A bipartisan group of 76 House lawmakers urged congressional leaders to remove or revise Section 901 of the Senate-passed 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act, arguing that the provision would undermine the bill’s affordability goals by discouraging build-to-rent (BTR) housing and reducing rental options for American families. (Punchbowl News, | PoliticoPro, April 22)

Why It Matters

• The push adds to growing House resistance as negotiators weigh how to reconcile the two chambers’ housing packages.

• The letter, led by members of the Congressional Real Estate Caucus and Build America Caucus, warns that Section 901 “would have far-reaching and unintended consequences that run counter to the bill’s stated goal of expanding housing opportunity,” and that the provision goes “far beyond its intended purpose” by threatening to reduce rental options. (Letter | PoliticoPro April 22)

• Lawmakers argue the provision’s broad definition would also capture the construction of new single-family rental communities—threatening a growing source of housing supply at a time when the nation remains millions of units short. (Letter | Punchbowl News, April 22)

• Section 901 would require certain large institutional investors to sell newly built single-family rental homes after seven years—a change that could disrupt the long-term ownership model behind BTR communities, constrain capital, and reduce housing options for families seeking the flexibility of a single-family rental home.

• The housing bill was a major focus at The Real Estate Roundtable’s (RER) Spring Roundtable Meeting this week, where members and policymaker guests discussed the growing pushback to Section 901 and the need for any final package to preserve the bill’s pro-supply provisions. (See story above)

State of Play

• Since the Senate passed its version of the bill, progressive and conservative groups alike have cited numerous benefits that single-family rental owners and builders deliver for U.S. housing markets, including expanding supply, maintaining housing stock, and providing families the opportunity to live in communities where homeownership remains out of reach. (Progressive Policy Institute, February 2026 | Competitive Enterprise Institute, February 2026)

• Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Secretary Scott Turner recently toured a build-to-rent (BTR) community with the project’s developer, operator, and industry representatives, underscoring the growing visibility of BTR. (The Real Deal, April 18 | NMHC, April 13)

RER & Industry Advocacy

• RER and other housing advocates continue to urge lawmakers to preserve the bill’s pro-supply provisions while removing language that could reduce rental housing production and discourage new investment.

• RER and broad housing coalitions have consistently emphasized that housing affordability is driven by supply shortages, construction costs, and mortgage rates—not institutional ownership levels—and that restricting institutional capital would only make it harder to meet the nation’s growing housing needs. (Roundtable Weekly, Jan. 9 | Jan. 16 |  Jan. 23 | Feb. 27| March 6 | March 13 | March 20 | March 27 | April 3 | April 10 | April 17)

• Last week, RER shared with members of Congress a recent white paper by Paul Clement of Clement & Murphy, PLLC, arguing that Section 901’s forced-sale requirement raises serious constitutional concerns under the Takings Clause, and also raises equal protection and federalism concerns. (Roundtable Weekly, April 17)

As lawmakers work to address the housing shortage, the focus should remain on expanding supply and lowering barriers to development—not on punitive restrictions that threaten new investment, undermine build-to-rent housing, and worsen affordability challenges.