The discussion centers on the role of institutional investors (corporate landlords) in the U.S. single-family housing market and the implications of the proposed 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act, which aims to restrict these investors from owning too many single-family homes in an effort to improve housing affordability.
– Institutional investors currently own less than 1% of single-family homes nationwide
– Institutional investors may reduce rental prices by increasing rental supply, benefiting about one-third of American families who rent.
– About 7% of new single-family homes are built specifically for rent. The proposed bill’s requirement for institutional investors to sell these homes within seven years could halt this “build-to-rent” activity, potentially reducing housing supply and worsening affordability.
– Industry leaders warn the bill could have unintended consequences, chilling the construction of new rental homes and limiting affordable housing options.
– Negative effects linked to high institutional ownership in neighborhoods include modest increases in property, violent, and drug-related crimes (respectively +2%, +4%, and +7%), though these must be weighed against social benefits.
– Many tenants report positive experiences with corporate landlords, exemplified by one woman, who rates her corporate landlord 4 out of 5 stars and recently saw a rent decrease.
– Overall, evidence suggests institutional investors are not a major cause of housing price increases, and restricting them, especially in new home construction, may hinder efforts to improve affordability.
Sufficient_Key_5062 on
There’s still no evidence that the existence of Corporate landlords drives up housing prices. When there is evidence, my position may change.
TheBeanConsortium on
Best I can do is subsidize housing demand, introduce useless bills to restrict corporate housing, and do some zoning. As a treat.
3 Comments
Submission Statement
The discussion centers on the role of institutional investors (corporate landlords) in the U.S. single-family housing market and the implications of the proposed 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act, which aims to restrict these investors from owning too many single-family homes in an effort to improve housing affordability.
– Institutional investors currently own less than 1% of single-family homes nationwide
– Institutional investors may reduce rental prices by increasing rental supply, benefiting about one-third of American families who rent.
– About 7% of new single-family homes are built specifically for rent. The proposed bill’s requirement for institutional investors to sell these homes within seven years could halt this “build-to-rent” activity, potentially reducing housing supply and worsening affordability.
– Industry leaders warn the bill could have unintended consequences, chilling the construction of new rental homes and limiting affordable housing options.
– Negative effects linked to high institutional ownership in neighborhoods include modest increases in property, violent, and drug-related crimes (respectively +2%, +4%, and +7%), though these must be weighed against social benefits.
– Many tenants report positive experiences with corporate landlords, exemplified by one woman, who rates her corporate landlord 4 out of 5 stars and recently saw a rent decrease.
– Overall, evidence suggests institutional investors are not a major cause of housing price increases, and restricting them, especially in new home construction, may hinder efforts to improve affordability.
There’s still no evidence that the existence of Corporate landlords drives up housing prices. When there is evidence, my position may change.
Best I can do is subsidize housing demand, introduce useless bills to restrict corporate housing, and do some zoning. As a treat.