So, how do we rein in corporate landlords?

There are several policies that can help. No single reform will fix the housing crisis, but together, these tools can limit landlord power, protect tenants, and shift us toward a more equitable system. Many of these policies have been successfully implemented in other parts of the country, offering a roadmap for what’s possible here in Georgia.

See below for more information about these policies, and a list of bills that we are tracking.

Policies

  • Limit number of properties

    Restrict how many residential units a single corporate landlord can own in order to prevent monopolistic control over local housing markets.

    Further Reading

  • Restrict algorithmic pricing software

    Enforce transparency and fair practices from companies that manage rental data by regulating software that algorithmically increases rent prices.

    further reading

  • End junk fees

    Ban or regulate unnecessary and deceptive fees (like "convenience" or "processing" fees) that landlords tack onto rent or applications to increase profits.

    Further reading

  • Rights for tenants

    Expand legal protections for tenants, such as the right to organize, protection from unjust evictions, and access to legal counsel in housing court.

    Further Reading

  • Rental registries

    Require landlords to register their properties with a local or state agency, making it easier to track ownership, hold bad actors accountable, and enforce housing standards.

    Further Reading

  • Rent stabilization

    Limit how much landlords can raise the rent each year, helping to keep housing stable and affordable for existing tenants. Georgia state law currently bans rent stabilization.

    Further Reading

Bills for Georgia’s 2025-2026 Legislative session

A number of these policies have been introduced as bills in the current session of the Georgia General Assembly. See below for a list of legislation that the ETCT Campaign is tracking for the 2025-26 legislative session. 

Resources and Further Reading

Limiting the Number of Properties

The most targeted way to reduce the corporate control of Georgia’s housing market is to limit the number of properties these companies can amass. Similar legislation has been introduced in at least seven other states, including California, Kentucky, Minnesota, Nebraska, North Carolina, Virginia and Utah. As of yet, none of this legislation has passed, and only in California has it passed out of a single chamber of the state legislature. While there are no examples of this legislation successfully passing elsewhere to look to, Georgia has a chance to lead the nation by passing the first such bill as a reflection of the fact that Georgia has been more affected by these predatory landlords than any other state.

Further Reading

Restrict algorithmic rent pricing software

In addition to owning large numbers of properties individually, corporate landlords in the multi-family rental market have begun colluding with one another using proprietary algorithmic price-fixing software like those offered by RealPage. Though many of the biggest clients using RealPage have already agreed to discontinue their use of the software as part of a settlement with the US Department of Justice, it is important to prevent any similar companies from emerging in the future.


There are currently two states and seven municipalities across the country that have successfully banned the use of algorithmic price-fixing software in the housing market. At the state level, this includes California and New York, though a similar effort in Colorado passed both legislative chambers before being vetoed by the governor. The cities of Minneapolis, San Francisco, Philadelphia, Jersey City, Hoboken, Providence, Seattle, San Diego and Santa Monica have also passed anti-algorithmic price-fixing ordinances, while Berkeley passed a similar ordinance before repealing it in order to avoid litigation.

Further Reading

End Junk Fees

Corporate landlords are known to introduce a variety of extraneous, non-negotiable fees onto tenants after they sign a lease, contributing to higher prices for tenants. Bills that outright ban or require greater transparency around junk fees have been passed in 10 different states, including Nevada, New Mexico, Virginia, California, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Colorado, Minnesota, Utah and Idaho.

Further Reading

Rights for tenants

Georgia currently has some of the least protections for tenants of any state in the US, which encourages large out-of-state corporations to come into Georgia and exploit our communities. Creating stronger, across-the-board protections for all tenants would provide a major disincentive to these companies to continue buying up Georgia homes. A few basic protections involve providing a right to cure, or opportunity for a tenant to make amends before evictions are filed. Another is to ensure a standard of habitability for properties that face neglect. This is critical because corporate landlords tend to neglect their properties, prioritizing their collateral value or ability to be packaged into investment instruments. House Bill 404, which passed in 2024, is a start by providing a cure period and warrant of habitability. However, the bill does not outline a clear enforcement mechanism, which is still needed to enshrine these rights.


While tenant protections can take a number of different forms, one of the most popular has been enshrining tenants’ right to counsel into law, guaranteeing tenants a lawyer when facing eviction proceedings in the same way that those charged with criminal offenses are guaranteed a defense attorney. A total of 19 cities, 2 counties and 5 states have passed legislation guaranteeing a tenant's right to counsel between 2017 and 2024. Furthermore, many corporate landlords tend to evict at a much higher rate. Eviction records can severely affect a tenant’s ability to gain new housing during the tenant screening process. Creating a pathway for eviction expungement is a key right for tenants, which currently is a convoluted process in Georgia.

Further Reading

Rental Registries

Corporate landlords are known for using a variety of interlocking limited liability companies (or LLCs) in order to mask the full scope of their property holdings from public scrutiny and legal liability. Rental registries are commonly employed by municipalities in order to increase transparency in the housing market and allow for stronger enforcement of existing laws and regulations. But since 2003, Georgia law has preempted municipalities from creating such registries. Even without regulating rental prices, rental registries can help policymakers gather crucial information about the housing market that otherwise isn’t available or requires a level of topical expertise that may not always be available to city, county or state officials.

Further Reading

Rent stabilization

Corporate landlords have played a significant role in driving the price of housing higher and higher for renters and prospective homebuyers. As more and more people are renting, providing stability and predictability in the rental market is crucial. Repealing the statewide ban on municipal rent stabilization policies would allow municipalities facing the steepest increases in prices to regulate their local markets and keep rents affordable for working families.

Only Oregon and California have statewide rent stabilization laws, though municipalities in New York, New Jersey, Maine, Maryland and Minnesota, as well as the District of Columbia, also have rent stabilization ordinances in effect.

Further Reading