Many housing policy experts argue that limiting or prohibiting large institutional investors from buying single-family homes can help preserve the supply of owner-occupied housing. These proposals often define thresholds based on portfolio size or ownership structure to ensure the rule applies only to large corporate entities, not individual landlords.

These policies give first-time homebuyers, local residents, nonprofits, or community land trusts priority access to homes before they can be sold to investors. Similar programs exist for foreclosed homes, helping keep properties in the hands of local buyers rather than national investment funds.

To prevent private equity firms from buying homes through shell LLCs, many policymakers propose requiring public disclosure of the actual parent company behind purchases. This improves oversight, prevents evasion of ownership caps, and gives municipalities better insight into investor behavior.

Some jurisdictions consider adding taxes or fees on:

• Bulk purchases
• Rapid resales (“flipping”)
• Large portfolios of single-family units

The goal is to discourage speculative activity that drives up prices and reduces supply for households seeking long-term residency.

Policies in this category include:

• Down-payment assistance for first-time buyers
• Grants or financing for community land trusts (CLTs)
• Support for resident-owned cooperatives
• Programs that direct foreclosed or tax-delinquent homes to nonprofits instead of investors

These efforts strengthen the position of families and communities in the housing market and help prevent corporate consolidation.

New Yorkers should not have to compete with Wall Street to buy a home. Across the state, private equity firms and large corporate investors are using all-cash offers to outbid families, drive up prices, and turn starter homes into high-rent investments. The result? First-time homebuyers are being pushed out, rents are rising, and entire neighborhoods are becoming corporate portfolios—not communities.

We are fighting to change that.

Corporate landlords often outbid families with instant cash offers

• They target starter homes, further shrinking supply
• Rents rise faster than inflation under institutional ownership
• Studies show higher eviction rates from corporate landlords
• Once purchased, homes are permanently removed from the owner-occupied market
• New York already has one of the tightest housing markets in the U.S.

Doing nothing means more families priced out and fewer paths to homeownership.

Our reform will support:

• Young families looking for their first home
• Teachers, nurses, and essential workers
• Low- and middle-income buyers locked out of a rigged market
• Communities fighting displacement and rising rents
• Future generations who deserve the same opportunities we had

Housing should not be a Wall Street investment strategy. It should be a foundation for stable families and vibrant neighborhoods.

Private equity firms buy residential homes in bulk using all-cash offers that ordinary families cannot compete with. They target affordable starter homes, convert them to rentals, raise rents, add fees, and file higher eviction rates. These homes then leave the owner-occupied market—often forever.

Starter homes are the foundation of homeownership and generational wealth-building. When private equity purchases these homes, first-time buyers lose the ability to compete, leaving families locked out while corporate portfolios grow.

Yes, New York needs more housing—but supply alone does not solve the problem if large corporate investors can outbid families for nearly every affordable home that gets built. Stopping corporate buyers is a complementary policy, not a competing one.

While private equity does not own the majority of housing, their purchases are concentrated in markets where inventory is already tight. Even a small share of corporate buying can have outsized effects on prices, competition, and neighborhood stability.

The proposal would prohibit:

• Private equity firms
• Hedge funds
• Large corporate investors and subsidiaries
• Institutional buyers above a defined size threshold

from purchasing:

• Single-family homes
• Condos/townhomes
• Small multi-family properties (2–4 units)

This does not apply to small individual landlords or family-owned LLCs.

No. Existing ownership can continue temporarily, but future acquisitions would be banned, and subsequent sales must return homes to the owner-occupied market—not to another corporate buyer.

Keeping homes owned by people instead of corporations reduces predatory rent hikes, stabilizes neighborhoods, and prevents high eviction rates associated with private equity landlords. More owner-occupants also creates safer, more invested communities.

No. This policy is regulatory—not a subsidy program. It does not require new tax dollars. It simply sets rules about who can purchase certain types of homes.

Yes. States including California, Minnesota, North Carolina, and Hawaii have introduced or are studying restrictions on institutional purchases. New York has the opportunity to lead with the strongest and most effective protections.

No. This proposal is targeted only at large-scale institutional investors. Small landlords, mom-and-pop property owners, and family LLCs are completely unaffected.

No. Regulations aimed at corporate investment entities do not target individuals or protected classes. Many cities already have “first look” programs prioritizing residents and nonprofits — and these have passed legal review.

The policy requires beneficial ownership disclosure, meaning the true parent company must be identified. This prevents firms from hiding behind shell LLCs and keeps enforcement effective.

By stopping deep-pocketed corporate buyers from competing with families, the market becomes more balanced. This can help slow price escalation in the starter-home segment and improve affordability for first-time buyers.

Because regulations alone cannot reverse corporate consolidation that has already happened — and cannot shield families from bidding wars where they are outmatched by cash-rich investors. A ban is the only way to keep starter homes available for New Yorkers, not corporations.

To ensure that:

• New York’s residential neighborhoods remain people-centered
• First-time buyers have a fair shot at owning homes
• Housing is treated as shelter and stability—not a financial instrument
• Communities can flourish without corporate extraction

This is about protecting New York’s future and rebuilding pathways to homeownership.