You say that like it's a simple thing, it's not. Here is a concrete example of what I mean. In NYC rent control/stabilization artificially limits the supply and increases the cost of non-stabilized units. If rent control was eliminated rental values across the city would plummet in non-stabilized units. As a result property values in non-stabilized buildings would plummet as well. You could easily trigger a panic as landlords try to sell off property that is declining in value. There are unintended side effects to changing laws, it's never as simple as just fixing a legal restriction.
Zach_the_Lizard|10 years ago
Rent stabilization is similar. It would raise the property values in rent stabilized buildings. It would also raise rents in the rent stabilized buildings.
Where it would hurt is market rate apartments. They would likely see rents fall over time given the market is no longer bifurcated.
To ease the transition, a phase out would probably be in order, but given that a phase out can be terminated it would probably have to be one big shove out the door.
pavel_lishin|10 years ago
Do you mean rent control and rent stabilization? As far as I can tell, rent-controlled units make up something like 2% of all units.
eric_h|10 years ago
True, but that is actually a great deal of lost income for the landlords in those cases. Anecdotally, of the number of people I've heard of living in rent controlled apartments, I've never heard of rent over $500, including 2 and 3 bedroom apartments in primo neighborhoods. Numbers like that are just _absurd_ given what I'm paying for my 1 bedroom in an "up and coming" neighborhood in queens
psaintla|10 years ago