Rent regulation policies
Rent regulation policies affect the landlord-tenant relationship by establishing protections such as limits to the amount landlords can increase rent for existing tenants; such policies also often prohibit landlords from evicting tenants without just cause. Historically, policies used rent control to set price ceilings or strict limits on rent increases. Most current policies regulate markets that otherwise would be too expensive for households with low or moderate incomes using a rent stabilization approach, which provides a moderate return on investment for landlords with annual rent increases that account for the cost of inflation and any property improvements beyond standard maintenance. Current rent regulations vary by scope, standards for permitted rent increases, and enforcement mechanisms1. Although many current rent regulation policies do not have income eligibility requirements, policies can be adjusted to focus on tenants with low incomes2. According to reports from Harvard University’s Joint Center for Housing Studies, as of 2017, over 21 million U.S. households spend more than 30% of their income on rent3.
What could this strategy improve?
Expected Benefits
Our evidence rating is based on the likelihood of achieving these outcomes:
Increased housing stability
Reduced displacement
Improved access to affordable housing
Reduced evictions
Increased neighborhood stability
What does the research say about effectiveness?
Rent regulation policies with income eligibility requirements are a suggested strategy to increase access to affordable housing, improve housing stability, reduce displacement and evictions, provide affordable housing for tenants with low incomes, and support economic diversity in hot real estate markets1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9. Available evidence suggests that rent regulation policies increase neighborhood stability1. Experts suggest that combining rent regulations with robust efforts to promote affordable housing, offer job training opportunities, and implement economic development plans may be needed to address severe housing insecurity1. Rent regulation reduces housing costs for people living in rent regulated homes4, 10. Additional research is needed to confirm effects and determine which aspects of rent regulation policies are most effective5.
Effects of ending rent control policies. An evaluation of the repeal of rent control in Cambridge, Massachusetts, indicates increases in property values, condo conversions, and rent for units that were regulated and unregulated, as well as substantial tenant turnover following the policy change11. The neighborhood gentrification that followed the repeal of rent control increased landlord revenue and displaced existing tenants1. In New York City, studies also suggest de-regulating rent stabilized units contributes to tenant displacement12. In cities with high costs of living, private equity owners with high expectations of financial returns often replace local, independent landlords, which can exacerbate tenant displacement. Legal-financial practices such as rent regulation policies are suggested to help redefine property owners’ financial expectations13.
Housing stability effects. Cities with strong tenant protection laws, including rent regulation policies and eviction protections, have lower eviction rates than cities without such policies9. A Washington, D.C.-based report suggests rent stabilization programs reduce displacement and improve housing stability, especially for residents of color; this report also suggests that converting a relatively small percentage of existing rent regulated units into affordable housing units has the potential to increase economic diversity in neighborhoods across the city, without needing to find locations for and then build new affordable housing projects7. Rent regulation policies can be designed to protect populations who are vulnerable and housing insecure, such as those in extreme poverty and families with children and low incomes8. For example, New York City’s Senior Citizens Rent Increase Exemption program (SCRIE) provides rent increase exemptions for tenants of rent regulated housing who are older adults with low incomes or with disabilities2.
Potential benefits for landlords. Rent regulation can benefit landlords, especially those who are local and independent, by minimizing tenant turnover and reducing transaction costs14. Experts suggest that rent regulation balances the interests of landlords and tenants8, 10.
Rent regulation debate. People in the real estate industry, for-profit developers, and landlords often claim that rent regulation policies do not provide affordable housing for those who need it. Meanwhile, housing policy researchers and tenant advocates identify policy loopholes or weak enforcement efforts that can undermine the effectiveness of rent regulation policies10. Tenant advocates note that rent regulation can mitigate power imbalances between tenants and landlords, increase civic engagement, and provide affordable housing for families with low incomes better than supply focused policies, which tend to improve supply for people with more moderate incomes10.
Policy variation. Rent regulation policies vary in terms of the (a) limits placed on rent increases; (b) exceptions to rent caps offered for landlord cost increases such as building improvements, utility or property tax increases, or for the right to a reasonable return; (c) exemptions from the policy, such as for new construction or for units in owner-occupied buildings; (d) vacancy decontrol provisions, which allow rent to increase beyond rent caps, reset to market rates, or to exclude that unit from future rent regulations after a tenant leaves; and (e) compliance, enforcement, tenant support, and education policy components10, 15. Vacancy decontrol creates incentives for landlords to evict or try to displace current tenants and to choose tenants who are more likely to be short-term residents, move around, and likely have higher incomes10. Just-cause eviction requirements may help reduce the negative impacts of vacancy decontrol; however, landlords have found many loopholes in those requirements and many experts suggest eliminating vacancy decontrol to protect tenant rights10.
Best practices. Education and outreach information for tenants about rent regulation policies may increase awareness and rent reduction benefits for tenants10, 16, 17. Successful rent regulation policies include policy enforcement, compliance measures, and educational components that support positive tenant outcomes10. One expert suggests that rent control policies could be applied only to absentee landlords in blighted, inner city neighborhoods to attract resident landlords, thereby increasing economic diversity and supporting neighborhood stabilization. Such a policy would need to be designed carefully to avoid oversaturating the market with buildings for sale18. Rent regulation policies can also be implemented in combination with other policies to address potential unintended market outcomes15.
Potential unintended consequences. Available evidence suggests that rent regulation may reduce maintenance efforts or encourage condo conversions, as rent increases may not cover increases to maintenance or operational costs1, 5. A Los Angeles-based study suggests that tenants in rent regulated apartments report more instances of deferred maintenance, neglect, and intimidation efforts from landlords19. San Francisco-based studies show that vacancy decontrol loopholes that allow landlords to reset rent rates between tenants can increase the likelihood of evictions for tenants in rent regulated homes; rent regulation policies and statewide laws need to be carefully designed to avoid this unintended consequence20, 21. In a St. Paul, Minnesota-based study, rent regulation is associated with decreases in property values22.
State preemption efforts. Affordable housing policy is usually determined by local governments; however, many states have used preemption to take control away from local governments. Available evidence suggests states with conservative legislatures are more likely to use preemption to address housing policy, while states are less likely to use preemption when higher percentages of their population rent their homes23.
How could this strategy advance health equity? This strategy is rated potential to decrease disparities: suggested by expert opinion.
Experts suggest that rent regulation policies, especially with income eligibility requirements, have the potential to decrease disparities in experiences of displacement, evictions, and access to affordable housing, especially between people of color with low incomes and white people with higher incomes2, 7, 8. Available data suggest that Hispanic people and immigrants are more likely to live in rent regulated units, which provide rent savings and reduced rent burdens, than white people and people born in the U.S.35. Available evidence suggests that strong rent regulation policies can reduce the overall availability of rental units; however, the effects vary by income, with an increase in rental unit availability for people with very low incomes and a decrease in rental unit availability for people with higher incomes. These results vary depending on policy details and features of the local housing market27.
Rent regulation policies without income eligibility requirements appear to have more beneficial effects for people born in the U.S. than for immigrants, even though immigrants are more likely to rent17. Available data from New York City shows immigrant tenants pay more, even in rent-stabilized units, than non-immigrants; the cost difference is especially high among female-headed households17. Rents in large cities are very expensive and disproportionately burden immigrants, who typically have lower incomes than people born in the U.S.17.
Most rent regulation policies do not include income eligibility requirements and the benefits provided are not adjusted for household income16. Available evidence suggests that in the early 2000s, rent reductions through rent regulation were much lower for tenants of color than for white tenants16. However, these racial gaps have been decreasing since 2011, largely because of gentrification, which increased benefits for tenants of color who were able to remain in gentrifying neighborhoods whereas incoming white tenants received smaller rent benefits as new tenants16. Since these disparities have been reduced due to gentrification and not through policy changes, disparities could increase again over time as white tenants remain in their apartments and their rent regulation benefits increase, especially if tenants of color leave gentrifying neighborhoods16. Another study suggests that tenants with higher incomes appear to benefit more from rent regulation policies that are not targeted than tenants with lower incomes22.
What is the relevant historical background?
The first generation of rent regulations in the U.S. originated in New York City and Washington, D.C. around 1920. These policies used strict rent control through long-term price ceilings to prevent profiteering15, 27. While these policies ended following World War I, rent controls reemerged at the federal level during World War II to protect affordable housing15. The federal Office of Price Administration was established to ration goods, set prices, and control rent. At its peak, almost 80% of rental units were under federal rent control; however, by the end of the 1950s, most rent controls had disappeared15.
In the 1970s, the second generation of rent regulations were introduced in response to rampant inflation and large tenant organizing efforts. Often called rent stabilization, these regulations were more moderate, with policy variations such as set rates for rent increases, exceptions for cost increases, property exemptions, or vacancy decontrol provisions15. Most rent regulations were implemented to increase affordable housing supply; however, in the 1980s and 1990s, landlords and real estate industry opponents of rent control successfully spread the theory that rent control will always reduce the quality, supply, and efficiency of the housing market; state-level preemption was then used to end many rent regulation policies15, 36.
Following the 2008 recession, many cities experienced rapid rent increases that renewed interest in rent regulations and resulted in numerous campaigns to repeal state preemption laws or pass rent regulations15. The COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated the housing affordability crisis: from 2019 to 2021, median rent in the U.S. increased by 12%, double the 6% increase to inflation rates17. Many residents of large cities are severely rent-burdened; for example, in New York City in 2022, the average renter spent over 68% of their monthly income on rent17. In contrast, many other countries implemented strict rent controls to prevent rent increases during the COVID-19 pandemic, and several European countries and cities maintained rent regulations after the crisis ended34.
Equity Considerations
- Who in your community suffers from severe rent burdens? Are there policies in place to address severe rent burdens? How could rent regulations in your community be strengthened to improve their effectiveness? Does your community have just-cause evictions provisions? Does vacancy decontrol need to be removed or changed?
- What community outreach and education efforts are needed in your community to raise awareness about tenant rights and local rent regulations?
- How well are rent regulations enforced in your community? What partnerships or local efforts could improve compliance and enforcement?
- Do you live in a community in which local affordable housing policies have been preempted by the state government? What community coalitions and campaigns exist or could be developed to petition for preemption repeal?
Implementation Examples
California, Maryland, New Jersey, and New York have rent regulation laws as of 2019. New Jersey has rent control regulations in about 120 jurisdictions; the other three states have regulations covering a few jurisdictions. Thirty-seven states currently prohibit or preempt rent regulation; nine states (Alaska, Hawaii, Maine, Montana, Nevada, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and West Virginia) have no laws that address rent regulation. As of 2021, legislatures in seven states (Colorado, Illinois, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington) are considering challenges to preemption or new regulations to remove prohibitions on rent control10. Oregon was the first state to adopt statewide rent regulation policies24, followed by California25. Similar policies are proposed in Illinois and Washington, and Colorado plans to repeal its statewide ban, allowing local rent regulation policies26.
As of 2022, over 200 U.S. cities have some version of rent regulation policies27; examples include Washington, D.C., New York City, San Francisco, and Newark, New Jersey28, 29, 30, 31. Moderate rent stabilization policies in Berkeley, California have successfully provided roughly 75% of tenants with protection against future displacement; similar policies can be found in Los Angeles, Oakland, San Francisco, and San Jose32. In 2021, voters approved a rent stabilization ordinance in St. Paul, Minnesota17.
New York City is a unique case and still has the only operating first generation rent control program along with second generation rent regulations15. In New York City in 2011, there were nearly one million rent stabilized housing units, roughly 45% of the city’s rental housing stock, and roughly 66% of tenants living in rent-stabilized units were considered low income33.
Rent regulation policies exist in various forms in many other countries around the world; Ireland and Belgium are two countries that have rent regulation policies with income eligibility requirements14. Most European countries have adopted some form of moderate rent regulations, and several places such as Berlin and Catalonia have re-introduced strict rent controls34.
Implementation Resources
‡ Resources with a focus on equity.
PolicyLink-Rent control 2025 - Hoang, T., & Chew, A. (2025). Our homes, our future: Building the power to win rent control for stable communities. PolicyLink.
PolicyLink-Chew 2019 - Chew A, Treuhaft S. Our homes, our future: How rent control can build stable, healthy communities. PolicyLink, Right to the City, The Center for Popular Democracy. February, 2019.
LHS‡ - Local Housing Solutions (LHS). To enhance local affordability and foster inclusive communities. New York University, Furman Center and Abt Associates, Inc.
Furman Center-Affordable housing - Furman Center for Real Estate and Urban Policy. Research area: Affordable & subsidized housing. New York University, Furman Center.
Footnotes
* Journal subscription may be required for access.
1 Pastor 2018 - Pastor M, Carter V, Abood M. Rent matters: What are the impacts of rent stabilization measures? 2018:1-30.
2 McPherson 2004 - McPherson G. It’s the end of the world as we know it (and I feel fine): Rent regulation in New York City and the unanswered questions of market and society. Fordham Law Review. 2004;72(4):1125-1169.
3 JCHS-Rental report 2017 - Joint Center for Housing Studies of Harvard University (JCHS). America's rental housing 2017.
4 Kholodilin 2024 - Kholodilin, K. A. (2024). Rent control effects through the lens of empirical research: An almost complete review of the literature. Journal of Housing Economics, 63, 101983.
5 Urban-Galvez 2017 - Galvez M, Brennan M, Meixell B, Pendall R. Housing as a safety net ensuring housing security for the most vulnerable. Washington, D.C.: Urban Institute; 2017.
6 Furman Center-Yager 2016 - Yager J, Herrine L, Mian N. Gentrification response: A survey of strategies to maintain neighborhood economic diversity. New York University, Furman Center; 2016.
7 DC Policy-Taylor 2020 - Taylor YS. Appraising the District’s rentals. D.C. Policy Center; 2020.
8 Rosser 2017 - Rosser E. Exploiting the poor: Housing, markets, and vulnerability. The Yale Law Journal Forum. 2017;126.
9 CityLab-Holder 2017 - Holder S. Where evictions hurt the most. CityLab; 2017.
10 Urban-Stacy 2021a - Stacy, C. P., Noble, O., Morales-Burnett, J., Hodge, T., & Komarek, T. (2021, July). Rent control: Key policy components and their equity implications. Urban Institute.
11 Autor 2014 - Autor DH, Palmer C, Pathak PA. Housing market spillovers: Evidence from the end of rent control in Cambridge Massachusetts. Journal of Political Economy. 2014;122(3).
12 Wyly 2010 - Wyly E, Newman K, Schafran A, Lee E. Displacing New York. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space. 2010;42(11):2602-2623.
13 Teresa 2015 - Teresa BF. Managing fictitious capital: The legal geography of investment and political struggle in rental housing in New York City. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space. 2016;48(3):465-484.
14 Haffner 2008 - Haffner M, Elsinga M, Hoekstra J. Rent regulation: The balance between private landlords and tenants in six European countries. European Journal of Housing Policy. 2008;8(2):217-233.
15 Goetz 2021 - Goetz, E. G., Damiano, A., Brown, P. H., Alcorn, P., & Matson, J. (2021, September 7). Minneapolis rent stabilization study. Center for Urban and Regional Affairs (CURA) - University of Minnesota.
16 Chen 2023c - Chen, R., Jiang, H., & Quintero, L. E. (2023). Measuring the value of rent stabilization and understanding its implications for racial inequality: Evidence from New York City. Regional Science and Urban Economics, 103, 103948.
17 Bian 2025 - Bian, X., Chen, R., & Jiang, H. (2025). Do immigrants equally benefit from rent control? Real Estate Economics, 53(1), 67–100.
18 Elorza 2007 - Elorza JO. Absentee landlords, rent control and healthy gentrification: Policy proposal to deconcentrate the poor in urban America. Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy 2007;17(1), 1-74.
19 Angst 2025 - Angst, S., Rosen, J., Painter, G., & De Gregorio, S. (2025). Harassment or neglect? How market dynamics and rent control shape landlord behaviour in Los Angeles. Urban Studies, 62(11), 2175–2201.
20 Gardner 2025 - Gardner, M., & Asquith, B. (2025). The effect of rent control status on eviction filing rates: Causal evidence from San Francisco. Housing Policy Debate, 35(2), 334–354.
21 Geddes 2025 - Geddes, E., & Holz, N. (2025). Rational eviction: How landlords use evictions in response to rent control. Journal of Housing Economics, 68, 102047.
22 NBER-Ahern 2022 - Ahern, K. R., & Giacoletti, M. (2022, May). Robbing Peter to pay Paul? The redistribution of wealth caused by rent control. National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER).
23 Goodman 2023 - Goodman, C. B., & Hatch, M. E. (2023). State preemption and affordable housing policy. Urban Studies, 60(6), 1048–1065.
24 NLIHC-Oregon rent control - National Low Income Housing Coalition (NLIHC). From the field: Oregon passes nation’s first statewide rent control law. 2019.
25 CTL-CA 2020 rent control - California Tenant Law (CTL). California 2020 rent control and eviction protection law: Civil Code 1946.2 and 1947.12 within the Tenant Protection Act of 2019.
26 PolicyLink-Chew 2019 - Chew A, Treuhaft S. Our homes, our future: How rent control can build stable, healthy communities. PolicyLink, Right to the City, The Center for Popular Democracy. February, 2019.
27 Stacy 2025 - Stacy, C., Hodge, T. R., Komarek, T. M., Davis, C., Stern, A., Noble, O., Morales-Burnett, J., & Rogin, A. (2025). Rent control and the supply of affordable housing. Journal of Housing Economics, 68, 102063.
28 DC-Rent regulation - Washington, D.C., Department of Housing and Community Development. Rent control.
29 NYC-Rent regulation - New York City (NYC) Rent Guidelines Board. An introduction to the NYC Rent Guidelines Board and the rent stabilization system.
30 SF-Rent regulation - City and County of San Francisco (SF), Rent Board. Learn about San Francisco rental laws: The San Francisco Rent Ordinance offers rent control and eviction protections for most tenants.
31 Newark-Rent control - City of Newark, Economic and Housing Development, Office of Rent Control. Service: Rent control.
32 Barton 2012 - Barton SE. The city’s wealth and the city’s limits: Progressive housing policy in Berkeley, California, 1976–2011. Journal of Planning History. 2012;11(2):160-178.
33 Furman Center-Rent stable - Furman Center for Real Estate and Urban Policy, New York University. Profile of rent-stabilized units and tenants in New York City. 2014.
34 Kholodilin 2023 - Kholodilin, K. A., & Kohl, S. (2023). Rent price control – yet another great equalizer of economic inequalities? Evidence from a century of historical data. Journal of European Social Policy, 33(2), 169–184.
35 Zapatka 2023 - Zapatka, K., & De Castro Galvao, J. (2023). Affordable regulation: New York City rent stabilization as housing affordability policy. City & Community, 22(1), 48–73.
36 Anderson 2024 - Anderson, M. B., Zickefoose, G., Andrie, T., & Newton, T. (2024). Landlord opposition to rent control and the politics of class monopoly rent. Human Geography, 18(1), 46–58.
Related What Works for Health Strategies
To see all strategies:
countyhealthrankings.org/whatworks