Uh, no, not subsidiaries. Partnerships maybe but not even contractors. Most they could do is offer loans.

It's actually not bad, prevents shell games, but still allows them to keep properties they already own and allows up to 350 new properties larger than single family.

A potential hack would be offering loans to businesses to buy 350, and if theyvreally want to push the limits they can try to buy the smaller companies which just so happens to transfer their properties.

Gonna need more than 45 DNC for that.

Maybe there is a housing crash coming and the will of the people no longer conflicts with special interest groups.

If they don't plan to buy anyway, they will throw a bine so the public can make bad investments at will.

They realize the market is at peak so they're going to get out anyway.

Or, better theory, they've grandfathered in existing arrangements so it's just keeping out additional PE firms.

I get where you're coming from and an for the sentiment, but that will need at least some sort of caveat or having to sell the house of a lost family member will be become very dangerous.

Or buying a foreclosure and making it livable.

If Trump didn't veto it, there must be some loopholes large enough to drive a battleship through.....

I wonder how this is going to affect https://arrived.com/ -- I have some minor investments there I'd prefer not to lose.

Still, this is quite good news, for exactly the reasons Warnock says, even if I lose every red cent in my arrived account.

I knew he'd do some good. :) I was hopeful when Georgia elected him. That hope wasn't misplaced.

Senate vote was 85-5

Ron Johnson of Wisconsin
Mike Lee of Utah
Rand Paul of Kentucky
Rick Scott of Florida
Tommy Tuberville of Alabama

Guessing Trump knew it would be a losing battle to veto it. Also, it should make him look better with him having to do nothing but stay out of the way

Private equity really the problem? In Canada, these are all mom and pop boomer investors.

Canada passed a law against foreign buyers but it did nothing because it was <3% of buyers, but it made everyone feel better.

Private equity really the problem? In Canada, these are all mom and pop boomer in

you know waht. its a start. We dont need to solve it all in one pass, but doing nothing isnt the solution

Finally some good news!

it was also an opportunity for everyone to kumbayah and get some good press on addressing affordability

Rick Scott voting against his constituency?

Shocker.

- A Floridian, speaking sarcastically

Ewwwww. I sincerely hope every penny you gave them vanishes. You don't deserve it back for investing in something so slimy.

It’s a pretty high limit, so no impact on small investors.

I don’t see it making much difference, but maybe it’s just not as common where I live. It’s a start though. I don’t think there’s going to be a single fix but maybe enough small fixes will add up

Are they stripping them of the ones they already have?

Hopefully they're just being taxed at increased rates that make profit unviable and allows them to unload the houses normally. I don't really know how the legislation works though.

It sure would be cool if Ron Johnson would go grab a drink with Lady G and Mitchy boy. I truly hate that man.

The thing is, the power is in the hands of existing home owners who financially benefit from a shortage of housing supply.

Solving the housing crisis and homeowners growing their equity are two goals totally at odds with one another.

No government in north america or the eu is ever going to tell the haves "good job paying off your mortgage, but I'm afraid the value of your home is now hundreds of thousands of dollars less than what you paid for it".

As long as housing is considered an investment it will never be affordable.

hopefully it negatively affects that investment quite heavily

The only way we're ever getting out of this mess is for increased density in urban areas and for people to grow out of this desire for a single family home with a yard and a driveway.

Damn, fuck Russian Ron Johnson. The democrats really left Barnes out to dry against Ron Johnson and he ran an awful campaign. It still blows my mind that the same election elected Democrat Evers for governor and Ron Johnson. What a wild split ticket.

Cool. Both.

"Corporate owned" would be defined in a way that allowed for earnest actual single human/family scenarios, but also stopped little mini tyrants from trying to become a local menace through loopholes.

It's a great way to get younger people to stop caring when they can't actually afford to own anything. This is a step in the correct direction, corporate gatekeeping needs to end, we need to give people opportunities to own. If someone rents, borrows, and leases their entire life, why would they care if it all goes to shit?

This solution makes sense. They need to phase out the existing rules properly, no matter how wrong they were to begin with.

Tax them from 10% til 100% over 5 years, and let them sell off as they go through that time spand maybe?

Are private equity firms, as defined in the bill, actually buying homes? Or is the private entity type doing that, not classified as an equity firm?

Rich people have nothing to do with their stolen money but buy up assets. It's a runaway disaster for everyone. The rich are pricing people out of being alive and we act like we can't do anything about it. At some point, perhaps gen Alpha, will have to do something about it or simply die.

Can we apply that to farms too? If you aren't actually farming, whether you have a corporation or not, you can't buy farmland. Sorry, JD.

Eh, one of the founders is a friend of a friend, I don't think it's "slimy". Though I have complained about some aspects both publicly and privately to him.

It was easier to get into than to actually buy my own property, but there's been a lot of changes to it since I bought my first shares of a local (to me) property.

They're not going to explain that right away. They wouldn't want the poors to take adavantage of it.

Finally! I've watched these fucking companies buy up every house in my neighborhood that came up for sale. IMO when this trend started was when the people's dream of ever owning a home got destroyed. Warnock for President?

It was easier to get into than to actually buy my own property

You say while participating in something that actively makes it harder for people to buy their own property.

So for every 350 homes they make a new LLC or shell company.

You didn't expect this to actually fix the problem did you? Sorry, too much money to be made.

An important distinction here is that BlackRock is not a PE firm. They are an asset management company. Now, that's not to say they're not in the business of buying up homes, just that they're not PE. Blackstone is the PE firm which has been buying up single family homes. They're different companies. Both evil though.

I mean any progress is a step in the right direction. It just seems that these days are Democrats are very performative. Most of their legislation has no teeth and is just for show. Enforcement of any policies is basically none.

We’ve had low interest rates propping up the stock market and speculative bubbles for far too long. This is why there has been too much cheap capital chasing returns over the last decade.

It’s a bubble of its own which we are starting to see pop in a number of sectors. (Private Equity firms and banks starting to show signs of strain, zombie businesses going under, AI bubble running out of capital sources and now tapping retail investors, crypto crash, etc.)

However this president is intent on getting us to 0% interest rates which will reverse that progress. Once the asset class can tap into essentially free money all of this progress will be undone.

If PE can get free capital every 7 years and sit on an appreciating asset while making renters pay for it, they will. If PE has to refinance that asset every 7 years at 7% or 8% interest suddenly the math doesn’t work especially in a slumping housing market.

And let's not forget: the younger people of today are the older people of tomorrow. Except for those who are handed things due to generational wealth, we're looking at an extremely large contingent of the country (world?) which will own nothing. Perhaps the largest ever such contingent. Does not seem like a sustainable situation over any extended term.

This won't do anything people who read actual news know the private equity is a convenient boogeyman hiding the refusal of state government to do their job an remove local control and mandate zoning reform and more housing of all types and sizes. Also it's 2026 and people are still posting tv news outlets to the internet.

Fuck Rick Scott to hell and back. He is in it for the $$$ and nothing else, does not give even one fuck about the people of Florida. I cannot imagine voting for him, such a high level scammer.

In Canada, these houses are all being bought by Mom and pop Boomer investors, leveraging equity of houses they paid 12 acorns for.

But actually ignoring the real problem and making panacea laws doesn't help anyone. You can pass a law banning intergalactic space travellers from buying houses, but is the point to do something, or just look like you are?

Wait, why does that "email" have three To's and two CC's (unless those three people share onn email address)

Wat?

Have you ever seen an email thread?

Worked in any business ever?

Ok, sorry, I haven't.

Private Equity's housing stock is actually pretty small when compared against so-called "Mom and Pop" landlords. This law creates exceptions for Mom-and-Pops that own ten properties or less.

PE accounts for an average of 2.4% of home ownership in the US. Mom-and-Pops take up another 6.5%, nearly 3x as much. This law will have an outsized impact on sunbelt cities where PE owns double-digits portions of the market, but most of the country won't perceive these changes at all.