of the guarantee; this is the obligation to stand ready to perform in the event that specified triggering events or conditions occur. The initial measurement of this liability is the fair value of the guarantee at inception. The recognition of the liability is required even if it is not probable payments will be required under the guarantee or if the guarantee was issued with a premium payment or as part of a transaction with multiple elements. We recorded at inception the fair value of our guarantees of the Deer Park and Wisconsin Dells joint venture’s debt as debits to our investments in Deer Park and Wisconsin Dells and credits to a liability. We have elected to account for the release from obligation under the guarantees by the straight-line method over the life of the guarantees. The recorded remaining values of the guarantees were $1.5 million and $1.0 million at December 31, 2008 and 2007, respectively.

Captive Insurance – Our wholly-owned subsidiary, Northline Indemnity, LLC, is responsible for losses up to certain levels for property damage (including wind damage from hurricanes) prior to third-party insurance coverage. Insurance losses are reflected in property operating expenses and include estimates of costs incurred, both reported and unreported.

Impairment of Long-Lived Assets – Rental property held and used by us is reviewed for impairment in the event that facts and circumstances indicate the carrying amount of an asset group may not be recoverable. In such an event, we compare the estimated future undiscounted cash flows associated with the asset group to the asset group’s carrying amount, and if less, recognize an impairment loss in an amount by which the carrying amount exceeds its fair value. Fair value for purposes of an impairment test is calculated as the estimated, discounted future cash flows associated with the asset. We believe that no impairment existed at December 31, 2008.

In February 2008, the FASB issued FASB Staff Position 157-2, “Effective Date of FASB Statement No. 157”, which delays the effective date of FAS 157 to January 1, 2009 for us for all nonfinancial assets and nonfinancial liabilities, except for items recognized or disclosed at fair value in the financial statements on a recurring basis (at least annually). Rental property is considered a nonfinancial asset and the testing of it for impairment is considered nonrecurring in nature. Effective January 1, 2009, fair value in the context of an impairment evaluation will be the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date.

Real estate assets designated as held for sale are stated at the lower of their carrying value or their fair value less costs to sell. We classify real estate as held for sale when it meets the requirements of FASB Statement No. 144, “Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets”, or FAS 144, and our Board of Directors approves the sale of the assets. Subsequent to this classification, no further depreciation is recorded on the assets. The operating results of real estate assets designated as held for sale and for assets sold are included in discontinued operations for all periods presented in our results of operations.

Derivatives - We selectively enter into interest rate protection agreements to mitigate changes in interest rates on our variable rate borrowings. The notional amounts of such agreements are used to measure the interest to be paid or received and do not represent the amount of exposure to loss. None of these agreements are used for speculative or trading purposes.

We recognize all derivatives as either assets or liabilities in the consolidated balance sheets and measure those instruments at their fair value in accordance with FASB Statement No. 133, “Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities” as amended by FAS 137, FAS 138 and FAS 157, collectively FAS 133. FAS 133 also requires us to measure the effectiveness, as defined by FAS 133, of all derivatives. We formally document our derivative transactions, including identifying the hedge instruments and hedged items, as well as our risk management objectives and strategies for entering into the hedge transaction. At inception and on a quarterly basis thereafter, we assess the effectiveness of derivatives used to hedge transactions. If a cash flow hedge is deemed effective, we record the change in fair value in other comprehensive income. If after assessment it is determined that a portion of the derivative is ineffective, then that portion of the derivative's change in fair value will be immediately recognized in earnings.

Income Taxes – As a partnership, the allocated share of income or loss for the year is included in the income tax returns for the partners; accordingly, no provision has been made for Federal income taxes in the accompanying consolidated financial statements.

F - 8

Revenue Recognition – Base rentals are recognized on a straight-line basis over the term of the lease. Straight-line rent adjustments recorded in other assets were approximately $12.3 million and $9.3 million, respectively as of December 31, 2008 and 2007. Substantially all leases contain provisions which provide additional rents based on tenants’ sales volume (“percentage rentals”) and reimbursement of the tenants’ share of advertising and promotion, common area maintenance, insurance and real estate tax expenses. Percentage rentals are recognized when specified targets that trigger the contingent rent are met. Expense reimbursements are recognized in the period the applicable expenses are incurred. Payments received from the early termination of leases are recognized as revenue from the time the payment is receivable until the tenant vacates the space. The values of the above and below market leases are amortized and recorded as either an increase (in the case of below market leases) or a decrease (in the case of above market leases) to rental income over the remaining term of the associated lease. If a tenant vacates its space prior to the contractual termination of the lease and no rental payments are being made on the lease, any unamortized balance of the related above or below market lease value will be written off.

We provide management, leasing and development services for a fee for certain properties that are not owned by us or that we partially own through a joint venture. Fees received for these services are recognized as other income when earned.

Concentration of Credit Risk - We perform ongoing credit evaluations of our tenants. Although the tenants operate principally in the retail industry, the properties are geographically diverse. No single tenant accounted for 10% or more of combined base and percentage rental income or gross leasable area during 2008, 2007 or 2006.

Supplemental Cash Flow Information - We purchase capital equipment and incur costs relating to construction of new facilities, including tenant finishing allowances. Expenditures included in construction trade payables as of December 31, 2008, 2007 and 2006 amounted to $12.0 million, $23.8 million and $23.5 million, respectively. Interest paid, net of interest capitalized, in 2008, 2007 and 2006 was $40.5 million, $40.5 million and $40.2 million, respectively. Interest paid for 2008 includes a prepayment premium for the early extinguishment of the Capmark mortgage (see Note 7) of approximately $406,000. Interest paid for 2006 includes a prepayment premium for the early extinguishment of the Woodman of the World Life Insurance Society mortgage debt (see Note 7) of approximately $609,000.

During the second quarter of 2008, upon the closing of our LIBOR based unsecured term loan facility, we determined that we were unlikely to enter into a US Treasury based debt offering. In accordance with FAS 133, we reclassified to earnings in the period the amount recorded in other comprehensive income, $17.8 million, related to these derivatives. This amount had been frozen as of March 31, 2008 when we determined that the probability of the forecast transaction was “reasonably possible” instead of “probable”. Effective April 1, 2008, we discontinued hedge accounting and the changes in the fair value of the derivative contracts subsequent to April 1, 2008 resulted in a gain of $8.9 million. The accounting treatment of these derivatives resulted in a net loss on settlement of $8.9 million which has been reflected in the statement of cash flows as a non-cash operating activity. The $8.9 million cash settlement of the derivatives during the second quarter was reflected in the statement of cash flows as a change in accounts payable and accrued expenses.

Accounting for Stock Based Compensation – The Company may issue non-qualified share options and other share-based awards under the Amended and Restated Incentive Award Plan, or the Plan. The Operating Partnership will issue one common unit to the Company for every two common shares issued by the Company. Effective January 1, 2006, we adopted FASB Statement No. 123 (revised 2004), “Share-Based Payment”, or FAS 123R, under the modified prospective method. Since we had previously accounted for our share-based compensation plan under the fair value provisions of FAS No. 123, our adoption did not significantly impact our financial position or our results of operations. As required by the statement, deferred compensation as of December 31, 2005, which was set forth separately in the Partners’ equity section of the consolidated balance sheets, was reclassified to limited partners’ equity interest during 2006. Compensation expense recognized in 2006 and for future years is now recorded as an increase to limited partners’ equity interest.

New Accounting Pronouncements - In December 2007, the FASB issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 141 (revised 2007) “Business Combinations”, or FAS 141R. FAS 141R is effective for fiscal years beginning on or after December 15, 2008, which means that we will adopt FAS 141R on January 1, 2009. FAS 141R replaces FAS 141 “Business Combinations” and requires that the acquisition method of accounting (which FAS 141 called the purchase method) be used for all business combinations for which the acquisition date is on or after January 1, 2009, as well as for an acquirer to be identified for each business combination. FAS 141R establishes principles and requirements for how the acquirer: (i) recognizes and measures in its financial statements the identifiable assets acquired, the liabilities assumed, and any non-controlling interest in the acquiree; (ii) recognizes and measures the goodwill acquired in the business combination or a gain from a bargain purchase; and (iii) determines what information to disclose to enable users of financial statements to evaluate the nature and financial affects of the business combination. On January 5, 2009, we acquired the remaining 50% interest in the Myrtle Beach Hwy 17 joint venture for a cash purchase price of $32.0 million, which was net of the assumption of the existing mortgage loan of $35.8 million. The accounting for this acquisition of interest in a joint venture is covered by the guidance for FAS 141R. See Note 18, Subsequent Events, for further explanation and details of the transaction.

F - 9

3. Development of Rental Properties

Washington, Pennsylvania

On August 29, 2008, we held the grand opening of our 371,000 square foot outlet center located south of Pittsburgh in Washington, Pennsylvania. Tenants include Nike, Gap, Old Navy, Banana Republic, Coach and others. At December 31 2008, the outlet center was 85% leased. Tax incremental financing bonds have been issued related to the Washington project of which we have received approximately $16.4 million. We receive proceeds from the tax increment financing bonds as we incur qualifying expenditures during construction of the center.

Expansions at Existing Centers

During the second quarter of 2008, we completed a 62,000 square foot expansion at our center located in Barstow, California. As of December 31, 2008, the center contained approximately 171,000 square feet, including the newly opened expansion space. The outlet center is 100% occupied.

During the fourth quarter of 2008, we began an expansion of 23,000 square feet at our existing center in Commerce II, Georgia. We expected tenants to begin opening during the second quarter of 2009.

Commitments to complete construction of the Washington, PA development, the Commerce II, GA expansion, along with renovations at centers in Myrtle Beach Hwy 501, South Carolina; Lincoln City, Oregon; Park City, Utah and Foley, Alabama and other capital expenditure requirements amounted to approximately $11.3 million at December 31, 2008. Commitments for construction represent only those costs contractually required to be paid by us.

F - 10

Change in Accounting Estimate

During the first quarter of 2007, the general partners’ Board of Trustees formally approved a plan to reconfigure our center in Foley, Alabama. As a part of this plan, approximately 42,000 square feet was relocated within the property. The depreciable useful lives of the buildings demolished were shortened to coincide with their demolition dates throughout the first three quarters of 2007 and the change in estimated useful life was accounted for as a change in accounting estimate. Accelerated depreciation recognized related to the reconfiguration reduced income from continuing operations and net income by approximately $6.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2007. The effect on income from continuing operations per diluted unit and net income per diluted unit was a decrease of $.32 per unit for the year ended December 31, 2007.

4.	Investments in Unconsolidated Real Estate Joint Ventures

Our investments in unconsolidated joint ventures as of December 31, 2008 and 2007 aggregated $9.5 million and $10.7 million, respectively. We have evaluated the accounting treatment for each of the joint ventures under the guidance of FIN 46R and have concluded based on the current facts and circumstances that the equity method of accounting should be used to account for the individual joint ventures. At December 31, 2008, we were members of the following unconsolidated real estate joint ventures:

Joint Venture	Center Location	Opening Date	Ownership %	Square Feet	Carrying Value of Investment (in millions)	Total Joint Venture Debt (in millions)
Myrtle Beach Hwy 17	Myrtle Beach, South Carolina	2002	50%	402,442	$(0.4)	$35.8

Wisconsin Dells	Wisconsin Dells, Wisconsin	2006	50%	264,929	$5.6	$25.3

Deer Park	Deer Park, Long Island NY	2008	33.3%	684,952	$4.3	$242.4

Our joint venture related to the shopping center in Deer Park, New York is considered a variable interest entity because the equity investment at risk is insufficient to finance that entity’s activities without additional subordinated financial support. However, we are not required to consolidate the joint venture because we are not the primary beneficiary. The primary beneficiary is the entity that is expected to absorb the majority of the expected losses or receive a majority of the expected returns. In determining that we are not the primary beneficiary, we performed a qualitative analysis of the financial support provided to Deer Park by each of its members, the financial condition of each member and potential losses that each member may have to absorb based on the joint and several guarantees made by affiliates of each member. We are unable to estimate our maximum exposure to loss at this time. Upon completion of the project, the debt is expected to be approximately $284 million, of which our proportionate share would be approximately $94.7 million. See “Deer Park” below for further discussion of the Deer Park joint venture. Our joint ventures in Myrtle Beach Hwy 17, Wisconsin Dells, as well as the warehouse joint venture in Deer Park are not considered variable interest entities.

These investments are recorded initially at cost and subsequently adjusted for our equity in the venture’s net income (loss) and cash contributions and distributions. Our investments in real estate joint ventures are reduced by 50% of the profits earned for leasing and development services we provided to the Myrtle Beach Hwy 17 and Wisconsin Dells. Our investment in Deer Park is reduced by 33.3% of the profits earned for leasing services we provided to Deer Park. The following management, leasing and marketing fees were recognized from services provided to Myrtle Beach Hwy 17, Wisconsin Dells and Deer Park (in thousands):

		Year Ended December 31,
		Year Ended December 31,
		2008	2007	2006
Fee:
	Management	$ 1,516	$ 534	$ 410
	Leasing	60	26	188
	Marketing	185	108	86
	Development	---	---	304
Total Fees		$ 1,761	$ 668	$ 988

Our carrying value of investments in unconsolidated joint ventures differs from our share of the assets reported in the “Summary Balance Sheets – Unconsolidated Joint Ventures” shown below due to adjustments to the book basis, including intercompany profits on sales of services that are capitalized by the unconsolidated joint ventures. The differences in basis are amortized over the various useful lives of the related assets.

F - 11

Myrtle Beach Hwy 17

The Myrtle Beach Hwy 17 joint venture, in which we have a 50% ownership interest, has owned a Tanger Outlet Center located on Highway 17 in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina since June 2002. The Myrtle Beach center now consists of approximately 402,000 square feet and has over 90 name brand tenants.

Wisconsin Dells

Deer Park

In May 2007, the joint venture closed on the project financing which is structured in two parts. The first is a $269.0 million loan collateralized by the property as well as limited joint and several guarantees by all three venture partners. The second is a $15.0 million mezzanine loan secured by the pledge of the partners’ equity interests. The weighted average interest rate on the financing is one month LIBOR plus 1.49%. Over the life of the loans, if certain criteria are met, the weighted average interest rate can decrease to one month LIBOR plus 1.23%. The loans had a combined balance $240.0 million as of December 31, 2008 and are scheduled to mature in May 2011 with a one year extension option at that date. The joint venture entered into two interest rate swap agreements during June 2007. The first swap is for a notional amount of $49.0 million and the second was a forward starting interest rate swap agreement with escalating notional amounts that totaled $121.0 million as of December 31, 2008. The agreements expire on June 1, 2009. These swaps effectively change the rate of interest on up to $170.0 million of variable rate construction debt to a fixed rate of 6.75%.

F - 12

In June 2008, we, and our two other partners in the shopping center joint venture, each having a 33.3% ownership interest, formed a separate joint venture to acquire a 29,000 square foot warehouse adjacent to the shopping center to support the operations of the shopping center’s tenants. This joint venture acquired the warehouse for a purchase price of $3.3 million. The venture also closed on a construction loan of $2.3 million with a variable interest rate of LIBOR plus 1.85% and a maturity of May 2011.

The first table above combines the operational and financial information of both Deer Park ventures. During 2008, we made additional capital contributions of $1.6 million to Deer Park joint ventures. Both of the other venture partners made equity contributions equal to ours. After making the above contribution, the total amount of equity contributed by each venture partner to the projects was approximately $4.8 million.

Condensed combined summary financial information of joint ventures accounted for using the equity method is as follows (in thousands):

Summary Balance Sheets– Unconsolidated Joint Ventures
			2008	2007
Assets
	Investment properties at cost, net		$ 323,546	$ 71,022
	Construction in progress		---	103,568
	Cash and cash equivalents		5,359	2,282
	Deferred charges, net		7,025	2,092
	Other assets		6,324	8,425
		Total assets	$ 342,254	$ 187,389

Liabilities and Owners’ Equity
	Mortgage payable		$ 303,419	$ 148,321
	Construction trade payables		13,641	13,052
	Accounts payable and other liabilities (1)		9,479	6,377
		Total liabilities	326,539	167,750
	Owners’ equity (1)		15,715	19,639
		Total liabilities and owners’ equity	$ 342,254	$ 187,389

(1) Includes the fair value of interest rate swap agreements at Deer Park and Myrtle Beach Hwy 17 totaling $5.6 million and $4.0 million as of December 31, 2008 and December 31, 2007, respectively, recorded as an increase in accounts payable and other liabilities and a reduction of owners’ equity.

Summary Statements of Operations– Unconsolidated Joint Ventures:
			2008	2007	2006
Revenues			$ 25,943	$ 19,414	$ 14,703

Expenses:
	Property operating		12,329	6,894	5,415
	General and administrative		591	248	213
	Depreciation and amortization		7,013	5,473	3,781
		Total expenses	19,933	12,615	9,409
Operating income			6,010	6,799	5,294
Interest expense			6,006	4,129	2,907
Net income			$ 4	$ 2,670	$ 2,387

Tanger Properties Limited Partnership share of:
Net income			$ 852	$ 1,473	$ 1,268
Depreciation (real estate related)			$ 3,165	$ 2,611	$ 1,825

F - 13

5. Disposition of Properties and Properties Held for Sale

2007 Transactions

In October 2007, we completed the sale of our property in Boaz, Alabama. Net proceeds received from the sale of the property were approximately $2.0 million. We recorded a gain on sale of real estate of approximately $6,000. The results of operations and gain on sale of real estate for the property are included in discontinued operations under the provisions of FAS 144. We were not retained for any management or leasing responsibilities related to this center after the sale was completed.

2006 Transactions

In January 2006, we completed the sale of our property in Pigeon Forge, Tennessee. Net proceeds received from the sale of the property were approximately $6.0 million. We recorded a gain on sale of real estate of approximately $3.6 million. We continued to manage and lease the property for a fee until December 31, 2007. Based on the nature and amounts of the fees received, we determined that our management relationship did not constitute a significant continuing involvement, and therefore the results of operations and gain on sale of real estate for the property are included in discontinued operations under the provisions of FAS 144.

In March 2006, we completed the sale of our property located in North Branch, Minnesota. Net proceeds received from the sale of the property were approximately $14.2 million. We recorded a gain on sale of real estate of approximately $10.3 million. We continued to manage and lease this property for a fee until December 31, 2007. Based on the nature and amount of the fees received, we determined that our management relationship did not constitute a significant continuing involvement and therefore the results of operations and gain on sale of real estate for the property are included in discontinued operations under the provisions of FAS 144.

Below is a summary of the results of operations of the disposed properties through their respective disposition dates and properties held for sale as presented in discontinued operations for the respective periods (in thousands):

Summary Statements of Operations – Disposed Properties:			2008	2007	2006

Revenues:
	Base rentals		$ ---	$ 417	$ 1,043
	Percentage rentals		---	1	12
	Expense reimbursements		---	138	354
	Other income		---	18	37
		Total revenues	---	574	1,446
Expenses:
	Property operating		---	317	774
	Depreciation and amortization		---	145	307
		Total expenses	---	462	1,081
Discontinued operations before
	gain on sale of real estate		---	112	365
Gain on sale of real estate included in
	discontinued operations		---	6	13,833
Discontinued operations			$ ---	$ 118	$ 14,198

Outparcel Sales

Gains on sale of outparcels are included in other income in the consolidated statements of operations to the extent the outlet center at which it is located has not been sold. Cost is allocated to the outparcels based on the relative market value method. Below is a summary of outparcel sales that we

Filing Compare · TANGER PROPERTIES LTD PARTNERSHIP /NC/