Rent stabilization is a regulatory framework in New York City that limits rent increases and provides lease protections for tenants in nearly half of the city's private rental housing stock. This page covers CBC's work on the physical condition of aging rent-stabilized buildings, the financial distress of property owners, the targeting of housing subsidies, the impact of regulation on housing supply, and the role of the Rent Guidelines Board.
This page was created with AICBC Insights uses AI to group, analyze and present data and recommendations from CBC's publications. Always reference the cited sources to verify important details..
The Rent Guidelines Board should approve rent increases that, at a minimum, keep pace with inflation to prevent landlords from cutting back on maintenance.
The Rent Guidelines Board should augment its reports with more information on the physical and financial well-being of New York City’s housing stock.
The Rent Guidelines Board should augment the Mortgage Supply report to track building sales at a more granular level to better understand the marketplace for predominantly stabilized buildings.
The Rent Guidelines Board should work with City agencies to produce an independent report on building conditions, including data on code violations and unpaid fines.
The Rent Guidelines Board should ask the New York City Department of Finance or New York State Homes and Community Renewal to publish a building level file with the total number of rent stabilized units in each rental building in the City.
Key Data
In May 2025, the CBC reported that pre-1974 rent-stabilized units remain in the worst condition of all privately owned rental units in the city, with an average of 1.76 maintenance deficiencies, which is 75% more deficiencies than post-1973 stabilized units and 79% more than market-rate units.
In June 2024, the CBC noted that more than half of New York City's rental stock is regulated, with 41% being rent stabilized, 7.4% public housing, and 3.2% either income-restricted or rent controlled.
In January 2022, the CBC testified that between 2010 and 2019, the costs of operating rent-stabilized buildings increased at an average annual rate of 3.6%, which was twice the rate of inflation. Cumulatively over those 10 years, rents increased 15.1% while expenses rose 37.5%.
In January 2019, the CBC reported that rent regulation benefits are poorly targeted, noting that 28,377 households earning more than $200,000 lived in rent-stabilized units, saving a total of $271 million annually (an average of $13,764 per household).
In May 2011, the CBC highlighted that lower rents in the regulated sector reduce property values, which in turn decreases the City's property tax base and reduces property tax revenue by approximately $283 million annually.
Jackie most recently served as the Commissioner of the New York State Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Services from 2021 to 2026, where she oversaw emergency management, disaster recovery, counter terrorism policy, cyber security and emergency services for the state of New York. She served in New York City’s…
17 is the number of days, at the time of this conversation’s recording, before Dean Fuleihan becomes First Deputy Mayor for a second time. As Mayor-Elect Mamdani turns from campaigning to the practicalities of governing, First Deputy Mayor Fuleihan will be an expert hand involved in every step. On this…
Pre-1974 rent-stabilized buildings are in the worst condition of all privately owned rental units in New York City, with maintenance deficiencies significantly higher than other housing types. Financial distress among these properties is rising, as evidenced by declining net operating incomes and low sales prices, while city-subsidized preservation programs are becoming increasingly costly and difficult to scale.
Recommendations related to Rent Regulation/Rent Stabilization
The Rent Guidelines Board should approve rent increases that, at a minimum, keep pace with inflation to prevent landlords from cutting back on maintenance.
The Rent Guidelines Board should augment its reports with more information on the physical and financial well-being of New York City’s housing stock.
The Rent Guidelines Board should augment the Mortgage Supply report to track building sales at a more granular level to better understand the marketplace for predominantly stabilized buildings.
The Rent Guidelines Board should work with City agencies to produce an independent report on building conditions, including data on code violations and unpaid fines.
The Rent Guidelines Board should ask the New York City Department of Finance or New York State Homes and Community Renewal to publish a building level file with the total number of rent stabilized units in each rental building in the City.
Key Data
1.76
— Average number of maintenance deficiencies found in pre-1974 stabilized units.
75 percent
— Amount by which pre-1974 units have more maintenance deficiencies than post-1973 stabilized units.
9 percent
— Decline in nominal net operating income for pre-1974 stabilized buildings outside core Manhattan between 2020 and 2023.
$175,225
— Average sales price per unit of 100 percent stabilized buildings citywide in 2024.
$899.4 million
— Combined cost of Article 11 and 420-c property tax exemptions in fiscal year 2025.
$1,250
— Estimated operating costs per unit per month for a typical, well-run rent stabilized building.
New York City's housing shortage is driven by a lack of new construction and policies like rent stabilization that discourage mobility, trapping residents in place and limiting available housing. This scarcity drives up costs, contributes to outmigration, and negatively impacts the city's tax base and broader economic health.
Recommendations related to Rent Regulation/Rent Stabilization
The City should modernize the City’s zoning ordinance to allow more housing everywhere to start to chip away at a housing shortage that has been years in the making.
The State should reform the State’s environmental review laws to increase production at the scale needed to improve affordability.
The State should pass laws to encourage development in the downstate suburbs to increase production at the scale needed to improve affordability.
The State should repeal the Scaffold law, which drives up insurance costs, to help increase housing production.
The City should reform the City’s property tax policy to increase production at the scale needed to improve affordability.
Key Data
41.0 percent
— The share of the city's rental stock that is rent stabilized.
41.2 percent
— The amount by which the annual turnover rate for New York City rental units is lower than the national average.
20.8 percent
— The share of New York City renters who have lived in their unit for more than 10 years.
14.8 percent
— The share of New York City renters who moved into their current unit within the last year.
7.4 percent
— The share of the city's rental stock that is public housing.
3.2 percent
— The share of the city's rental stock that is either income-restricted or rent controlled.
As Chief Housing Officer, Katz oversees the Department of Housing Preservation and Development, the New York City Housing Authority, the Housing Development Corporation, the Mayor’s Office of Housing Recovery Operations and the Mayor’s Office to Protect Tenants. Katz most recently served as executive director of the research nonprofit Citizens Housing…
Good cause eviction policies, while well-intentioned, risk suppressing housing development and maintenance if they do not allow for sufficient rent increases to cover operating costs. Alternative interventions like the federal Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program or right to counsel programs are better suited to addressing affordability and tenant stability than rigid rent caps.
Recommendations related to Rent Regulation/Rent Stabilization
Policymakers should ensure that any good cause policy allows rent increases that are sufficient to encourage owners to maintain buildings and invest in repairs and rehabilitation.
Legislation should exempt new development for a period of time, typically 15 years, to avoid discouraging investment in new rental housing.
Good cause policies should include provisions that allow for existing residential buildings to be redeveloped.
Policymakers should consider if goals could be met better by other policy interventions, such as the federal Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program or right to counsel programs.
Key Data
3.6 percent
— Average annual growth in operating expenses of rent-stabilized buildings between 2010 and 2019.
80 percent
— More maintenance deficiencies reported by tenants of rent-stabilized units compared to tenants living in market-rate units.
37.5 percent
— Cumulative increase in expenses for rent-stabilized units over ten years, compared to a 15.1 percent increase in rents.
15.1 percent
— Cumulative increase in rents for rent-stabilized units over ten years.
3.3 percent
— Average annual rent increase the proposed bill's formula would have resulted in between 2010 and 2019.
To address the housing affordability crisis and boost production, the incoming administration should reform laws that currently disincentivize development. These reforms should specifically target the Scaffold Law, the Multiple Dwelling Law, and rent stabilization to encourage a more robust housing supply.
Recommendations related to Rent Regulation/Rent Stabilization
The incoming administration should support the reform of laws that disincentivize development, specifically the New York State’s Scaffold Law, the Multiple Dwelling Law, and rent stabilization.
$3.2 billion is the amount NYC spends on homeless services, double what was spent in 2014, earning the agencies providing these services a spot on NYC Comptroller Scott Stringer's Agency Watch List. Learn more about this list and the Comptroller's assessment of the City budget, rent regulation reform, and more.
6/15 is the date when NYS rent laws are set to expire. Strengthening rent regulation is a top priority for the Governor and state lawmakers in the closing days of the legislative session. Listen to REBNY President John Banks and Assemblymember Harvey Epstein share their perspectives.
Rent regulation in New York often fails to guarantee affordability for low-income households, with 75 percent of unsubsidized rent-stabilized tenants earning less than 80 percent of the Area Median Income remaining rent burdened. Furthermore, the system is poorly targeted, as evidenced by the $271 million in annual savings realized by upper-income households earning over $200,000, while rent-stabilized units simultaneously report 80 percent more maintenance deficiencies than market-rate housing.
Recommendations related to Rent Regulation/Rent Stabilization
The Legislature should evaluate the potential to worsen rather than improve tenants’ living conditions when considering dramatic reform to the rent regulation system.
One way to address the issue of middle- and upper-income households occupying rent-stabilized units would be to eliminate rent stabilization for upper-income households who earn more than $200,000 per year.
Preserving the conditions of regulated units would be well served by providing an incentive for investment and supporting better enforcement of the improvement allowances.
For rent regulation to be more effective, reforms should focus on improving conditions for tenants and making the system better targeted to low-income, rent-burdened households.
Improving the Major Capital Improvement (MCI) and Individual Apartment Improvement (IAI) programs could be an important component of addressing apartment conditions.
Key Data
75 percent
— of unsubsidized rent-stabilized tenants earning less than 80 percent of Area Median Income (AMI) were rent burdened in 2017.
86 percent
— of unsubsidized rent-stabilized households earning less than 50 percent of Area Median Income (AMI) were rent burdened in 2017.
100,000
— upper-income households earning more than 165 percent of Area Median Income lived in rent-stabilized units built before 1974 in 2017.
$271 million
— is the amount saved each year by upper-income rent-stabilized households earning more than $200,000 per year.
80 percent
— more maintenance deficiencies are reported on average in rent-stabilized units than in market-rate units.
60 percent
— of tenants who moved into stabilized units renting for $2,000 or more per month since 2015 were middle- and upper-income households.
New York City's rent regulation system currently covers 988,192 apartments, yet it fails to effectively target low-income households, with 28,377 households earning over $200,000 annually living in rent-stabilized units and saving $271 million in rent. Reforms should focus on eliminating stabilization for these high-income earners to restore units to market-rate status and provide resources for better-targeted housing programs, rather than simply expanding existing, flawed regulations.
Recommendations related to Rent Regulation/Rent Stabilization
Any reforms included with the renewal of rent regulation should focus on better targeting its protections to the most rent burdened.
One way to serve this goal would be to eliminate rent stabilization for upper-income households who earn more than $200,000 per year, restoring as many as 28,000 units to market-rate status.
Any reforms to capital improvement allowances should provide some incentive for owners of stabilized buildings to maintain the condition of their units.
At a minimum, any reform measures should not exacerbate current problems.
Ideally, reform measures should make rent regulation better targeted to lower-income, rent-burdened households.
Key Data
28,377
— Number of households earning more than $200,000 per year living in rent-stabilized units.
$271 million
— Total annual savings for rent-stabilized households earning more than $200,000 per year.
$13,764
— Average annual savings per household for rent-stabilized tenants earning more than $200,000 per year.
988,192
— Total number of apartments subject to rent regulation in 2017.
45 percent
— Share of the city's rental housing stock comprised of rent-stabilized and rent-controlled units.
80 percent
— Higher average number of maintenance deficiencies reported in rent-stabilized units compared to market-rate units.
Nearly half of New York City renter households pay at least 30 percent of their income on rent, with over 462,000 families classified as severely rent burdened. Addressing this affordability crisis requires significant state and federal intervention, as local resources alone are insufficient to maintain public housing and support the lowest-income residents.
Recommendations related to Rent Regulation/Rent Stabilization
Any strategy to protect or preserve affordable housing must include public housing and requires federal assistance.
Any strategy to protect or preserve affordable housing must include New York City’s public housing and requires State and federal assistance.
The City cannot and should not be expected to close the affordability gap on its own.
Key Data
921,000
— Number of renter households in New York City, or 44 percent of all renters, that pay at least 30 percent of their income in rent.
462,000
— Number of families and single adults considered severely rent burdened, meaning they pay at least half of their income in rent.
1.2 million
— Number of New York City renter households, or 56 percent of the total, that were rent burdened in 2017 based on gross rent.
$24,423
— Average annual income of a family living in NYCHA public housing.
$32 billion
— Estimated cost of bringing NYCHA public housing units back to a state of good repair.
The 2015 New York State end-of-session agreement includes the continuation of vacancy decontrol, a measure that helps gradually phase out regulations that constrict housing supply and negatively impact the rental market. While rent regulation and the 421a tax exemption remain costly and imperfect, the agreement also introduces a $1.3 billion property tax rebate program and a $250 million increase in aid to nonpublic schools.
Recommendations related to Rent Regulation/Rent Stabilization
The state should support the continuation of vacancy decontrol to allow for the gradual end to regulations that constrict supply and negatively impact the broader rental market.
Rent regulation is often mischaracterized as an effective tool for affordability, yet 44 percent of tenants in rent-regulated units remain rent burdened. Furthermore, market-rate housing remains affordable for the majority of tenants, with 54 percent of such households paying less than 30 percent of their income on rent.
Key Data
38 percent
— of New York City’s tenant households are rent burdened when using the out-of-pocket rent measure.
54 percent
— of market-rate households, or 441,202 households, pay less than 30 percent of income for rent.
44 percent
— of tenants in rent-regulated units are rent burdened.
211,000
— regulated units are occupied by middle-income and upper-middle income households.
1,087
— is the number of rent-regulated units that grew in 2013 according to the Rent Guidelines Board.
6,000
— units were added through the 421-a program in 2013.
The extension of rent regulation for only four years, combined with raising the vacancy destabilization rent threshold to $2,500 and the luxury destabilization income limit to $200,000, fails to meaningfully increase the supply of affordable housing for low- and middle-income families. These policy adjustments slow the pace of decontrol without addressing the core need for more affordable housing options.
Key Data
$2,500
— The vacancy destabilization rent threshold was increased to this monthly amount.
$200,000
— The luxury destabilization annual income threshold was set at this amount.
New York City's rent regulation system is poorly targeted, with the highest-income households receiving the largest average benefits while many low-income renters remain in unregulated units without affordable housing. Instead of expanding these regulations to higher-income families, policymakers should retain protections for those in need while phasing out benefits for wealthier households and pursuing more effective housing solutions.
Recommendations related to Rent Regulation/Rent Stabilization
The protections now available to low- and moderate-income households should be retained.
The legislature should reduce the inequities and social costs of regulation by phasing out benefits for higher-income households.
State leaders must acknowledge that rent regulation is not the answer to the city's affordable housing problems and shift their focus to better targeted and more effective solutions.
Key Data
60 percent
— Only about 60 percent of benefits accrue to households with incomes below $50,000.
14 percent
— 14 percent of benefits go to households with incomes of $100,000 or more.
6.7 percent
— An income of $175,000 places a household into the top 6.7 percent of all city residents.
30 percent
— For nearly 30 percent of households in regulated units, the regulated rent is close to or even higher than the rent for comparable unregulated units.
35.8 percent
— Among all private-sector renters with incomes below $50,000, 35.8 percent are in unregulated units.
$283 million
— Lower rents in the regulated sector reduce property values and, therefore, property tax liability by about $283 million annually.
New York City's rent regulation laws are set to expire on June 15 and require legislative action to continue. The extension should avoid policy expansions that would benefit high-income families while negatively impacting households in unregulated housing.
Recommendations related to Rent Regulation/Rent Stabilization
Rent regulation in New York City, which will expire on June 15, should be extended without expansions that would provide assistance to high-income families and harm low- and middle-income households whose rents are not regulated.
Rent regulation in New York City provides significant but poorly targeted benefits, with an average annual rent discount of $5,500 per unit, yet it imposes substantial costs including $1.9 billion in higher rents for unregulated tenants and $283 million in lost annual property tax revenue. Future policy should focus on phasing out benefits for high-income households while expanding more effective, targeted programs to promote affordable housing for low- and moderate-income residents.
Recommendations related to Rent Regulation/Rent Stabilization
Benefits now available to low- and moderate-income households should not be reduced, but the poorly targeted benefits can be removed at an accelerated pace by phasing out regulation for higher-income households.
The long-term contraction in the scope of rent regulation should be accompanied by expansion of other more effective programs to promote affordable housing.
New legislation should phase out benefits for all high-income households.
Future policy changes should be designed to retain the benefits of regulation for low- and moderate-income households.
The role of state and local government should be to evaluate the efficiency and effectiveness of existing affordable housing programs.
Key Data
$5,500
— Average annual rent reduction per housing unit provided by rent regulation.
$1.9 Billion
— Annual amount paid in extra rent by households in unregulated units due to market distortions.
$283 Million
— Annual decrease in the City of New York's property tax revenue attributable to rent regulation.
31%
— Average discount provided by rent regulation for affected units.
$2.6 Billion
— Total aggregate rent discount associated with regulation under full deregulation assumptions.
190,000
— Number of units removed from regulation from 1994 through 2008.
Rent regulation in New York City is poorly targeted, failing to provide adequate relief to those in need while costing unregulated renters $1.9 billion annually and reducing potential property tax revenue by $283 million. The current system requires a massive overhaul to replace ineffective regulations with better-targeted housing assistance.
Recommendations related to Rent Regulation/Rent Stabilization
The current rent regulation law needs a massive overhaul.
The city should implement better-targeted housing assistance.
Key Data
$2,800
— Average amount more per year that tenants in the unregulated rental market pay for their apartments compared to what they would pay without rent regulation.
$1.9 billion
— Total annual cost that more than 669,000 unregulated renters pay as a consequence of rent regulation.
500,000
— Number of households in unregulated units that have incomes below $75,000.
$283 million
— Annual property tax revenue the city would gain without rent regulation, which could be used for services like education and senior programs.
31%
— Average discount provided by rent regulation based on 2008 data.
Rent regulation in New York City provides significant but poorly targeted benefits, with an average annual rent reduction of $5,500 per unit, while simultaneously imposing substantial costs including $1.9 billion in higher rents for unregulated households and $283 million in lost annual property tax revenue. Future policy should focus on phasing out benefits for high-income households while expanding more effective, targeted programs to promote affordable housing for low- and moderate-income residents.
Recommendations related to Rent Regulation/Rent Stabilization
Benefits now available to low- and moderate-income households should not be reduced, but the poorly targeted benefits can be removed at an accelerated pace by phasing out regulation for higher-income households.
The long-term contraction in the scope of rent regulation should be accompanied by expansion of other more effective programs to promote affordable housing.
The guiding principles for this initiative should be to focus on keeping rent-income ratios for low- and moderate-income households below a threshold of about 30 percent, to rely primarily on competitive markets to set prices for housing, and to maximize reliance on federal funding rather than local funding for subsidies to lower-income households.
Key Data
$5,500
— Average annual rent reduction per housing unit provided by rent regulation.
$1.9 billion
— Total annual extra rent paid by 669,000 households in unregulated units due to the market effects of rent regulation.
$283 million
— Annual decrease in the City of New York's property tax revenue attributable to rent regulation.
31%
— Average discount provided by rent regulation for affected units.
$2.6 billion
— Total aggregate rent discount associated with regulation.
New York City's rent regulation system covers over one million housing units, yet it often fails to provide affordability for the lowest-income households while simultaneously benefiting many higher-income residents. State leaders should prioritize targeted assistance for low-income families and market-based solutions to expand housing choices rather than simply extending the reach of current rent regulations.
Recommendations related to Rent Regulation/Rent Stabilization
The Legislature should be cautious about initiatives to extend the reach of rent regulation.
State leaders should think more broadly about ways to better target assistance to lower income households.
State leaders should allow the market to work in ways that better allocate housing and expand housing choices for all New Yorkers.
Key Data
1,045,317
— Number of occupied, regulated housing units in New York City in 2008.
2.1%
— Vacancy rate in New York City's regulated rental sector in 2008.
4.7%
— Vacancy rate in New York City's unregulated rental sector in 2008.
$35,297
— Median income of households in regulated housing in 2007.
$45,000
— Citywide median income of households in 2007.
12,800
— Number of units reported to have been decontrolled in 2008.
The 2003 legislative session saw the extension of existing rent control laws after a looming deadline forced an agreement between the Governor and legislative leaders. This event highlights how the threat of expiration for laws affecting almost a million residences in New York City can compel political action in a divided government.
Key Data
almost a million
— Number of residences in New York City affected by <b>rent regulation</b>.
No results for your current filters. Manually edit your filters, or
clear the filters.
Share Feedback
Give a star rating, write a comment of at least 10 words, or both.
