As Congress considers legislation aimed at institutional investors in housing, build‑to‑rent (BTR) has become a central, and often misunderstood, part of the debate. Supporters argue the sector adds much‑needed supply, while critics frame it as competition for would‑be home buyers.
Adrianne Todman, CEO of the National Rental Home Council (NRHC), weighs in on what policymakers get wrong about BTR, how investor restrictions could affect housing production, and why liquidity and long‑term investment matter for affordability.
Hear more from Todman on April 13 during the session “Housing Policy in a Political Moment: Implications for Rental Markets” at Zonda’s Build-to-Rent Conference in Phoenix.
Adrianne Todman
How do you see the BTR sector shaping the future of housing supply in the U.S.?
BTR isn’t just shaping the future of housing. It has already been delivering results. In recent years, more than 40,000 BTR units have come online annually, providing much‑needed supply in markets where traditional housing production has consistently fallen short, adding housing that would not otherwise exist, creating well‑maintained neighborhoods with safer streets in high‑growth, high‑opportunity areas.
The BTR sector is a proven engine of economic growth for builders, developers, and residents alike. The provision requiring institutional investors to sell BTR homes within seven years would undermine that growth, potentially eliminating nearly 40,000 single‑family homes each year––homes that are built, inspected, occupied, and generating positive economic and community impacts at every stage.
In high‑growth, high‑opportunity regions, housing demand continues to outpace supply. Without BTR communities, families who are not positioned to buy, or who simply prefer to rent, would be priced out of living closer to their jobs, extended family, and higher‑performing schools.
Having spent decades in the housing industry, including serving as Deputy Secretary of the Department of Housing and Urban Development, I’ve seen firsthand the value of BTR. These communities expand opportunity for hard-working families, whether it’s a military family living closer to base at an affordable price point, a single mother able to live near her parents outside the city, or a teacher who can both work in and enroll her children in a higher‑performing school district. BTR is not a promise for the future; it delivers for people today.
What do policymakers often misunderstand about BTR communities?
BTR homes are available as rental homes from day one. While policymakers often assume they were originally occupied by owner-occupants, that is not the case. BTR homes do not take homes away from first-time home buyers. Instead, they add much-needed housing supply for families across the country who require flexibility in their housing choices.
For professionals in housing and development, what’s the most effective way to engage with policymakers on issues like BTR?
One of the most effective ways to engage with policymakers is to participate directly in the conversations already happening, whether in Congress or in states like Georgia and Minnesota. It’s essential to help policymakers understand that BTR is a critical part of the nation’s housing supply, especially at a time when the country remains significantly underbuilt. Policies that restrict BTR ultimately undermine efforts to improve housing affordability. Removing unnecessary restrictions that limit or ban professional single-family rental providers is pivotal to increasing the housing supply and ensuring that working families across the country have access to safe, affordable housing choices.
The proposed investor ban in the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act targets companies owning hundreds of homes. What’s the NRHC’s take on the matter?
Lawmakers are correctly focusing on housing affordability and supply issues. However, while legislation may have been introduced with good intentions, elements of the bill are flawed, including the mandate to sell BTR units seven years post construction and components of the overall ban on SFR. The reality is single‑family rentals provide access to strong neighborhoods and good schools for hard-working Americans. By providing housing options, our members continue to expand access to jobs and more opportunities for families across the country.
With today’s housing shortage in America, we should ensure more resources are available to build housing. The restrictions placed on new rental units must be removed from the bill. Our work is not done. We are disappointed this was not addressed by the Senate but will continue to collaborate with Congress and the administration during the legislative process to ensure that the final product adds to the number of homes available nationwide.
It seems that one of biggest debates right now is simply defining what counts as a “large investor.” From a policy standpoint, how important is getting that definition right?
Housing finance is heavily dependent on liquidity in the market. Policies that restrict liquidity between investors would undermine the private sector’s ability to build private rental housing. The NRHC and its members want to ensure that the policy and regulatory environment investors, regardless of their size, collaborate and create the resources and capital needed to invest and build new housing.
Many policymakers frame institutional investors as competing with first-time buyers. From your experience in housing policy, is that competition overstated or a real barrier?
As the nation’s housing deficit and prices continue to increase, professional single-family rental providers have been wrongly identified as the culprit. Professional single-family rental providers own less than 1% of single-family homes nationwide and did not cause America’s housing shortage. Multiple data sources, from the Urban Institute to Cotality to the American Enterprise Institute, suggest that institutional investors have a small presence in the housing market compared to “mom-and-pop” investors, who continue to shape the housing market.
The facts show that professional single-family rental providers are not actively competing with first-time home buyers as has been portrayed. Despite these narratives, our members are actually providing quality, professionally managed homes for families and are helping grow the housing supply through BTR communities.
How can industry pros get involved with the NRHC?
The National Rental Home Council is the only national trade association that advocates for single-family rental (SFR) owners and operators—and vendors who support them—across the country. Our membership also includes owners and operators of BTR single-family housing. We are committed to building and maintaining a strong platform that ensures the stability of SFR and BTR communities.
I’ve dedicated my career to advancing policy solutions that promote stable housing for renters and homeowners and bolster strong community development. I have seen firsthand how important it is to have a diverse housing inventory to support communities nationwide. Now, I am excited to be NRHC’s CEO, and I welcome everyone reading this piece to join us as we forge a new future. NRHC is here to support the industry, but we are also here to support the professionals in the industry. From our advocacy work, our networking opportunities, our conferences and trainings; we want the industry and the people who drive it to thrive. Please join us!
