Back to top

The Enduring Failures of Rent Control

Share

Published April 16, 2026

Rent control is presented as a way to make housing more affordable, but it does the opposite. By holding rents below market levels, it reduces supply, discourages maintenance, and weakens incentives for new construction. The result is fewer available units, lower housing quality, and a market that works less well for those trying to enter it. Its political durability is part of the problem. Rent control protects incumbent tenants while outsiders face a tighter supply, lower vacancy rates, and a harder search. By contrast, gasoline price controls in the 1970s were easier to repeal because the costs were visible and broadly shared. Rent control persists because its benefits are concentrated among those already inside the system, while the costs fall on those still trying to get in.

Learn more from David R. Henderson:

  • Read "Rent Control Creates Privileged Tenants" by David Henderson here.
  • Read "Phil Gramm and Donald Boudreaux, Economic Myth-Busters" by David Henderson here.
  • Read "The Economics of Oil Prices" by David Henderson here.

Learn more about David R. Henderson here.

__________

The opinions expressed in this video are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Hoover Institution or Stanford University.

© 2026 by the Board of Trustees of Leland Stanford Junior University.

 

 

View Transcript

- Rent control meant to keep prices down often exacerbates inequities and perpetuates the crisis in 2025. As the United States faces significant housing scarcity and rent increases, it's essential to reconsider policies like rent control that were intended to ease housing costs. Rent control caps limits on how much landlords can charge or increase rent. Artificially keep rents below market levels leading to rental shortages. Rent control incentivizes landlords to forego necessary maintenance as repair costs rise, but rents to recoup the costs do not. It also undermines incentives for new construction as developers would be unable to break even, let alone turn a profit. In short, rent control diminishes both housing quantity and housing quality. Why then rent control policies endure even when their negative impacts are so widely documented. Rent control has existed and persisted in places like New York since 1943. In contrast, price controls on gasoline were attempted in 1971 and abandoned in 1981 after creating shortages just as rent control does. Why was it easier to get rid of price controls on gasoline than it has been to remove price caps on housing? The driving reason behind these enduring failed policies is that rent control creates a profound divide between existing tenants and aspiring ones. It pits insiders against outsiders. Consider the details of rent control. Under typical rent control rules, tenants and controlled units can remain as long as they want, as long as they pay rent on time. With artificially low rent supply quickly dries up and can't meet demand creating shortages and low vacancy rates. This scarcely affects incumbents the insiders, they've secured their spots, but for non renters seeking entry, the outsiders finding a unit becomes arduous and more costly than in a free market. And if these outsiders do not yet live in the district where they hope to find a unit, they cannot even vote to help change local policies in their favor. Unless you are an existing tenant who opposes rent control on principle, or unless you see the long-term damage rent control can have on your building or your neighborhood, you along with the vast majority of current tenants, will support rent, control and lobby to maintain the status quo. Consider by contrast the details of price controls on gasoline. President Nixon introduced price controls on every good and service in America. In 1971, he started with a literal price freeze. For the first 90 days, it was illegal to raise prices or wages by even 1 cent. Phases followed, allowing modest increases. But in the fall of 1973, OPEC hiked oil prices from $3 to $11 per barrel. The government imposed price controls on gasoline prevented oil refineries, distributors, and gas stations from passing on the sudden cost increases to consumers via higher prices. These price controls led to shortages, rationing, and long lines at the pump. Gasoline buyers ultimately saved 20 cents a gallon, but paid far more with their time. The average amount of time people waited in line for gasoline worked out to an extra 40 cents per gallon. So people paid more including the time cost than they would have if price controls had been lifted before. President Reagan's repeal in 1981. The key difference between rent and gasoline. Gasoline was not a privileged commodity. Everyone needed it. And unlike rent control tenants, everyone felt the pain at the pump. If gasoline were treated the way rent has been, the government could single out some of the population to receive gasoline. Well, the rest would be out of luck completely. Those who were able to purchase gas would naturally be in favor of keeping their privilege lobbying to preserve it and prevent those without from having any at all. No matter how rent control is presented or packaged as a helpful way to make housing affordable, it locks in a privileged class of incumbents. While outsiders scramble in a market starved a supply, it distorts incentives stifles new building and ensures shortages persist all under the guise of help. True affordability comes not from government caps that breed artificial scarcity, but from unleashing the free market ditching rent control opens doors for everyone proving once again that freedom not fiat, creates the housing opportunities Americans desperately need.