in an incredibly polarized society, there are fewer and fewer things that seem to unite both sides of the aisle in the American political system. Yet it turns out that objections to Wall Street’s grand heist of single-family homes have done just that.
We can expect Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Elizabeth Warren to rail against the onslaught of institutional investors in residential real estate markets, causing rental prices to jump and effectively locking millions of households out of home ownership. However, I admit that I was surprised to find J.D. Vance and Marjorie Taylor Greene striking a similar note. But I was completely unnerved to see real estate tycoon and Wall Street darling Donald Trump singing from the same hymn sheet.
Earlier this month, Trump announced his intention to ban large institutional investors, such as asset managers and pension funds. On Tuesday, he signed an executive order and called on Congress to pass it into law. “Houses are built for households, not for corporations,” he told a Davos audience the next day.
While this stance against the corporate takeover of housing may seem sensible to readers, it places Trump far to the left of Britain’s Labor Party. In fact, Keir Starr and Rachel Reeves have spent much of their time trying to win over firms like Blackstone, once the largest owner of single-family rentals in America. Now they are one of many financial companies that are about to clip their wings as a way to reverse the Trump administration’s recent policy.
Strummer is building his reputation during Parliament on his pipe dream of building 1.5 million homes and launching the next generation of new cities. The UK’s latest housing secretary, Steve Reid, announced his ambitious plans for the sector at Labour’s party conference in Liverpool in September while chanting “Baby blood blood blood!” Red Cap was playing with the slogan. Many found his performance provocative of Maga’s knock-off to spectacle, with his abrasive rhetoric and sartorial choices.
Property industry insiders expect large institutional investors to play a major role in the supply of new housing in the UK. He pointed out that the New Towns Plan is inconceivable without such investment. Corporate landlords are to provide a quarter of these new homes through build-to-rent schemes, including developments in single-family rental homes.
Single-family tenancies, whether in the US or the UK, may consist of detached houses or low-rise blocks of flats owned and managed by a single investor or consortium. In the UK, investment is flowing into the wealthy commuter towns of Cambridgeshire and Hampshire. In the U.S., these are the suburbs of affluent cities in the Sunbelt region — sprawling places like Atlanta, Georgia, Jacksonville, Florida, and Charlotte, North Carolina. Institutional investors now own one out of every four or five single-family homes in these rental markets.
In comparison, the UK’s single-family rental market is small, even in local areas with high levels of investment. That could change quickly, as Trump’s announcement has already prompted analysts to predict a shift in activity toward Britain. According to real estate consultancy Knight Frank, single-family rentals now account for 40% of all investment in the rental sector since the boom. This represents significant growth for an asset class that was essentially non-existent before 2020.
As for Trump, it’s uncertain why he decided to take this detour. Taking an educated guess, I believe he is responding to his lack of progress on the pro-affordability agenda he has campaigned hard for in 2024.
Recent statistics released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics show that rent and food are the primary drivers of U.S. consumer inflation. His unprecedented threats and criminal investigations into Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell see Trump’s desperation to dampen Trump’s opinion and bring back a sense of prosperity to voters. He knows he’s in hot water if he doesn’t change the macroeconomic picture before November’s midterm elections.
The problem, however, is that Trump enjoys enormous support and millions in donations from a real estate industry that benefits greatly from persistent inflation of rental prices. But desperate times call for desperate measures — and the president seems willing to cut that hand to try to stay in power.
The Trump administration has likely realized that in 2024, Trump has won 19 of 20 elections. They also know that their electoral heartlands lie in middle-class suburbs that are increasingly moving away from home ownership and toward renting. There is a clear political imperative here that must demystify the loyalty of the donor base.
In stark contrast, Starr has no clue where his missing base is. Parties across the country are already mobilizing fronts against his New Towns plan. Social housing-led developments could help overcome this aversion, as two-thirds of voters favor expanding council housing stock. But Reeves’ self-imposed fiscal rules make direct public investment in housing a non-starter, leaving the government with no other option but to knock on Wall Street’s door with begging bowl in hand.
In Britain’s strong political system, there is still something that unites tenants and landlords, working class and elite, racists and racists. This is our deep and unwavering concern for the government of the day. Housing policy seems to be another area where no one is particularly happy.
