Massachusetts Rent Control Debate: Build More Housing or Repeat New York City’s Mistakes?

Massachusetts is standing at a defining moment in its housing history. Rents remain stubbornly high, homeownership feels out of reach for many residents, and some policymakers and highly questionable housing groups drum up mounting pressure to “do something” — fast. Across the country, several misguided cities are wrestling with similar housing problems and a few are turning to rent control and aggressive tenant-protection regimes as political quick fixes. It’s time to start asking the real and hard questions – and not feed into the rage baiting drive-by media noise. Let’s get after it right now!

Does rent control actually drive down rents? Or do people move to other states with better and newer housing options through an abundance supply mindset? What types of financial studies could be performed to see if rent control drives people to leave their state? Does anyone want to live in expensive and outdated housing? When people vote with their feet and leave a state does that lower the tax base? If we have less taxpayers does that impair vital state services? Is pandering for votes good economic policy for the financial well-being of a state? Let’s do a deep dive into the proposed rent control measure in Massachusetts and all it’s potential impacts.

Politicians are often players – nearly all of them do what is popular rather than what is fiscally correct. Election cycles are very short and attention spans even shorter. Never underestimate the power of propaganda in various campaigns. Popularity often comes at a cost of financial prudence and overall wellbeing of their constituency. There are also several NGO’s and other socialist leaning groups that would prefer housing in America be community or government owned. How does that work and who funds these group? Should internationally funded NGO’s have a say in our local housing considerations? Could knee jerk reactions and unclear thinking be contributing to the lack of housing supply? We can go really deep down the rabbit hole of impediments to free market forces which almost always reduce supply and drive prices up. Every new legislation and red tape adds to the price of housing. Math is math.

What if politicians and well-meaning but misguided activist groups just let the free market create more supply without restrictions – could housing costs come down in meaningful ways? Why do some politicians and questionably funded housing groups feel the need to constantly add more legislation and restrictions to housing providers that drives up the cost of construction and reduces supply? What is that? How did we even get to rent control as a concept? . Is rent control on the ballot caused by a series of bad legislations created by either well meaning or opportunistic politicians looking to “feel good” but not understanding the construction and supply process? Should we double down on teaching supply and demand in our school systems? There is so much to think about when it comes to how we got to the horrible problem of thinking about rent in Massachusetts. We most likely would never even be talking about rent control if we spent 90 percent of our time focused on supply. Focusing on the wrong things nearly always creates bigger problems down the road. Kicking the can with bad policies nearly always creates bottlenecks and less quality housing at scale.

Before we follow that path with any form of rent control, we should take a hard look at New York City — a cautionary tale of how socialist group-think housing policy can backfire, shrinking supply, degrading housing quality, and ultimately making affordability worse. Can we find one quantifiable success matrix in rent control in New York or anywhere else for that matter? Here is what we know – if there was one success story about rent control in America it would be widely touted by many so called “affordability groups” with questionable funding sources. Real questions need to be asked – how are some of these housing advocacy groups actually funded. Where does their money come from? What is their end game? The fact that these questionable housing groups can’t point to one success story of rent control across America over the last 100 years is the tell that says it all. Could this be more about power than anything else? Time will tell but the fact remains that after one century there is not one politician or group that can point to a true rent control success story. You and I both know we would have seen this success story show up all across the national media and be repeated throughout all the local media ad nauseum.

Massachusetts Housing Crisis Is Reaching a Breaking Point

The U.S. housing crisis is real. Rents have surged dramatically over the past decade, homelessness has reached record highs, and homeownership takes longer for most middle-income earners. Rising housing and building standards including “green measures” often bump up the cost of new product by over 20 percent in many states. Do we really expect developers to go bankrupt to build green housing? Would politician or housing advocacy groups work for free for years and lose money? Who is the taking the risk? Cost increases in the housing industry are real. You can’t wish away inflation that started several years ago. When costs go up- these pressures disproportionately harm marginalized communities, particularly renters who already face higher eviction risks and housing instability. Innovation and a reduction of onerous zoning restrictions and green initiatives would help drive down costs- but how do you circle that square with all the various groups clamoring for more regulations? The people of Massachusetts need to make serious decisions in 2026.

There were many reasons for inflation in rent prices that started several years ago. Supply and demand never stops working. There are numerous factors that drive up pricing. Between government overspending and printing too much money you will always get inflation. Excessive government spending always triggers inflation and there are tons of charts to prove it- do a google search. You also had a massive influx of people that entered the country which filled up housing.  According to data from the U.S. Census Bureau and an analysis from the UMass Donahue Institute, the population of Massachusetts saw an extreme shift between the years of 2021 and 2024. This influx offset the steady outflow of Massachusetts residents to other states. The net numbers show that MA population grew by more than 50,000 individuals between July 2023 and July 2024 alone, the highest increase in Boston. Including that universities also increased their international student enrollment over the last several years. Most of these students enrolling in graduate programs are not provided with dorm housing; this also had a large impact. Coupled with the immigration influx, Boston rent pricing responded accordingly. Housing production often takes years from raw land into finished product, especially in a city with some of the most difficult zoning laws. Rent prices and housing supply are inextricably linked - it is simply a math driven equation – add too many people too fast and you watch the real time vacancy rate (RTVR) and real time availability rates (RTAR) plummet. The fact remains that we saw some of the lowest vacancy and availability rates in MA over the last several years. Clearly we need to look at new housing supply ideas and provide more zoning relief.

The Supply Problem - The Root Cause of High Housing Costs

Low supply is the biggest driver in higher rent prices. Data has a simple way of explaining supply and demand and it subsequent effects on rent prices. As our immigration policies change – so have rents. As our interest rates and inflation change – so does housing stats. Don’t get caught up in the politics or headlines of any matter – go back to the math. One need not look further than the certain suburbs or gateway cities where rents have flatlined or gone down. The amount of people in an area determines rents and concessions. Certain neighborhoods of Boston near universities were deeply impacted last year from international students not showing up for enrollment. Rent prices respond quickly to policies – math is math. So we know the solution to affordable rents is to widely increase supply and provide more housing choices as quickly as possible.

Boston Housing is not immune to math and data. While Massachusetts continues to lose people across the state – Boston still continues to grow. It’s a very deceptive slow boiling “frog in the pot” scenario. Boston may look great and continue to grow while in many parts of the state it continues to hollow out. Demand in Boston continues to outpace supply, especially in transit-accessible neighborhoods and near job centers. The core problem, however, is not mysterious: there simply isn’t enough housing. Another blatant truth: bringing back rent control that affects Boston and all of MA will make the problem worse. Rent control scares away developers that risk enormous sums of money and time to finish a project. Most developers that you speak with say they are building properties with long term financial pay back horizons and going broke or giving their property over to foreclosure is not a risk worth taking under rent control. Ten years is often not enough time on larger rental developments to get their capital back. Developers can bring their capital to any state and will usually do so where they feel they have control over their own property. At the end of the day – it is their money and they are taking all the financial and time risks. No one wants to work for years to get a housing project finished only to find out someone else can be in charge of their own outcome.

Most people have no idea how risky housing development is and all the things that can go wrong in the process. Many smaller developers will literally risk all their life savings and borrow large sums of money to build housing. There are very few people in America that can build properties with their own capital because the costs are massive. Developers have that entrepreneurial spirit within them – that voice that says I can build something better. However, when government keeps adding regulations such as green requirements and affordability mandates and hurdles to them completing projects – it causes them to think differently and take pause. A lot of people don’t realize that during the development process the owner is not collecting rents – they are collecting a massive amount of debt. Even when the building is finished they still need time to stabilize the asset and pay back all the people they borrowed money from – and that can take years. Impediments and headwinds create low supply. Rent control will just make it worse. Rent control in Massachusetts could be the final straw in severally halting our housing production. What happens if a significant amount of our developers start moving to other states? We have some bad news for you – it is already happening. We have had countless conversations with: builders, framers, electricians, plumbers and many other associated in housing supply chain that are looking to other states for business. We can’t afford this skill trade brain drain.

Why Rent Control Fails to Solve the Boston Housing Crisis

Rent control is often framed as a simple moral choice — protecting tenants from so-called “greedy landlords” — but in practice it operates as a price ceiling that distorts the housing market. When rents are artificially capped, new construction slows or stops because developers can no longer justify the financial risk, existing landlords delay maintenance as rising costs for labor, utilities, taxes, and capital repairs go unrecovered, and rental units quietly disappear as they are converted to condominiums or left vacant altogether. Poor housing stock causes people to leave our state and deters people from moving here. Who wants to live in expensive dilapidated properties?

Imagine if our state passed other price and wage controls – how would that look if you were impacted. What if the state said your salary could not go higher than the government allotted wage? There is also the issue of rent control being only forced upon landlords but not on college dorms or tuitions. Clearly there are tens of thousands of students in dorms across the state of MA yet there are no dorm or tuition price controls. How does that work? Anyone see a problem in the fairness doctrine in that situation? Why do colleges get special exemptions from taxes and regulations? What is that?

Is it fair that landlords would be asked to take on an unfair burden of their properties falling into disrepair while Colleges and Universities can continue to raise prices but they don’t pay taxes? Why do tax free institutions get special treatment? People leave states when they feel the game is rigged against them. Is MA growing or shrinking in population? What if our highest earners leave the state? Would unfair rent control cause more people to leave? What person would want to live in substandard housing ten years from now when the effects of rent control wreak havoc on the quality of existing housing? Does anyone want to live in housing where a landlord is forced to make delayed repairs with bubble gum, popsicle sticks and duct tape because they can’t afford a proper remedy? Would we have to add more government workers and increase Inspectional Service budgets? Would adding more government workers lead to even higher taxes? What are we actually doing here? Are we implementing bad policy to create worse future outcomes?

These negative housing outcomes created by rent control are not theoretical. Cities that have expanded rent control have consistently seen declines in building permits and long-term increases in market-rate rents due to constrained supply. Where are the pro rent control advocates on housing quality and new supply? Are they going to go build it themselves for everyone else? It is fairly easy to complain a lot – but it takes more effort to swing a hammer or hang sheetrock. Less complaining and more “doing” might also be a solution. Misallocation of time spent complaining doesn’t make one more unit of housing.

For Boston specifically, but also all of Massachusetts, which already struggles to approve new projects quickly, layering on rent caps would all but guarantee fewer homes in the future. We have got to change our thinking here – abundant supply is the key to driving prices down. What if we tried something new? What if we decided to remove major obstacles to development such as onerous green requirements and affordability quotas? Who came up with 20 percent affordable units anyways? Did the people cheerleading that ever build one house in their lives? What do they actually know about building? Many of them have a PHD in complaining but literally have never built anything. Why did affordability requirements creep up over time and who was responsible for this disaster? Who did our politicians listen to? Are we letting politicians make decisions or business leaders? What if we decided to have a two year moratorium on any housing building restrictions just to see how much we could build? What is the worst that can happen – A giant building boom? Do giant building booms create skills that pay bills and lots of jobs? Here is what we know – our current negative limited thinking got us into the rent control quick sand where we are now – and it is probably time to try something new. Let’s try moving from whiners to winners. What would we have to lose?

New York Rent Control: A Warning for Massachusetts, Not a Model

Nowhere are the unintended consequences clearer than in New York.

Nearly half of the city’s rental housing falls under some form of rent regulation. Rent increases are dictated by political boards, sometimes frozen entirely, regardless of inflation or operating costs. Evictions — even for nonpayment — can take more than a year, with city-funded legal counsel for tenants and multiple mechanisms that allow rent-free occupancy long after a court ruling. How is New York doing? Is the state of New York growing or shrinking? People vote with their feet. What happens when people get taxed and regulated to the point of no return? Most people don’t like to leave their state – but when they do; you know something is severely wrong. The fact is that New York is losing population. Most states with the most regulations lose people over time. People inherently want to be free to maximize their outcome in life and control their destiny. That is why people want to come to America.

Check the U-Haul records of your state to know it’s financial health as the two are inextricably linked to each other. If your state is growing your tax base is growing – if they are leaving….. Math is Math. Next comes reductions in state services. Rent control will drive people out of the state – especially our young and vibrant college graduates because no one wants to live in government controlled housing. Truth be told – government has never been good at delivering or managing housing supply. Government needs to get out of the way and listen to their developers as they are the experts in delivering supply.

What Decades of Rent Regulation Did to New York’s Housing Stock

Additionally, data from the 2017 New York City Housing and Vacancy Survey showed that rent-controlled apartments were significantly more likely to suffer from poor conditions: 53 percent had at least one maintenance deficiency, compared with 36.4 percent of unregulated units. Even after accounting for building age, rent-controlled units were more than twice as likely to have three or more serious maintenance problems—18 percent versus just 7.5 percent across seven major condition categories. This is not a hard math equation. States that raise their taxes and regulations higher than inflation or CPI eat into repair or upgrade capital that a landlord could put back into their building. Back to basics – Math is Math.

Under Mayor Zohran Mamdani, the city is poised to go even further into the depths and dangers of a rent control nightmare.His administration has embraced officials and advisors who openly question private property rights and advocate for expanded government control over housing. Meanwhile, policies like “good cause eviction” and strict limits on capital improvement increases have made reinvestment financially irrational. You can all but rest assured that taxes will increase in New York and this will accelerate people leaving. As people leave, taxes will be raised to cover budget shortfalls – and the downward cycle continues.

No one exactly knows what books Zohran read during high school but our guess is that he may have either skipped economics class or it wasn’t provided at his school at the time. We have to double down on better quality free market educational classes in America that took us from the swamps to the stars and made us the best country on the planet. It is crucial that we start looking at what is being taught in our school systems and ask business leaders to speak to our youth in a positive inspirational way that creates abundance based thinking. We may also want to examine how some of these socialist groups and politicians receive their funding sources.

Rent control is not only bad for housing but it is a dream killer to our future young builders. Young people want to enter into vibrant employment sectors. Rent control stifles innovation and creativity and creates whiners instead of winners. Mindset is important in life and we have to start bringing more positive and forward thinking people into our collective consciousness. New builders will deploy more technology and innovation into the building process – not red tape.

The horrible results of rent control speak loudly:

• Tens of thousands of apartments sit vacant.
• Small landlords exit the market.
• New housing production lags far behind demand.
• Despite decades of rent regulation, New York remains one of the most expensive rental markets in the world.

Who Benefits From Rent Control — and Who Pays the Price

Rent control undeniably benefits a subset of existing tenants — often without regard to income — who secure below-market apartments and remain in them for decades, sometimes long after their housing needs or financial circumstances have changed. How is that fair? However, this artificial stability comes at a steep cost to everyone else. New renters are forced into fierce competition for a shrinking pool of market-rate units, driving prices higher and making access to housing increasingly difficult.

Housing mobility collapses as families stay locked into apartments that no longer fit their size, location, or lifestyle needs, reducing turnover and flexibility across the entire market. At the same time, discrimination can intensify when price signals are removed, as landlords rely more heavily on subjective screening criteria rather than open competition.

The paradox is that cities with extensive rent control often experience deeper inequality and less opportunity — not more — as access to housing becomes scarcer and more unevenly distributed.

MA´s Better Solution: Build More Housing to Lower Rents

MA still has a choice. Unlike New York, it can avoid doubling down on failed socialist policies that punish housing supply and discourage long-term investment, and instead pursue reforms that address the root of the affordability crisis. The path forward is proven to work: modernizing zoning rules to allow denser housing near transit lines and job centers, streamlining permitting processes to reduce delays and political uncertainty for builders, and encouraging mixed-income and multifamily development at meaningful scale.

We also need to explore all our green and affordability requirements and if they have served us well over the past decade. Do green and increasing affordability quotas drive up the cost of construction? If so – how can you create abundant housing if the cost per unit soars to the moon? What if we are looking at this all wrong? What if we just decided to build at scale without endless restrictions? Why are some cities across the nation growing faster than others? Could supply be the driving factor of building better cities?

Rather than relying on blunt price controls, MA can more effectively protect vulnerable tenants through targeted assistance such as housing vouchers, rental subsidies, and eviction-prevention programs. When housing supply is allowed to grow, competition begins to work in renters’ favor — prices stabilize, housing quality improves, and displacement pressures ease without undermining the long-term health of the market.

Massachusetts Rent Control Decision Will Shape the City’s Future

Massachusetts can either repeat New York City’s mistakes — piling regulation on top of scarcity — or choose a more sustainable path rooted in economic reality.

Rent control may win applause from some in the short term, but history shows it leads to fewer homes, worse housing, and higher rents over time. Building more housing is the only solution that actually addresses the root of the crisis. It is time the courage to do what is right wins over feel good slogans and politically opportunistic people that have divorced themselves from math and supply and demand.

At this crossroads, Massachusetts should choose growth, not gimmicks. Mindset, action and courage must win out over fear and pandering. Let the business leaders in real estate show us the way to an abundant supply of shiny new affordable housing- not some politically appointed government board that doesn’t understand housing and delivers us a decayed housing stock over the long haul. The health of our housing stock depends on us rejecting rent control.