In the News
High housing costs attract no shortage of proposed solutions, and the menu rarely shrinks. Rent control is one of the recurring entries, resurfacing again in a Current Affairs essay titled ”Rent Control is Fine, Actually.”
Here’s My Take
The author challenges the economic consensus that rent control is bad policy, arguing it reflects groupthink around an oversimplified supply-demand model. He’s right that not all rent control regimes are identical and that certain effects are hard to isolate in housing markets. And his broader point is well taken. Consensus alone isn’t proof of correctness.
Even so, the decades of documented outcomes of rent control are hard to ignore, trained economist or not. Observers have found examples of reduced new housing construction, chronic deferred maintenance, and units misallocated to tenants who don’t actually need the subsidy, and more.
But getting into the weeds of rent control regimes is largely unnecessary. There’s a foundational question worth asking. Should the government be setting prices at all? In nearly every other market, we’ve decided the answer is no. We don’t cap what gas stations can charge when fuel prices spike. We don’t mandate a price on eggs when they get expensive. Price controls treat a symptom while suppressing the signal that tells producers to build more. They also violate private property rights.
Closing
Still, rejecting price controls doesn’t mean accepting high rents. For example, Texas allows more housing to be built and housing prices have responded. In particular, Austin aggressively encouraged more housing and saw rents fall through 2024, while Houston has long allowed abundant housing and kept rents lower than comparable major cities.
Utah law already prohibits municipal rent control, and that’s the right call.
