BREAKING: House Releases ROAD to Housing Draft

Good news for NARPM® members: the House is moving forward on a major housing bill—and it includes two changes for which NARPM specifically asked.

What Happened

House Financial Services Committee Chair French Hill (R-AR) and Ranking Member Maxine Waters (D-CA) have reached a bipartisan agreement on a House version of the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act (H.R. 6644). The House is expected to take up the legislation as early as next week.

The bill passed the Senate in March 2026 with broad bipartisan support. The House version includes several improvements to the Senate-passed text—two of which NARPM specifically requested in a letter to House members sent in March.

What the Bill Does

The 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act is a sweeping, bipartisan housing package. It aims to increase the supply of housing in America through a wide range of measures, including zoning reform incentives, manufactured housing modernization, improvements to FHA lending programs, and new tools for community development. Title X of the bill addresses institutional investor activity in the single-family home market.

What NARPM Asked For—and What We Got

When the Senate passed H.R. 6644, NARPM identified two provisions that concerned us. We wrote to the House asking for fixes before the bill became law. The House version addresses both.

Fix No. 1: The Build-to-Rent Divestment Requirement

The Senate bill required large institutional investors that purchase homes through build-to-rent programs to sell those homes to individual buyers within seven years. NARPM opposed this provision because it would have discouraged investment in purpose-built rental housing at a time when the country needs more housing, not less. Build-to-rent development adds net new homes to the rental supply—these are not homes being converted away from owner-occupancy. A forced divestment timeline creates investment uncertainty and could cause developers to exit this space altogether.

The House version addresses our concern. The seven-year mandatory divestment requirement that applied to build-to-rent properties has been removed from the bill.

Fix No. 2: Property Management Agreements and “Investment Control”

The Senate bill defined a “large institutional investor” as any entity with direct or indirect investment control over 350 or more single-family homes. The definition of “investment control” was broad enough that it could have unintentionally swept in professional property management companies—even though those companies own none of the homes they manage.

A property management firm that manages 400 client-owned homes under third-party contracts has no ownership stake in those properties. It does not make investment decisions. It is a small business service provider—not a large institutional investor. But without clarifying language, the bill could have treated it as one, triggering compliance obligations designed for large corporate ownership entities.

The House version adds a clear rule of construction stating that entering into or performing under a third-party property management agreements—including tasks related to maintenance and tenant selection—does not, by itself, constitute investment control over a covered single-family home. This is exactly the fix NARPM requested.

What This Means for Property Managers

The practical takeaway here is simple: advocacy works. NARPM members and the NARPM advocacy team engaged on this bill, and Congress listened. These two changes are a direct result of that engagement—our March letter identified both concerns clearly, proposed specific solutions, and asked the House to act. The House version reflects that work.

Thank you to every NARPM member who contacted their representatives, submitted a comment, or otherwise made their voice heard on this legislation. Your participation made a difference.

If this bill becomes law as written, professional property managers who manage homes under third-party contracts will not be treated as large institutional investors under Title X of the Act—and purpose-built rental communities developed through build-to-rent programs will not be subject to a mandatory seven-year sell-off requirement.

What Comes Next

The House is expected to vote on the bill in the week of May 18, 2026. If it passes the House, the bill will then go back to the Senate for consideration of the House’s changes. If the Senate approves it, the bill would then go to the President for signature.

NARPM will continue to monitor the legislation and will provide updates as the process moves forward.