Don’t Ban the Bridge to
the American Dream

  Know the Facts:  

  • Renting is more affordable than owning:

    • According to Bankrate, the typical monthly mortgage payment in the U.S. is $2,703. The typical rent is just $1,979 – a 37% cost difference, that can help young parents and families build toward a down payment.

  • Most rental homes aren’t owned by big corporations:

    • A study by the firm Cotality found that “mom-and-pop” landlords with just 3 to 10 properties make up the majority of investor purchases in every major metro area.

  • Professionally managed rentals offer stability:

    • These homes often come with maintenance staff, financial literacy programs, credit-building tools, and even first-right-of-refusal options that help renters eventually become owners.

  • Rental homes are a pathway to upward mobility:

    • Researchers at Virginia Tech found that increasing the supply of single-family rentals helped low-income children access higher-performing schools.

  • More housing supply lowers costs:

    • A 2024 paper from the National Bureau of Economic Research estimated that the U.S. would have 15 million more housing units today if we had kept up pre-2000 construction trends. Supply is the problem, and investment is part of the solution.

With housing prices, mortgage rates, property taxes, and insurance costs all rising, the dream of owning a home is slipping further out of reach for many Americans. For a growing number of working families, renting a single-family home is the only viable path to a better neighborhood, a better school district, and eventually, homeownership.

But now, some politicians are pushing proposals that would cap or ban professionally managed single-family rental homes. These misguided efforts threaten to take away one of the few housing options that’s actually working and would make the crisis worse.

Rental Home Purchase Bans Are the Wrong Approach

Across the country, legislators are pursuing legislation that would ban professionally managed housing providers from purchasing single-family homes to rent out. These bills claim to protect renters and homebuyers, but in reality, they does the opposite:

  • Reduces the number of available homes in desirable areas

  • Makes it harder for renters to access good schools and safe streets

  • Drives up prices for both renters and prospective buyers

  • Discourages new housing construction across the state

According to the Urban Institute, large investors often buy homes in need of repair and can renovate them more efficiently than individual buyers. These homes are then rented out at prices well below the cost of ownership.

The evidence from similar policies abroad is clear: A study of Rotterdam’s investor ban found that rental prices increased by 4%, wealthier buyers replaced renters, and low-income residents were displaced.

Housing policy should be focused on expanding options, not eliminating them. Legislators should turn their focus to policies that expand housing supply of all types and bring down the cost of housing.