Congress Clears Housing Bill, Cementing a Rare Bipartisan Feat
1–10 of 19 posts
Re: Congress Clears Housing Bill, Cementing a Rare Bipartisan Feat
#25 paragraphse of premable about the horse race. God hates actual journalism.
I need an LLM to start stripping out everything to do with this type of stupefying horse race discussion.
Re: Congress Clears Housing Bill, Cementing a Rare Bipartisan Feat
#3It's behind a paywall. Does this disallow corporations and non-USA residents from buying property?
That works here in Switzerland sort of - prices are still super high but more because of local wealth, not Russians and Chinese buying everything. There are underdeveloped places where foreigners are allowed to buy - Andermatt for example is filled with rich Americans.
Re: Congress Clears Housing Bill, Cementing a Rare Bipartisan Feat
#4Unclear how this is going to help? A corporation can only buy 350 single family homes. Ok, so, what's to prevent making a new corporation at 349, with the same staff?
Re: Congress Clears Housing Bill, Cementing a Rare Bipartisan Feat
#5We all love the bipartisanship, but this is probably too little too late.
Partly because the federal governments leverage on local politics is very little but majorly because currently the interest rate and the labor/material costs is just too high especially on the coasts and none of that is regulatory burden. The Atlantic had a great breakdown [1].
Congress and/or state governments should work on a preferable interest rates for construction loans scheme and engineers need to bust through Moravecs paradox to get some productivity boosts in construction going, everything else is window dressing.
The ball has moved!
[1]: https://www.theatlantic.com/economy/2026/03/california-housi...
Re: Congress Clears Housing Bill, Cementing a Rare Bipartisan Feat
#6Re: Congress Clears Housing Bill, Cementing a Rare Bipartisan Feat
#7https://archive.ph/gA9Vo
Partial view.
Archives having issues scraping nytimes lately. 381 page bill too.
“The measure prohibits corporate entities from owning more than 350 existing single-family homes, although it does not require them to sell homes purchased before the measure became law.”
They don’t mention anything about foreign investments but China is trying to rein in their own overseas spending to boost national investment.
Carve outs: - Investors may purchase homes owned by other investors.
- There are additional exceptions related to previous contracts and legal obligations, or if the purchase is part of a loss-mitigation strategy.
https://nlihc.org/sites/default/files/21ST_Century_ROAD_Expl...
Re: Congress Clears Housing Bill, Cementing a Rare Bipartisan Feat
#8Unclear how this is going to help? A corporation can only buy 350 single family homes. Ok, so, what's to prevent making a new corporation at 349, with the same staff?
agree our condo building has the SAME question Limiting one owner to own a set number of multiple units yet what about that owners wife/cousin/son/son in law......become owners of multiple units in the same building?
Re: Congress Clears Housing Bill, Cementing a Rare Bipartisan Feat
#9The seems like a nothingburger. Going after "big bad" corporations probably feels good to voters, but (iirc) studies have shown have low/no effect.
Eliminating Fannie mae/Freddie Mac would've done a whole lot more to lower house prices.
Re: Congress Clears Housing Bill, Cementing a Rare Bipartisan Feat
#10https://archive.ph/gA9Vo Partial view. Archives having issues scraping nytimes lately. 381 page bill too. “The measure prohibits corporate entities from owning more than 350 existing single-family homes, although it does not require them to sell homes purchased before the measure became law.” They don’t mention anything about foreign investments but China is trying to rein in their own overseas spending to boost nati…
There's a lot I don't understand here. How did they come up with 350? I doubt there are any people who own more than 10 houses for personal use, and this is 35x that.
What's to stop people from just making multiple corporate entities? Or investors below the cap buying properties and flipping them to institutional investors above the cap bypassing the cap entirely?