FTC Releases Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking Targeting Rental Housing Fees

Summary

The Federal Trade Commission has released an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) that could fundamentally change how rental housing fees are advertised and disclosed. The NARPM Advocacy Team has been closely monitoring this development and is preparing a detailed response. Tomorrow, March 13, 2026, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) will publish in the Federal Register an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) titled Rule on Unfair or Deceptive Rental Housing Fee Practices. The notice has already been made available online, and the public comment period begins with tomorrow’s publication. This ANPRM signals that the FTC is seriously considering promulgating a new federal rule that would regulate how rental housing fees and charges are advertised, disclosed, and imposed on renters and prospective renters — throughout the entire lease lifecycle, from application through move-out. The public comment period closes 30 days after the March 13 publication date.

Background

To understand why this development matters, it helps to know the history. In November 2023, the FTC published a sweeping proposed rule for a broad economy-wide Trade Regulation Rule on Unfair or Deceptive Fees, designed to require upfront, all-in pricing disclosures across many industries. NARPM provided input on the issue on its own and in collaboration with a broader group of housing providers. When that rule was finalized in January 2025, the FTC made a deliberate choice to limit its scope to live-event ticketing and short-term lodging — and explicitly excluded rental housing. In its Statement of Basis and Purpose, the Commission acknowledged that rental housing raised distinct and complex issues and chose to “proceed incrementally.” Many in the property management industry breathed a sigh of relief. But the FTC was clear: the exclusion was not permanent. The Commission flagged its intent to examine the rental housing market separately, and that is exactly what it is now doing.

Where We Are in the Process

It is important to understand where this action fits in the federal rulemaking process. An ANPRM is the earliest formal step in the federal rulemaking process. It is a public request for information and comment. The FTC is essentially saying: “We are thinking about making a rule in this area. Tell us what you know and what you think we should do.”

An ANPRM is an opportunity — perhaps the most important opportunity — for the property management industry to shape whether a rule is needed, what it would cover, and how it would be structured. Comments submitted now can directly influence the direction of any future rulemaking. An ANPRM is not a proposed rule. There is no regulatory text. Nothing has been enacted. No new legal obligations exist. The FTC has not yet determined that a rule is warranted. Publishing an ANPRM simply means the FTC is gathering information to help it make that determination. Think of the ANPRM as an open question, not a mandate. The industry’s response at this stage can have a significant and lasting effect on what, if anything, comes next. The ANPRM is lengthy and wide-ranging. It covers concerns about fee practices across the entire rental lifecycle and specifically targets what the FTC describes as “hidden or misleading fees and charges” that inflate the true cost of rental housing beyond the advertised price.

The FTC’s Core Concerns

The Commission identifies several categories of practices it considers potentially unfair or deceptive:

• Advertising a base rent that excludes mandatory recurring or one-time fees and charges
• Failing to clearly disclose the nature, purpose, and amount of fees before a renter consents to any payment
• Misrepresenting fees as optional when they are mandatory, or as required by a government entity when they are not
• Charging fees without the renter’s express, informed consent
• Improperly withholding security deposit refunds for normal wear and tear or pre-existing damage
• Requiring renters to use specific third-party service providers, limiting competitive choice

The FTC’s Recent Enforcement Actions

The ANPRM does not come out of nowhere. The FTC has taken major enforcement actions against two large national landlords:

• Invitation Homes, the nation’s largest single-family rental provider, was ordered in September 2024 to pay $48 million in consumer redress and to overhaul its fee disclosure practices.
• Greystar Real Estate Partners, the largest residential rental property manager in the U.S., was ordered in December 2025 to pay $24 million, including $23 million in consumer redress and $1 million to the State of Colorado.

The FTC’s Chairman explicitly noted after the Greystar case that the problem is “not limited to Greystar” and that existing enforcement has not fully resolved the issue — a direct signal that a broader regulatory response is being contemplated.

What the FTC Is Asking For

The ANPRM includes 74 numbered questions across two broad categories.

Questions About the Industry and Current Practices (Questions 1–54)

These questions seek factual information about how the rental housing market currently operates, including:

• How advertised rents are determined and what is included or excluded
• The prevalence and types of fees charged and how common they are
• The role of property management software providers, listing services, and online platforms
• Technological capabilities and limitations related to total-rent advertising
• The full lifecycle of fees from application through move-out
• How the FTC’s earlier fees rule has impacted the ticketing and lodging industries, as a potential model

Questions About Potential Rule Requirements (Questions 55–74)

These questions explore specific potential regulatory approaches. The FTC is asking whether a rule should:

• Require all advertised rental prices to include mandatory fees in a single total-rent figure
• Require total rent to be the most prominently displayed pricing information
• Require itemization of all fees and their nature and purpose before any consent to pay
• Address security deposit practices, including restricting deductions to actual renter-caused damage
• Impose requirements on third-party platforms and property management software providers
• Exempt small landlords, owner-occupied buildings with four or fewer units, or other provider categories

What Comes Next If the FTC Moves Forward

If the FTC determines, based on ANPRM comments, that rulemaking is warranted, here is how the process would unfold:

Step 1: ANPRM Comment Period (Now — closes 30 days after March 13, 2026)

The public submits written comments, data, and arguments. This is the stage we are in now. The quality and substance of industry comments can meaningfully shape what happens next.

Step 2: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM)

If the FTC decides to proceed, it drafts actual regulatory text and publishes a proposed rule with another public comment period, including a detailed cost-benefit analysis.

Step 3: Informal Hearing (if requested)

Parties who dispute specific factual claims in the record can request an informal hearing to present testimony and cross-examine witnesses on those disputed issues.

Step 4: Final Rule

After considering all comments and hearing records, the FTC publishes a final rule. For Section 18 Magnuson-Moss rules, the evidentiary and procedural bar is higher than for standard agency rulemaking. The entire process typically takes several years.

Step 5: Congressional Review and Potential Legal Challenge

Major rules are subject to Congressional review and can be challenged in federal court.

NARPM Is Engaged and Will Be Commenting

The NARPM Advocacy Team has been closely monitoring this issue well before the ANPRM was released. We followed the FTC’s enforcement actions against Invitation Homes and Greystar, tracked legislative activity in more than a dozen states, and engaged with the FTC’s earlier Unfair or Deceptive Fees rulemaking process.

We recognize that some of the practices targeted by the FTC — such as undisclosed junk fees charged by large institutional landlords — are very different from the transparent, professional fee practices employed by NARPM members. At the same time, a broadly written federal rule could impose significant compliance burdens on small and mid-sized professional property management firms that are already operating responsibly.

NARPM will be submitting detailed formal comments in response to this ANPRM.

We Encourage NARPM Members to Submit Their Own Comments

Individual member comments matter, and they matter most at the ANPRM stage. The FTC reads and considers every comment it receives. Firsthand accounts from property managers about how their businesses operate, how they disclose fees, and what compliance costs would look like carry significant weight in the administrative record.

You do not need to be a legal expert to submit a comment. The FTC is specifically asking for practical knowledge, real-world data, and direct experience from industry participants.

Comments should be filed at www.regulations.gov under Docket No. R207011, titled “Unfair or Deceptive Rental Housing Fee Practices ANPRM.” Comments must be received within 30 days of the March 13, 2026 Federal Register publication date.

Stay Informed

This is a fast-moving area of regulatory activity. NARPM will continue to provide timely updates as the FTC’s process develops. Watch for additional information from the NARPM Advocacy Team in the coming weeks.

For questions about the ANPRM or NARPM’s advocacy efforts, please contact the NARPM Advocacy Team.