Editor’s Note: The RISMedia series Legislative Round-Up looks at pending and passed federal and state-level legislation that impacts real estate professionals.
HUD proposes eliminating a key fair housing rule
On Wednesday, January 14, the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) published a new rule proposal into the Federal Register that would change how the department enforces housing discrimination.
Under the current rule, HUD polices fair housing under an umbrella that includes “discriminatory effects,” i.e., the assessment of whether or not there’s been a fair housing violation isn’t based on proving intent, but in proving effect. That’s to say, if a property owner doesn’t explicitly ban certain groups from buying or renting their housing, but does have a policy that yields a “disparate impact” on one or more such groups being able to buy their housing, it could be classified as housing discrimination by outcome.
HUD’s new proposed rule would shift the burden of interpreting “disparate impact” liability from HUD itself to the courts.
The disparate impact rule has been enforced by HUD since 2013—it was subsequently modified in 2020 under the first Trump administration before being restored in 2023. In April 2025, President Trump issued an executive order to discontinue regulation based on disparate impact liability, which HUD cited in the Federal Register entry as a reason that prompted this rule change proposal.
Said executive order argued undermined principles such as meritocracy and equality based on opportunity, not outcome.
“Disparate-impact liability all but requires individuals and businesses to consider race and engage in racial balancing to avoid potentially crippling legal liability,” the executive order read. “On a practical level, disparate-impact liability has hindered businesses from making hiring and other employment decisions based on merit and skill, their needs, or the needs of their customers because of the specter that such a process might lead to disparate outcomes, and thus disparate-impact lawsuits.”
The National Fair Housing Alliance (NFHA), which called disparate impact “one of the most impactful tools to fight acts of housing and lending discrimination,” criticized HUD’s proposed rule change in a statement made shortly after the rule change’s pre-publication filing on Tuesday, January 13.
“Disparate impact is a common-sense tool that prevents discrimination that is not explicit and challenges the use of proxies for race, gender, and other protected characteristics that might lock people out of housing opportunities,” the statement read. “It also requires housing providers, financial institutions, and municipalities to ensure everyone has a fair shot to obtain safe, secure, and affordable housing in a thriving community.”
Also included were comments from NHFA President and CEO Lisa Rice, who argued that, “This proposal is yet another attempt by the Trump Administration to weaken our nation’s civil rights laws.”
The deadline for public comments on the rule in the Federal Register is Friday, February 13.
Congressman echoes Trump’s call for restricting institutional investors
In early January, President Trump announced on Truth Social intent to restrict large financial investors from buying single-family homes, saying he would call on Congress to make this plan happen, subsequently filing an executive order directing action from government agencies toward this goal.
One member of Congress showed once more that there is bipartisan support for reining in institutional investors’ presence in the residential housing market. Representative Ro Khanna (D-CA) reintroduced the “Stop Wall Street Landlords Act,” which he has previously sponsored in past Congressional sessions without success in passing it. The bill currently has 12 co-sponsors, all Democrats.
The bill is not an outright “ban” on investors owning single-family homes, but introduces new costs to discourage investors from doing so. It imposes an excise tax on the sale of a single-family home by a large investor equal to the home’s sales price, while also disallowing certain deductions as well as prohibiting federal mortgage assistance for investors.
Wisconsin enacts heavy private listings restrictions
Private listings are a key point of contention throughout the real estate industry, specifically due to the ongoing litigation between Compass and Zillow; Compass supports private listings networks, while Zillow mandates listings displayed on Zillow be entered on MLS feeds within one business day under its Listing Access Standards program.
In a sign of the national tailwinds, two states are making moves to restrict private listings. In December 2025, Wisconsin enacted a bill—taking effect January 1, 2027—that mandates that any one-to-four-unit property listed in the state must be listed on a publicly accessible site within one business day, unless the seller completes an opt-out form. This January, Washington state put forth a similar proposal to restrict private listings.
These bills do not mandate that listings have to be displayed on MLSs; “public marketing” can mean a publicly accessible website, for instance.
Arizona senator proposes affordable housing plan for the nation
Senator Ruben Gallego (D-AZ) has released a four-point plan to boost housing construction and bring down costs. Gallego’s office published a 36-page breakdown of his plan, which calls for the ultimate goal of producing 8.5 million new housing units by the end of the decade.
The plan promotes big-picture goals (more units, streamlined zoning, lower prices and future-proofing homes for climate) and then lists policies designed to achieve those goals. The top proposal for building more housing is spurring private investment in construction via expansion of the Low Income Housing Tax credit, as well as introducing a new tax credit for renovation of discarded office buildings into residential units.
Gallego’s proposal continues to list other common and popular housing reform policies: reforming capital gains taxes to incentivize moving and free up existing units, revising the definition of manufactured housing to make it more accessible as an affordable housing solution, prioritizing accessory dwelling units (ADUs), simplifying bureaucratic procedures such as environmental review and incentivizing zoning reform.
Some of the proposals in the plan would directly put money in homeowners’ hands, such as introducing a new tax credit for first-time homebuyers, or giving homeowners the ability to deduct home insurance costs—often one of the most burdensome carrying costs—from federal taxes. The plan also proposes solutions for high prices facing renters, including a ban on algorithmic price-fixing.
The text echoes claims that rent-setting algorithms are a tool of “landlord collusion” to raise prices, with a promise to “direct the FTC and DOJ to investigate and prosecute companies that provide algorithmic tools designed to suppress competition.” So far, certain states and metro areas have enacted bans on algorithmic pricing tools.
Gallego has been rumored as a possible 2028 presidential candidate, suggesting this plan could be his housing platform and/or that housing would be a central issue of his campaign should he indeed choose to run.
New Jersey assembly passes bill to ban algorithmic price-fixing of rental units
On Jan. 12, the New Jersey state assembly passed a bill on a 47 to 26 vote that criminalizes landlords and property managers using algorithms to raise prices for renters on antitrust grounds.
The legislation cites data from the U.S. Census Bureau that over 50% of renters in New Jersey are “rent burdened,” meaning they spend 30% or more of their income on rent, and attributes this in part to price-fixing collusion among landlords.
“Landlords engaging with the software supply real-time prices and additional lease information to companies managing the software, who proceed to use algorithms to fix rental prices. As a result, competition decreases and typically rental prices increase,” the bill claims in its text. It in turn cites statements by an unnamed “leading property management software provider” that its products help landlords “outperform the market.”
The legislation in particular mentions a statement by an executive at said property management software company that “the software could be responsible for rent increases of up to 14.5%.” This seems to suggest the unnamed company is software provider RealPage; in 2022, RealPage Vice President Jay Parsons boasted of rents going up by 14.5%, per reporting from Propublica. In 2024, the Department of Justice launched a lawsuit against RealPage for algorithmic price-fixing, though it was settled in November 2025 without a financial penalty for RealPage.
The New Jersey bill still faces passage in the Senate and approval by the governor before becoming law. However, it is only the latest state to consider such a law, with both New York and California having passed algorithmic price-fixing bans that are now in effect as of January 2026.
California introduces bill to speed up disaster insurance payments
The California State Senate is considering a bill, backed by the state’s Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara, designed to speed up insurance payment processes following natural disasters.
Last year, Los Angeles experienced severe wildfires that destroyed thousands of homes. The California Department of Insurance claims that the Los Angeles payout has been “the fastest on record, with $22.4 billion distributed since January 2025.” The goal of this new bill is to “modernize” the insurance laws of California to ensure a similarly fast payout rate after future natural disasters. Changes include requiring insurers to develop a plan in advance for payouts during disasters, to be reviewed by the CA Department of Insurance, and new consumer protections such as doubling fines for violating fair claims practices during declared states of emergency.
“The Southern California wildfires exposed deep weaknesses in a decades-old framework of insurance regulation and enforcement. Insurance commissioners across the country are hearing increasing consumer complaints whether it’s hurricanes, floods, or wildfires,” said Lara in a statement. “Our goal is to make these protections a model for how insurance companies should handle claims after every disaster so people recover quickly and fairly.”
Ohio advances foreclosure protection for seniors
Ohio lawmakers are advancing House Bill 443, a bipartisan measure that would allow homeowners aged 65 and older protections against tax-related foreclosures. Under the bill, known as the Senior Protection from Foreclosure Act, counties would be barred from enforcing property tax foreclosures on qualifying senior homeowners.
The legislation addresses growing concerns as rising property values have pushed tax bills higher, creating financial strain for seniors on fixed incomes who have substantial equity but limited cash flow.
The bill is currently moving through the Ohio House and could serve as a model for other states facing similar challenges with senior housing security and property tax burdens.
