HOME Act of 2025
- Bill Number
- H.R. 3214
- Origin Chamber
- House
- Congress
- 119th Congress, Session 1
- Policy Area
- Housing and Community Development
- Status
- Introduced
- Latest Action
- 2025-05-06: Referred to the Committee on Financial Services, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
- Last Updated
- 2026-01-13T09:05:47Z
AI-Generated Summary
Purpose of the Legislation
The Housing Oversight and Mitigating Exploitation Act of 2025 (HOME Act of 2025) aims to safeguard consumers from excessive pricing (known as price gouging) in residential rentals and single-family home sales during periods of affordable housing shortages or crises. It establishes federal oversight mechanisms to monitor housing markets, prevent exploitation, and promote fair competition, while directing penalties toward affordable housing initiatives.
Key Provisions
- Definitions:
- "Affordable housing crisis period" refers to times when a federal prohibition on excessive pricing is active nationwide.
- "Secretary" means the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).
- "Single-family housing" includes homes with 1 to 4 units but excludes condominiums or cooperatives.
- "United States" covers the 50 states, District of Columbia, and territories.
- Prohibition on Unconscionable Pricing (Section 3):
- HUD can declare an affordable housing crisis based on factors like mortgage interest rates, federal funds rate, median rental/sale prices, household incomes, and disaster declarations (under the Stafford Act, a law for federal disaster relief).
- During a crisis (up to 30 days, renewable, with possible 1-week advance application), it is illegal to rent or sell single-family homes at "unconscionably excessive" prices that exploit the crisis.
- Violations are assessed by comparing prices to pre-crisis averages or similar local offerings; aggravating factors include gross price hikes, while a mitigating factor is increasing housing supply post-crisis.
- HUD must provide advance notice before prohibitions take effect.
- An affirmative defense allows price increases if they reasonably cover added costs, risks, or anticipated expenses (e.g., repairs or insurance).
- The rule does not apply to futures market transactions.
- Enforcement (Section 3(d)-(e)):
- HUD enforces violations using powers similar to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) under the FTC Act (a law against unfair trade practices), including investigations and penalties.
- State attorneys general can file civil suits in federal or state courts for injunctions, penalties, or consumer compensation, but must notify HUD first; HUD can intervene.
- States cannot sue if HUD is already acting against the same party.
- Penalties fund the Housing Trust Fund (a federal program for low-income rental housing).
- The act does not override other HUD powers or state laws.
- HUD Investigation and Report on Housing Prices (Section 4):
- HUD must investigate market manipulation (e.g., reducing supply or investor mergers/acquisitions) within 270 days of enactment.
- Report to Congress includes a strategy to address manipulation (considering race, gender, and income data) and analysis of investor impacts on underserved communities.
- Exempt from Paperwork Reduction Act (rules limiting federal data collection); authorizes $1 million for fiscal year 2025.
- Housing Monitoring and Enforcement Unit (Section 5):
- Establishes a new HUD unit to collect and analyze rental, single-family sales, and investor-owned housing data.
- Duties include spotting manipulation (e.g., false reporting, anti-competitive practices), promoting transparency, and aiding enforcement; considers demographic data.
- Facilitates data-sharing with states, localities, and private sources on institutional investor purchases.
- Investigations of Excessive Housing Purchases (Section 6):
- HUD monitors single-family home buys in market areas.
- Triggers investigation if one buyer (including institutional investors) acquires >5% of available homes over 3 years, or investors collectively >25% over 1 year.
- Probes purposes like price gouging or practices displacing homeowners.
- Identification of Unfair Screening Practices (Section 7):
- HUD, FTC, and Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB, a federal agency overseeing consumer finance) jointly collect data on rental applicant/tenant screening (e.g., background checks, algorithms, income verification).
- Annual report to Congress on findings.
- Limitation on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Investments (Section 8):
- Amends the Federal Housing Enterprises Financial Safety and Soundness Act (1992 law overseeing these government-sponsored mortgage buyers).
- Requires the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) to set rules for their multifamily rental mortgage purchases, ensuring tenant protections and preventing sharp rent hikes.
- Review of Anti-Competitive Behaviors (Section 9):
- U.S. Attorney General and FTC jointly review issues like information sharing in rental and single-family markets.
- Report to Congress within 1 year.
Significant Changes to Existing Law
- Introduces a new federal ban on housing price gouging during declared crises, absent in current law, with HUD gaining FTC-like enforcement authority.
- Creates a dedicated HUD monitoring unit and mandates specific investigations/reports on market manipulation and investor activity, expanding HUD's role beyond traditional housing assistance.
- Adds a section to the 1992 Financial Safety and Soundness Act, imposing new regulatory standards on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac for multifamily loans to curb rent increases.
- Enhances interagency collaboration (e.g., HUD with FTC, CFPB, AG) for screening practices and anti-competitive reviews, without altering core FTC or state powers.
- Directs penalty revenues to the Housing Trust Fund, linking enforcement to affordable housing preservation.
Potential Impacts
- On Citizens: Renters and homebuyers, especially low- and very low-income families or those in underserved communities, may benefit from stabilized prices during crises, reduced exploitation, and more transparent markets; could improve access to housing but might limit seller flexibility.
- On Government Agencies: Significantly boosts HUD's workload with new units, investigations, data collection, and enforcement (modeled on FTC); involves coordination with FTC, CFPB, AG, states, and FHFA, potentially straining resources without additional funding beyond the $1 million authorization.
- On International Relations: No direct impacts, as the bill focuses on domestic U.S. housing markets.
- Broader effects include increased housing supply preservation via the Housing Trust Fund and potential deterrence of investor-driven price spikes.
Main Stakeholders Affected
- Consumers: Renters, homebuyers, tenants (particularly low-income, homeless, or minority groups), who gain protections against excessive costs and unfair screening.
- Housing Providers: Landlords, sellers, property managers, and developers, subject to pricing rules, monitoring, and defenses for legitimate cost increases.
- Investors: Institutional and non-occupant investors in single-family or rental properties, facing purchase limits, investigations, and anti-manipulation scrutiny.
- Government Entities: HUD (lead enforcer and monitor), state attorneys general (enforcement partners), FTC/CFPB/AG (collaborators on reviews), and FHFA (new rules for Fannie/Freddie).
- Communities: Underserved areas impacted by investor activity or market concentration.
Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications
- Legal: Expands federal intervention in private housing transactions, potentially leading to litigation over "unconscionable" pricing definitions or enforcement consistency; preserves state authority, reducing preemption risks, but affirmative defenses protect against overreach claims.
- Constitutional: Could face challenges under the Takings Clause (Fifth Amendment protection against uncompensated property devaluation) if price caps are viewed as restricting property rights, or under due process if determinations lack clear standards; interstate commerce clause likely supports nationwide application.
- Political: Addresses housing affordability amid crises (e.g., post-disaster or economic pressures), promoting equity through demographic data use; may spark debate on government market intervention versus free-market principles, with bipartisan potential given introducers from both parties.
This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.
Sponsor
Rep. Horsford, Steven [D-NV-4]
Cosponsors (13)
Rep. Titus, Dina [D-NV-1], Rep. Lee, Susie [D-NV-3], Del. Norton, Eleanor Holmes [D-DC-At Large], Rep. Ansari, Yassamin [D-AZ-3], Rep. Kelly, Robin L. [D-IL-2], Rep. Scholten, Hillary J. [D-MI-3], Rep. Stansbury, Melanie A. [D-NM-1], Rep. Vasquez, Gabe [D-NM-2], Rep. Johnson, Henry C. "Hank" [D-GA-4], Rep. Castor, Kathy [D-FL-14], Rep. Soto, Darren [D-FL-9], Rep. Craig, Angie [D-MN-2], Rep. Pocan, Mark [D-WI-2]
Recent Actions
- 2025-05-06: Referred to the Committee on Financial Services, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
- 2025-05-06: Referred to the Committee on Financial Services, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
- 2025-05-06: Introduced in House
- 2025-05-06: Introduced in House
Bill Versions
- Housing Oversight and Mitigating Exploitation Act of 2025 — issued 2025-05-06 — PDF (16 pages)