This part bars a large investor from buying single-family homes. A large investor is one holding at least 350 such homes. Eleven kinds of purchase are carved out, such as building new homes to rent. Renters get a phone line and website for disputes. The bar starts in 180 days and ends after 15 years.
“(II) alone or in concert with 1 or more other entities, beginning after the date of enactment of this Act, directly or indirectly has investment control of not less than 350 single-family homes in the aggregate,”
The section defines a large institutional investor as a for profit entity of any legal form that is engaged in whole or in part in investing in, owning, renting, managing, or holding single-family homes and that, alone or with others, has direct or indirect investment control of at least 350 such homes, not counting homes bought in an excepted purchase after enactment. It excludes any local, State, Tribal, or federal government body. Investment control turns on ownership, primary authority over investment or management decisions, control of the general partner or managing member, control of the investment manager, ownership of more than 25 percent of a class of equity unless a passive investor, or other control.
What the document actually says
“(II) alone or in concert with 1 or more other entities, beginning after the date of enactment of this Act, directly or indirectly has investment control of not less than 350 single-family homes in the aggregate,”
That sentence, in plain words
The firm must control at least 350 single-family homes. It may do so alone or with others. It may do so straight out or through another body.
What this is about
Investment control does not mean only holding the deed. It can mean running the firm that holds it. Government bodies are left out of this definition.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
“(A) means a structure that contains 2 or fewer dwelling units that are each intended for residential occupancy by a single household; and (B) does not include a manufactured home, as defined in section 603 of the National Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5402).”
The section defines a single-family home as a structure with two or fewer dwelling units, each meant for one household, and excludes a manufactured home as defined in section 603 of the National Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards Act of 1974. A purchase covers any purchase, transfer, or other acquisition, including through mergers, acquisitions, construction, foreclosures, or bulk purchases, whether or not for cash.
What the document actually says
“(A) means a structure that contains 2 or fewer dwelling units that are each intended for residential occupancy by a single household; and (B) does not include a manufactured home, as defined in section 603 of the National Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5402).”
That sentence, in plain words
The building holds two homes or fewer. Each is meant for one household. A factory-built home does not count.
What this is about
A duplex still fits the definition. A larger building does not. The word purchase is read broadly here.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “may not”Who acts: large institutional investorsHow: statuteSec. 1001 in the PDF
What the document says
“No large institutional investor may purchase, or enter into a contract to directly or indirectly purchase, any single-family home.”
The section bars a large institutional investor from buying, or contracting to buy directly or indirectly, any single-family home. The bar does not reach an excepted purchase or a purchase in connection with restructuring or reorganizing ownership of homes owned or bought on or before enactment.
What the document actually says
“No large institutional investor may purchase, or enter into a contract to directly or indirectly purchase, any single-family home.”
That sentence, in plain words
A large investor may not buy a single-family home. It may not sign a deal to buy one either. That holds whether it buys straight out or through another body.
What this is about
The bar has carve-outs set out elsewhere in the section. Homes already owned are not touched. Reorganizing ownership of those homes is allowed.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
“(B) pursuant to a build-to-rent program where the large institutional investor purchases, constructs, or constructs and retains a newly constructed single-family homes to be managed as a rental property”
The section carves out eleven kinds of purchase: newly built, renovated, or converted homes for sale; build-to-rent programs; renovate-to-rent programs that substantially rehabilitate homes failing local codes and spend at least 15 percent of the purchase price on improvements; homeownership programs meeting four tests including rent reporting the renter opts into and meaningful financial support; programs to boost homeownership with rent reporting, a right of first refusal and a 30-day first look; satisfaction of debts previously contracted in good faith; acquisitions by a servicer or lender solely through foreclosure or similar means for loss mitigation; purchases from another large investor that owned the home at enactment or bought it in compliance; purchases from an investor not covered by the section within two years of the effective date; newly built or converted homes for communities for households with a member aged 55 or older that meet visitability standards; and any combination of those.
What the document actually says
“(B) pursuant to a build-to-rent program where the large institutional investor purchases, constructs, or constructs and retains a newly constructed single-family homes to be managed as a rental property”
That sentence, in plain words
One carve-out covers building homes to rent out. The investor may buy, build, or build and keep a new home. It must manage it as a rental.
What this is about
Eleven carve-outs are named in all. Some cover building or fixing up homes. Some cover programs meant to help renters buy.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “may not be construed”Who acts: CongressHow: statuteSec. 1001 in the PDF
What the document says
“(A) require any large institutional investor to divest or otherwise sell any single-family home purchased before the date of enactment of this Act; or (B) prevent the filing of a petition, or otherwise affect any bankruptcy proceeding, under title 11, United States Code.”
The section states that nothing in it may be read as requiring a large institutional investor to divest or sell a home bought before enactment, or as preventing a bankruptcy petition or affecting a bankruptcy proceeding under title 11 of the United States Code.
What the document actually says
“(A) require any large institutional investor to divest or otherwise sell any single-family home purchased before the date of enactment of this Act; or (B) prevent the filing of a petition, or otherwise affect any bankruptcy proceeding, under title 11, United States Code.”
That sentence, in plain words
No large investor has to sell a home it bought before this law. Nothing here blocks a bankruptcy case either.
What this is about
The bar reaches only new purchases. Homes already held stay where they are. Bankruptcy law is untouched.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “can”Who acts: Secretary of the TreasuryHow: statuteSec. 1001 in the PDF
What the document says
“no regulation issued under subparagraph (A) may amend the definitions of the terms defined under subsection (a), including to--”
The section lets the Secretary of the Treasury, consulting the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, the Director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, and the Chair of the Securities and Exchange Commission, issue notice and comment regulations to carry out the section, including to minimize market disruption and mitigate harm to consumers and communities. No such regulation may amend the definitions in subsection (a), including by altering the scope or types of excepted purchases in a way that undermines the goal of expanding homes available to individual households, adding a category of large institutional investor, or altering the numerical threshold in that definition.
What the document actually says
“no regulation issued under subparagraph (A) may amend the definitions of the terms defined under subsection (a), including to--”
That sentence, in plain words
A rule made under this part may not change the words the law defines. Four things in particular are named as out of bounds.
What this is about
The Treasury may still write rules to carry the part out. It may act to keep the market steady. It may not move the line at 350 homes.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall”Who acts: Secretary of Housing and Urban DevelopmentHow: statuteSec. 1001 in the PDF
What the document says
“a public website designed to assist renters of residential properties owned by a large institutional investor in--”
The section requires the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, within 180 days of enactment, to set up a renter outreach resource made of a toll-free telephone number and a public website helping renters of properties owned by a large institutional investor to tell federal agencies about disputes including potential violations of federal law, to share information about them with other agencies, to monitor them, and to resolve them so far as practicable.
What the document actually says
“a public website designed to assist renters of residential properties owned by a large institutional investor in--”
That sentence, in plain words
The housing agency must set up a public website. It serves renters whose landlord is a large investor. A free phone line goes with it.
What this is about
A renter can use it to report a dispute. That includes a possible breach of federal law. The agency must pass it on and follow it.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall”Who acts: Secretary of Housing and Urban DevelopmentHow: statuteSec. 1001 in the PDF
What the document says
“The Secretary shall promptly process and investigate any information relating to a dispute received through the renter outreach resource established under paragraph (1) about a potential violation of Federal law”
The section requires the Secretary to set reasonable procedures to respond promptly, in writing where appropriate, to a renter who reports a dispute and to document those responses, covering the steps taken, any reply from the investor, and the outcome so far as practicable. The Secretary must promptly process and investigate information about a potential violation of federal law, including by asking the investor for information, identifying the right investor, and sharing the information with relevant agencies, and must give the investor a chance to respond. Where the report concerns State law, the Secretary must at least give the renter contact details for the right State authority.
What the document actually says
“The Secretary shall promptly process and investigate any information relating to a dispute received through the renter outreach resource established under paragraph (1) about a potential violation of Federal law”
That sentence, in plain words
The housing agency must act at once on what a renter reports. It must look into any possible breach of federal law.
What this is about
It must also write back to the renter and keep a record. It must give the landlord a chance to answer. State law matters are passed to the state.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall”Who acts: large institutional investorsHow: statuteSec. 1001 in the PDF
What the document says
“the name, phone number, and email address of the person or entity responsible for receiving and addressing renter disputes for the large institutional investor, and update the name, phone number, and email address within 30 days if such information changes”
The section requires each large institutional investor to give every renter, when they first occupy the home and each year after, written notice about the renter outreach resource and the name, phone number, and email address of whoever handles renter disputes for the investor, updating those details within 30 days of a change, and to feature the outreach resource prominently on a public website the renter can reach.
What the document actually says
“the name, phone number, and email address of the person or entity responsible for receiving and addressing renter disputes for the large institutional investor, and update the name, phone number, and email address within 30 days if such information changes”
That sentence, in plain words
The renter must be given a name, a phone number, and an email. That is the person who handles renter disputes. If any of it changes, the renter must be told within 30 days.
What this is about
The notice goes out when a renter moves in. It goes out again each year. The information must also sit on the landlord's website.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall”Who acts: Secretary of Housing and Urban DevelopmentHow: statuteSec. 1001 in the PDF
What the document says
“The Secretary shall, not later than March 31 of each year, submit to the Congress a public report which analyzes and aggregates the information received or obtained pursuant to this subsection during the prior year that includes--”
The section requires the Secretary to send Congress a public report by March 31 each year analyzing and aggregating what came in through the outreach resource in the prior year, covering the types and number of disputes about potential violations of federal law and of State law, the resolution of those disputes where practicable, and the information investors reported. Data in the report must be aggregated or anonymized, and the Secretary must protect personally identifiable information received through the resource.
What the document actually says
“The Secretary shall, not later than March 31 of each year, submit to the Congress a public report which analyzes and aggregates the information received or obtained pursuant to this subsection during the prior year that includes--”
That sentence, in plain words
The housing agency must report to Congress each year. The report is due by March 31. It sums up what came in the year before. It is a public report.
What this is about
The report counts disputes about federal law and about state law. Figures are grouped or stripped of names. That keeps private details out.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall”Who acts: large institutional investorsHow: statuteSec. 1001 in the PDF
What the document says
“(A) notify the Secretary each year whether such owner is a large institutional investor as defined in subsection (a); and”
The section requires each person or entity meeting the definition of a large institutional investor, within 180 days of enactment and by December 31 each year after, to tell the Secretary whether it is one, and in that notice to state how many single-family homes it has direct or indirect investment control of and the city and State of each, unless it owns 10 or fewer homes in that city.
What the document actually says
“(A) notify the Secretary each year whether such owner is a large institutional investor as defined in subsection (a); and”
That sentence, in plain words
The owner must tell the housing agency each year. It must say whether it counts as a large investor under this law.
What this is about
The notice must also count the homes it controls. It must give the city and state of each one. Cities where it owns ten or fewer are left out.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “can”Who acts: Secretary of the Treasury, Attorney GeneralHow: statuteSec. 1001 in the PDF
What the document says
“may bring an action against a large institutional investor that violates subsection (b) for a civil penalty in an amount that is not more than $1,000,000 per violation, or 3 times the purchase price of the property involved, whichever is greater.”
The section lets the Secretary of the Treasury, or the Attorney General at the Secretary's request, sue a large institutional investor that breaks the prohibition for a civil penalty of up to $1,000,000 per violation or three times the purchase price of the property, whichever is greater.
What the document actually says
“may bring an action against a large institutional investor that violates subsection (b) for a civil penalty in an amount that is not more than $1,000,000 per violation, or 3 times the purchase price of the property involved, whichever is greater.”
That sentence, in plain words
The government may sue an investor that breaks the ban. The penalty can reach a million dollars for each breach. It can also be three times the price paid. Whichever is bigger applies.
What this is about
The Treasury brings the case, or asks the Attorney General to. A civil penalty is a fine, not a criminal charge. The larger of the two figures is used.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall”Who acts: Secretary of Housing and Urban DevelopmentHow: statuteSec. 1001 in the PDF
What the document says
“civil penalties assessed under this section shall be transferred to and available to the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development to provide additional funding for the HOME Investment Partnerships program under subtitle A of title II of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 12741 et seq.)”
The section provides that from fiscal year 2027, to the extent provided in advance in appropriations Acts, civil penalties assessed under it are transferred to the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development as extra funding for the HOME Investment Partnerships program, allocated by that program's formula, for new construction, acquisition, and rehabilitation of single-family homes and for grants to first-time homebuyers that may cover down payments, closing costs, and interest rate buydowns.
What the document actually says
“civil penalties assessed under this section shall be transferred to and available to the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development to provide additional funding for the HOME Investment Partnerships program under subtitle A of title II of the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 12741 et seq.)”
That sentence, in plain words
The fines go to the housing agency. It adds them to a federal housing program.
What this is about
That money builds, buys, and fixes up single-family homes. It also helps people buying a first home. It can cover a down payment or closing costs.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall”Who acts: Comptroller General of the United States, Secretary of Housing and Urban DevelopmentHow: statuteSec. 1001 in the PDF
What the document says
“(A) the impact of the ownership by large institutional investors of single-family homes on housing availability and affordability for renters and homebuyers; and”
The section requires the Comptroller General to report to the two committees two years after the prohibition takes effect and again at ten years on the effect of large investor ownership on housing availability and affordability and on how well the section reduced their demand and expanded home ownership. On the same schedule the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, consulting the Treasury, the Rural Housing Service, the Loan Guaranty Service of the Department of Veterans Affairs, the Securities and Exchange Commission, and the Federal Housing Finance Agency, must report on whether the definition of a large institutional investor should be adjusted, the financial effect of the section, and any legislative recommendations. Congress states its sense that the section is meant to expand the number of single-family homes available to individuals and that further study should take that into account.
What the document actually says
“(A) the impact of the ownership by large institutional investors of single-family homes on housing availability and affordability for renters and homebuyers; and”
That sentence, in plain words
The report must weigh what large investor ownership does. It looks at whether homes are there to be had. It looks at whether renters and buyers can pay for them.
What this is about
Two reports are required, from two different bodies. Each comes twice, at two years and at ten. The clock starts when the ban takes effect.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
The document says “shall apply”Who acts: CongressHow: statuteSec. 1001 in the PDF
What the document says
“(1) shall take effect on the date that is 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act; and (2) are repealed on the date that is 15 years after the effective date under paragraph (1).”
The section provides that the prohibition and the enforcement provisions take effect 180 days after enactment and are repealed 15 years after that effective date.
What the document actually says
“(1) shall take effect on the date that is 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act; and (2) are repealed on the date that is 15 years after the effective date under paragraph (1).”
That sentence, in plain words
The ban starts 180 days after this law passes. It is wiped off the books 15 years after that.
What this is about
The delay gives investors time to adjust. The end date is written into the law. Congress must act again to keep the ban going.
No action is recorded against this proposal. That is not evidence that none has been taken, and nobody has yet read it against the record. See what the tracker does not yet cover.
Each distinct thing the section does: the definitions of an excepted purchase, a large institutional investor, a purchase, and a single-family home; the prohibition and its exceptions; the rules of construction; the power to issue regulations and the limits on them; the renter outreach resource with its response, investigation, State referral, notice, reporting, privacy, and annual notification duties; the civil penalty and the transfer of penalties; the two studies and the sense of Congress; and the effective date and repeal.
The eleven kinds of excepted purchase and the five tests for investment control are summarized rather than quoted item by item.
The section creates a new prohibition rather than amending an older statute. The definitions of a consumer reporting agency and a manufactured home come from other Acts that are not indexed here, and penalties are transferred to the HOME Investment Partnerships program under the Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act, which is likewise not indexed.
