Federal housing policy is shifting quickly in 2026. Fair housing guidance, eviction notices, a major housing supply bill and fee disclosure rules are all in play. So are new proposals for Section 8 programs. Some of it is settled. Most of it is not.
To see what is changing and what it means for operators, we spoke with Nicole Upano, AVP of housing policy and regulatory affairs at the National Apartment Association (NAA). She and her team track federal rulemaking and legislation for NAA’s members.
The conversation below has been edited for length and clarity.
Disclaimer
This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal or operational advice. Laws and federal rulemaking affecting rental housing vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Consult your attorney and review current federal and state guidance before making operational or policy decisions.
Key takeaways
- Most 2026 federal housing rules are still pending. Final language, final rules and court outcomes are in motion
- State and local law still matters: Stay informed and talk to counsel before changing policy
- Federal guidance is shifting, but state and local law is not
- The 30-day CARES Act eviction notice is a decision for your attorney, not a blanket answer
- Fee transparency is coming, federal rule or not. Fifteen states and DC already require some version of it
- HUD’s proposed work requirements and citizenship verification rules may increase operators’ administrative burden
- Centralized, audit-ready documentation is your key to handling policy shifts smoothly
On the recent fair housing guidance withdrawals
What did the recent HUD action change?
HUD withdrew eight Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity guidance documents this spring. The list covers emotional support animals, disparate impact and the use of criminal records in housing decisions. It also covers how the Fair Housing Act applies to digital advertising. A few had already been partially withdrawn through other mechanisms.
“When HUD issues non-binding guidance, the agency’s interpretation of the Fair Housing Act for compliance purposes can ping-pong between [presidential] administrations,” Upano says. HUD has signaled it prefers formal rulemaking over sub-regulatory guidance for that reason. It is a shift NAA supports. Rulemaking requires the agency to consider public feedback and in theory, leads to more balanced policies.
What should property managers do in the meantime?
This is a holding period. The practical answer for operators is the same as always when federal guidance shifts. Do not rewrite operational policy based on a rescission alone. Talk to counsel before making changes. That goes double for state and local fair housing exposure, which is not directly affected by the federal rescissions.
NAA offers a reasonable accommodation toolkit for assistance animals. It is a structured resource to help members even when regulatory dynamics shift.
On the Respect State Housing Laws Act
What is the bill trying to resolve?
The Respect State Housing Laws Act (H.R. 1078/S. 470) is a proposed fix to a pandemic-era eviction notice requirement. The CARES Act imposed a 120-day moratorium on evictions during the pandemic. It also required a 30-day notice that supplanted state and local notice periods for covered properties.
Six years later, the moratorium is gone. But ambiguous statutory language has kept the 30-day notice alive in eviction courts, where enforcement has been unpredictable. The bill would make clear that the requirement ended in 2020. It is not a current pre-filing obligation.
Federal agencies have been moving on this separately. HUD issued an interim final rule revoking its 30-day notice rule for covered housing. A lawsuit followed, and HUD shifted that action to a proposed rulemaking. The revocation will now go through full notice-and-comment before it takes effect.
Why is the Respect State Housing Laws Act a priority?
HUD’s own rulemaking found that unpaid rent climbed roughly 200% at PHAs and HUD-assisted properties during the pandemic. The numbers have not come back down. Upano points to the notice period itself as a major contributing factor. The average state or local notice is about six days. A 30-day federal floor adds roughly an extra month of lost rent in affected cases.
The 30-day rule is still contested in court. Whether operators should continue providing the notice is a decision for counsel, not a blanket answer.
On the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act and the institutional investor ban
What is happening with this bill?
The 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act is broadly pro-housing legislation with dozens of bipartisan provisions. It aims to expand supply, update financing tools and modernize programs like Section 8 inspections. One provision, however, has NAA and its industry partners raising alarms.
That provision, Section 901, would apply to entities controlling more than 350 units or homes. It would prohibit those entities from new single family home purchases after enactment. It would also require them to sell any single family homes they do purchase within seven years. Those homes would have to be sold to homebuyers individually.
Why is build-to-rent the specific concern?
According to Upano, build-to-rent communities are planned, zoned and operated as multifamily properties. They share amenities and are managed as one community. Many are also governed by state-level rules that would complicate forced individual sale.
“Many of those projects are now being halted,” even during the pending period, said Upano. NAA and a coalition of industry partners have submitted a letter to Senate leadership. They are urging a clean build-to-rent exemption from Section 901.
The 350-unit threshold means most small- and mid-sized operators will not be directly affected by the ban itself. Still, the downstream effects on housing supply and investment are worth watching.
On the FTC’s rent and fee transparency rulemaking
Where does this rulemaking stand?
The FTC issued an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on unfair or deceptive fee practices in rental housing. There is no rule to analyze yet. The agency is gathering information to decide whether to pursue a rule at all.
What would a rule look like if it moves forward?
The FTC’s recent enforcement record points to a likely direction. A rule would probably require disclosing rent and all mandatory non-variable fees at the point of advertising, not just in the lease.
A non-variable fee, per Upano, is anything charged community-wide without variation. Think: pet rent, reserved parking fees or bad-check fees that apply uniformly.
Why is this top of mind for operators?
A recent NAA straw poll found that 70% of members flagged federal fee transparency as their top pending concern. The reason is the scale of adjustment that could be required. Per NAA’s own tracking, 15 states plus D.C. already have some form of rental cost transparency requirement. A federal rule would put all states and D.C. on a new standard, setting a national floor for compliance. Operators should work with their attorney to understand how these developments impact their business.
On HUD’s proposed work requirements and term limits
What is HUD proposing?
HUD published a notice of proposed rulemaking titled “Establishing Flexibility for Implementation of Work Requirements and Term Limits.” If finalized, it would let PHAs and certain multifamily owners opt in to work requirements, term limits, both or neither. Nothing about it is federally mandated.
Who would it apply to?
The proposed rule would affect non-elderly, non-disabled “work-eligible adults” between the ages of 18 and 61. Covered programs include public housing, Housing Choice Vouchers, Project-Based Vouchers and Project-Based Rental Assistance.
There are defined exemptions to the rule. These include people with disabilities, pregnancy, enrollment in higher education, primary caregivers and temporary incapacitation.
What are the specific parameters?
PHAs or owners could require up to 40 hours of work activity per week. That requirement would be a condition of continued assistance. Term limits would have a ceiling of two years. In other words, housing vouchers would be non-renewable and expire after a minimum of two years. For current residents, the clock starts when the policy takes effect.
What is NAA’s read on the operational impact?
Fewer than 1% of PHAs currently have work requirements in place, per HUD. Upano’s concern, echoed in member feedback to NAA, is about the compliance burden. Tracking eligibility, verifying work activity and managing the prospective term-limit clock adds up. It could affect whether housing providers continue to accept Section 8 or participate in other HUD-assisted programs at all.
On HUD’s proposed citizenship verification rule
What would this rule change?
HUD published a proposed rule requiring verification of eligible immigration status in covered HUD programs. It would apply to all applicants and recipients of assistance, regardless of age. Verification would run through the Department of Homeland Security’s Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) system.
What would change for mixed-status households?
A mixed-status household is one where some members can declare eligible status and others have not. Under current rules, these households receive prorated assistance. The amount is based on the number of eligible members. The proposed rule would require verification of eligible status within 90 days of a future effective date and an ongoing verification requirement during recertification. Households where not all members can verify status would no longer qualify for any HUD assistance.
What does this mean operationally?
Upano points to two practical concerns from members. First, covered properties could see increased vacancies as affected households exit. Second, the verification workflow itself adds administrative burden.
As with the other items, the practical answer for operators is the same. Consult counsel on compliance and verification workflow before adopting any policy changes. Monitor the rulemaking docket for the final rule.
What to watch
Most rules discussed in this article are still pending. What property managers can do in the meantime is make sure their own house is in order (so to speak). Policy ambiguity is easier to navigate when communications, notices, fee disclosures and compliance documentation are centralized and audit ready. When rules change, pulling a clean paper trail should take minutes. That kind of readiness lets operators plan for the next regulatory shift before it becomes urgent.
How Yardi Breeze can help
Staying ahead of regulatory change starts with knowing where your documentation lives. Yardi Breeze centralizes tenant communications, notices, fee disclosures and lease records in one cloud-based system, so audits and policy updates don’t require a paper chase. If you don’t have a software system now, there’s never been a better time to look.
