Mass Evictions & Housing Policy
- Angus King, I-Maine, Chris Van hollen, D-Md., Ruben Gallego, D-Ariz., Bernie Sanders, I-vt., and Mark Kelly, D-Ariz., is generating controversy over its approach to housing affordability.
- The proposed legislation would require firms owning more than 50 single-family rental properties to divest those holdings.
- Critics argue the bill's approach is flawed, suggesting it could lead to mass evictions and disrupt rental markets.
Explore the heated debate surrounding Sen. Merkley’s bill targeting institutional home ownership, a move that proposes to reshape the housing landscape. This legislation, aiming to curb corporate control, faces heavy criticism, fearing it could trigger mass evictions and disrupt the rental market. The “Humans over Private Equity for Homeownership Act” may impact approximately 700,000 homes, with some critics suggesting the potential for widespread displacement. Learn about the bill’s key provisions, including limitations on corporate holdings and potential effects on cities like Phoenix, currently grappling with housing shortages. News Directory 3 breaks down the arguments of both proponents and opponents, scrutinizing the complex relationship between investors, rental markets, and housing affordability. Discover what’s next as the legislative process unfolds and stakeholders engage.
Merkley Bill Aims to Curb Institutional Home Ownership, Sparks Debate
Updated June 14, 2025
A bill sponsored by sen. Jeff Merkley, D-Ore., and co-sponsored by Sens. Angus King, I-Maine, Chris Van hollen, D-Md., Ruben Gallego, D-Ariz., Bernie Sanders, I-vt., and Mark Kelly, D-Ariz., is generating controversy over its approach to housing affordability. Known as the “Humans over Private Equity for Homeownership Act,” the bill seeks to limit corporate ownership of single-family homes.
The proposed legislation would require firms owning more than 50 single-family rental properties to divest those holdings. Merkley estimates this could affect roughly 700,000 homes and, by 2030, potentially 40% of all single-family rentals, or about 5 million homes.
Critics argue the bill’s approach is flawed, suggesting it could lead to mass evictions and disrupt rental markets. They contend that institutional landlords play a crucial role in filling gaps left by tighter mortgage lending standards.
The bill summary states that the purchasing of single-family homes by hedge funds “serves only to make profits for the investors and provides no value to the communities where these homes are located.”
“What this bill explicitly calls for is the eviction of 700,000 families,” one critic said.
The summary also asserts that taxing hedge fund activity in the single-family housing market will help give more families the prospect to purchase a home and combat the growing large investor landlord model.
As an example, Phoenix faces a shortage of approximately 200,000 entry-level single-family homes due to families struggling to secure mortgages. While apartment construction has increased, single-family home construction has not kept pace with demand. Some argue that limiting corporate ownership could hinder the construction of needed rental units.
Senate Bill 1209 would limit the ownership of single-family rentals to 5% of a county’s single-family homes and cap corporate purchases at 100 homes per year.The bill does not specify whether this includes new builds.
Critics question the logic of restricting single-family home development while not imposing similar limits on apartment developers. They argue that Phoenix needs an additional 200,000 units to lower rents, which may require institutional investment.
What’s next
The bill’s future remains uncertain as lawmakers debate its potential impacts on housing markets and affordability.Stakeholders on both sides are likely to continue advocating for their positions as the legislative process unfolds.