Lawmakers argue that limiting the amount of time large investors can own pre-built homes would eliminate competition for everyday homebuyers and drive down prices. Not everyone agrees.
The Senate is moving to make homeownership more affordable for Americans through legislation that would limit how long large single-family investors can hold properties, but some experts are skeptical the idea will work.
U.S. senators have added new language to the 21st Century Housing Act that requires large investors to sell build-to-rent properties to private individuals within seven years of completion.
By contrast, investors and builders who would be most affected by the new provisions said the bill could upend the industry and actually raise the cost of housing.
Last week, the National Association of Home Builders and the National Multifamily Housing Council sent a letter to the White House and members of Congress opposing the seven-year requirement.
Ken Wingert
Ken Wingert, chief advocacy officer for the National Association of Home Builders, told Bloomberg last week: “This has been a long, bipartisan process with a lot of positives for housing, and it’s unfortunate that this issue was brought up at the end of what should have been a very collaborative process.”
Meanwhile, the National Association of Realtors (NAR) largely supports the bill, saying last week that new additions to the bill would help address barriers to increasing supply, such as making it easier to build new homes.
Shannon McGahn
“The ROAD to 21st Century Housing Act epitomizes the meaningful reforms we have been advocating for for years,” Shannon McGahn, NAR’s executive vice president and chief advocacy officer, said in a statement last week. “Confronting housing barriers at every level by supporting planning and construction for growing communities, streamlining federal processes that slow construction, modernizing financing options for manufactured and rural housing, improving access to credit, and strengthening recognition of VA mortgage benefits. These are practical steps that will help accelerate supply, reduce costs, and expand opportunity.”
The Senate could vote on the bill as early as this week.
President Trump has long focused on institutional investors, and the White House has proposed that the Senate include a provision in the bill that would ban institutional investors from purchasing existing homes. However, the proposal excluded build-to-rent developers.
But the Senate proposal now puts a seven-year ownership limit squarely on these developers, making it even harder to secure financing as the real estate clock ticks. Industry insiders say investors will be less willing to put money into real estate because there is a limit to how long they can make money on it.
Rick Palacios
Proponents of the idea argue that this would free up housing for everyday homebuyers. However, other industry analysts disagree.
“Funds earmarked for rental development will need to look for opportunities elsewhere,” the John Barnes Research and Consulting report said. “We think the number of new homes being built in America will decline.”
Regarding X, Rick Palacios Jr., one of the report’s co-authors, added that the provision would “depress future housing supply and worsen affordability.”
The proposed ROAD to 21st Century Housing Act would constrain future housing supply and worsen affordability.
A tougher stance on build-to-rent (BTR) is of greatest concern, and we fear that much of the housing supply seen in the graph below is now at risk. https://t.co/dmxp1OqjXA. pic.twitter.com/hykbKWFL76
— Rick Palacios Jr. (@RickPalaciosJr) March 8, 2026
Tracy Ryniek, a value stock strategist at Zacks, blasted the X clause.
“This is the stupidest provision I have ever heard,” Liniec wrote. “Many of the people who rent single-family homes are not in a position to buy. They have credit issues. Landlords won’t use this clause to build homes. There will be fewer homes. Tenants will be evicted. Hmm.”
Darryl Fairweather | Redfin
But Darryl Fairweather, Redfin’s chief economist, said the proposed changes to the manufactured housing bill could actually help housing affordability.
“The ROAD to Housing Act removes the red tape around building homes and makes it easier for the public to finance housing, making it more accessible and more likely to be built,” Fairweather said in a video posted to X last week. The economist suggested that if the stigma surrounding this type of housing were eliminated, the country’s affordable housing supply problem could increase significantly.
Email Lillian Dickerson
