Can capping rental fees help solve the affordable housing crisis? 

Rent control is in the spotlight, with New York mayoral contender Zohran Mamdani proposing a citywide freeze on over a million rent-stabilized apartments. Supporters argue it is a lifeline for struggling tenants. However, numerous studies suggest that rent control policies typically decrease housing affordability, supply, and quality. 

The data tells a more complicated story, one that policymakers cannot afford to ignore. 

New York’s Affordability Crisis 

New York City renters are facing the highest prices in the country. According to Zillow, the average asking rent in New York is $3,800 per month. Vacancy rates have dropped to under 3%, far below the 5% standard considered healthy by most housing economists. 

Meanwhile, the supply of deeply affordable units continues to shrink, and the waitlist for public housing spans hundreds of thousands of families. With this level of strain, the city needs policies that actually grow the number of available homes, not just manage existing scarcity. 

Who Really Lives in Rent-Controlled Units? 

Roughly one million apartments in New York are subject to rent stabilization rules that limit annual rent increases. These units are often occupied by long-term tenants, many of whom are older and relatively stable financially. 

In fact, recent data shows that the median income of rent-stabilized households is about $60,000, which is higher than the median for many younger renters in the market-rate sector. Once inside a stabilized unit, tenants tend to stay, often for decades. That limits turnover and reduces access for lower-income New Yorkers trying to get a foothold in the city. 

Rent Control and Housing Supply 

One of the clearest effects of rent control is its impact on supply. A landmark Stanford study of San Francisco’s rent control policy found that: 

• Landlords removed 30% of rent-controlled units from the market 

• This led to a 15% drop in the overall rental housing stock 

• Rents increased by an average of 7% citywide as a result 

In New York, the picture is similarly concerning. In the Bronx, over 12% of pre-1974 rent-stabilized buildings are now operating at a loss. Some are teetering on the edge of foreclosure, others are quietly being sold, converted to condos, or withdrawn from the rental market altogether. 

This means fewer total apartments and a tighter squeeze for every new renter entering the city.  

Maintenance Declines as Costs Outpace Rents 

When rents are frozen, building expenses do not stop rising. Property taxes, insurance, heating oil, and repairs all continue to go up. Landlords unable to raise rents often defer maintenance, or abandon upgrades entirely. 

This has consequences for tenants. In rent-regulated buildings across the city, tenants frequently report issues with heat, mold, broken elevators, and pests. Housing court backlogs are growing as tenants seek help in restoring basic conditions. 

Research shows that rent-controlled properties are more likely to deteriorate unless landlords have a financial reason to reinvest. The longer units stay under strict price caps, the more likely they are to suffer from deferred maintenance. 

Good Intentions, Poor Targeting 

One of the central problems with rent control is that it provides subsidies based on tenancy, not income. This means that households with stable jobs and higher earnings can benefit from below-market apartments simply because they got there first. 

In Cambridge, Massachusetts, a study found that professionals, including doctors and lawyers occupied 20% of rent-controlled apartments, before rent control was repealed in 1994. The same patterns persist in many large cities today.  

Instead of reaching the most vulnerable families, rent caps often reinforce the advantages of those already inside the system. 

What Actually Works 

Cities that have seen real success in controlling rent burdens over time have taken a different approach. In places like Minneapolis, Tokyo, and even Houston, governments have: 

• Legalized more housing types and streamlined zoning 

• Invested in targeted rental subsidies and vouchers 

• Maintained protections against eviction without discouraging new construction 

In other words, they expanded supply while helping renters in need by building a system that works for everyone rather than artificially freezing rents. 

Rent control is a powerful tool, but a blunt one. It may help tenants in the short term, but the long-term trade-offs are hard to ignore: fewer apartments, slower turnover, declining conditions, and subsidies that do not always go to those who need them most. 

New York needs solutions equal to the scale of its crisis. That means more housing, better targeting, and smarter investments, not just a blanket freeze.