Know what would do even more? Punish companies that own and rent massive amounts of real estate. For example, limit rent increases for companies that own a real percentage of the homes in a market to no greater than some percentage of inflation. Make it so they are incentivized to invest in literally anything that isn't buying a home to rent. Maybe they can get a break if they build the home on undeveloped land first, but do something at least.
For single-family homes, there's a really easy solution: only allow individuals to own them. This doesn't kill the rental market; it's just common sense. You personally want to build a rental empire? Fine. But no hiding behind an LLC or other corporate structure -- if you want to rent-seek, you shouldn't have the protections of a business.
Multifamily is of course a different beast, as individual ownership rarely occurs above very small complexes. Still, capping rent increases at inflation plus minimum-wage increase (we're talking Washington here; it goes up annually) would go a long way toward stabilizing budgeting for renters.
It astounds me how many homeowners who locked in mortgages at $800 at 3% simply refuse to believe there's an affordability crisis in the rental market. "Just make 15% more next year" isn't particularly useful advice in a deteriorating job market.
Hey my mortgage is 2.75%. For every dollar I save to move somewhere nicer though, the homes I'm looking at go up by $2-3. I don't know how I'm supposed to ever move into a nicer home than what I have now when I'm constantly chasing the price of those homes and getting further and further. It's not even like I make too little money either, just that I didn't have enough money 5 years ago to even be in the race to begin with.
How kind of them ... a 10% cap. As though renters paying 50% of their income on housing get 5% raises every year -- never laid off -- and there's zero inflation elsewhere.
H.B. 1217: Slightly less usury for tenants permanently priced out of owning
I definitely agree that there should be more consequences (or at least higher fines,) but I'm glad they're doing SOMETHING! I wish we had something like that here in awful Oklahoma. (I know, it'd never happen, but I can dream!)
Only $2,000 fines? Fine them even more than that cmon
A year's rent at the illegal rate as a fine ought to get landlords in line. Tenant's payments won't even cover it, and they take a loss on the unit for the year beyond other costs.
That would be per unit per month. It's not small
Leeching bastards. Should have been $100,000 per dwelling per month. Fuck landlords.
Hey, it's a start.
News about and pertaining to the United States and its people.
Please read what's functionally the mission statement before posting for the first time. We have a narrower definition of news than you might be accustomed to.
For World News, see the News community.
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.