By Dawn Anastasi, RPA Board Member
You may have heard at a recent RPA Landlord Boot Camp, RPA blog post, or other RPA event about the CARES Act.
The CARES Act requires rental property owners to provide a 30-day notice to tenants prior to eviction for nonpayment of rent if the rental property is a "covered property."
Okay, so what's a "covered property"?
The term “covered property” includes any property that participates in certain federal housing programs or that has a federally backed mortgage loan.
Here are two ways to search to see if a property is covered by the CARES Act:
Keep in mind that if the rental property owner receives funds from the Rent Assistance program through the Housing Authority, that property is also covered through the CARES Act.
Do you have further questions on the CARES Act? Comment below!
This article by David J. Decker proposes an interesting solution -- have tenants pay Rent Assistance to the Housing Authority, not to landlords. The Housing Authority can pay the landlord the rent in full.
Read the full article here
Excerpt from the article:
The existing assistance formula usually requires tenants to pay at least a small portion of their rent, for example, $100 per month. This is good policy, but it puts landlords in an awkward position. While the county can be trusted to make its payments, sometimes the tenant does not. The landlord is faced with a conundrum. Landlords can beg and cajole tenants and request payment, but the only tool with any consequences is eviction. However, is a landlord likely to file an eviction costing $150 or more to recover a $100 delinquency? Unlikely.
Instead, the delinquency may fester until the amount demands action. That amount could be $400 or more. While seemingly a relatively small sum, for the county aid recipient, this represents four months of rent. They are unlikely to be able to pay and will face eviction. Now everyone loses. The landlord is unlikely to ever recover these funds and the tenant is forced out of their home.
The remedy is obvious. Have the aid recipient pay their portion of the rent to the county and have the county pay the landlord in full. Now the county can decide when to be patient. The county will know more about what is going on with their clients and how well their recipient screening process is working.
What do you think of this idea? Post your comments below!
This paper was discovered by one of our members while using Google Scholar. The paper was submitted as someone's dissertation for their Doctor of Philosophy in Organizational Behavior from Case Western Reserve University.
This paper is 399 pages, so not a bit of "light reading" but those who like reading long research papers may find this interesting.
The author, Anna Perlmutter, has spent the last 8 years as a landlord for lower-income tenants in Cleveland.
On page 5 of the paper, the author writes:
Small-scale, private market landlords work independently and are often structurally disconnected – with loose information networks and few integral ties to organizational participants.
One of the RPA's goals is to connect rental property owners not only to each other, through our monthly events and social outings, but also to outside resources such as Mediate Milwaukee, the Housing Authority of the City of Milwaukee, and more. And yet our membership doesn't contain all rental property owners in southeastern WI. Why do some rental property owners choose to operate as islands instead of making beneficial connections with others and invest in additional knowledge for themselves?
Also on page 5, the author continues:
This is evidenced by missed opportunities to engage landlords by public sector interventions and the widespread mistrust between landlords, tenants, and public/nonprofit sector professionals (PNPs) across the field.
The RPA has seen this many, many times over. We are constantly fighting to "get a seat at the table" at housing discussions by the city and state. We are constantly trying to fight bias by the media.
Do you know of other landlords who are not part of the RPA? If so, encourage them to join (or re-join if they have been past members). The RPA works hard to provide networking, educational, and legislative work for our members.
Read the entire paper here
By Christina Van Zelst and FOX6 News Digital Team
"I think we need to do something about corporate landlords taking over entire neighborhoods, buying their property so the regular, every day people can afford to purchase a home," Jackson said.
See the full article here
By Sharon Wilson Geno
Our current housing crisis is the result of decades of broken policy and repeated unwillingness to invest needed government resources in housing. The pandemic then drove the cost of housing way up due in large part to dramatic increases in uncontrollable costs, such as insurance and state and local taxes.
Rent control discourages builders from building the amount and the variety of homes needed to keep housing costs in check and upgrading existing homes. Over time, it creates a “worst of both worlds” scenario: It widens the shortage of affordable homes while also causing the existing housing stock to decay and deteriorate.
Moreover, rent control is wildly inequitable. It gives the well-off the same access to rent-controlled apartments as lower-income families who need assistance most. It incentivizes every renter, no matter their income or wealth, to stay in their apartment much longer than they otherwise would, even when their apartment no longer fits their needs. This creates fierce competition for a smaller number of vacant units. Studies shows that rent control supports more upper-income and white renters than those of moderate income and people of color.
This isn’t theoretical; the dynamic has been observed time and again in empirical studies by researchers of all political persuasions.
By Tim Ballering, RPA Board Member
See the link to the article from Milwaukee Neighborhood News Service Here
Yusuf “Joe” is an impressive guy and an asset to our industry.
The Legislative Committee supports his efforts to repeal the Thurmond Amendment. Crimes committed by a 16-year-old, with the last arrest at 18, should not harm them twenty productive years later.
In addition to being the past president of the Association, Joe is a Princeton Alumnus and, until this summer, the Director of the Dyer School for Innovation and Entrepreneurship at Lafayette College, PA. He runs the Real Estate Lab in Allenton.
Here are links to his Prison to Princeton and TED talk videos. They are short and worth viewing.
Note: RPA does not offer financial advice. All suggestions or ideas noted in this article should be discussed with a financial professional, such as a CPA or financial advisor.
Did your teenagers work for you this summer helping out with your rental properties? Do they help out during the year on weekends? If you pay them, consider allowing them to capitalize on the greatest money-making asset they have -- TIME.
“The greatest money-making asset any person can possess is time, and young people have more of it than anyone,” said Ed Slott, an IRA expert and certified public accountant.
Post-tax earned income can be used to make Roth IRA contributions. Roth IRA contributions can be withdrawn before retirement, tax and penalty free.
Eligibility to contribute to a Roth IRA also generally depends on how much you earn. Since workers may no longer qualify for Roth IRAs later in their careers when their incomes are higher, that also makes it advantageous to get started with these accounts early.
Read More in this Article
Keep in mind that self-directed Roth IRAs can also be used to invest in real estate or other assets outside of traditional stocks and bonds -- for example:
With the recent discussion from the government about implementing rent control on a federal level, there's been some articles and discussion refuting that this would be a good idea.
Here is a fantastic article about how Rent Control would not work in the long term and why:
Rent Control Recidivism
Here are some excerpts:
Rent control undermines landlords’ incentives to provide the services tenants want, because it denies landlords the ability to receive adequate compensation to make their efforts worthwhile.
There seems to be a mistaken belief in some circles that 100% of the rent collected by a property owner goes into that owner's pocket. This ignores all the expenses that go into running a property, which include property taxes, insurance, routine maintenance, lawn care, utilities, etc.
Anyone who does a non-volunteer job generally expects to be paid. Rental property owners are no exception.
But as Swedish economist Assar Lindbeck asserted, “In many cases rent control appears to be the most efficient technique presently known to destroy a city—except for bombing.”
The article highlights the three key points why Rent Control is a mistake:
By Attorney Heiner Giese
The attached is a comment submitted to the Federal Housing Finance Administration by Goodman Real Estate, owner of a 254 unit low income housing building in Seattle.
It is very succinct -- readable charts showing how a formerly profitable building declined dramatically from 2018 to 2022 due to various "tenant friendly" laws passed by the State of Washington and the City of Seattle.
Attachment
BECOME A MEMBER - JOIN TODAY!
.png)
