Property: land sales; purchase of certain residential homes by investors; regulate. Creates new act.
SB 971 would create the “Residential Homeownership Accessibility Act” to restrict certain out-of-state investors from buying and holding single-family homes in Michigan. The bill defines covered investors broadly to include corporations, hedge funds, private equity funds, limited liability companies, and similar entities that are not domiciled in Michigan or whose principal members are not domiciled in Michigan. In general, an out-of-state investor that already owns 10 or more single-family residences in the state would be prohibited from buying additional single-family residences, and no out-of-state investor could own more than 10 single-family residences in Michigan.
The bill also requires out-of-state investors to register with the Michigan State Housing Development Authority (MSHDA) before purchasing or acquiring a single-family residence, and it directs MSHDA to maintain a public registry of such investors. Existing owners would have to register within 90 days after the act takes effect. MSHDA may charge a registration fee, and it must promulgate rules to implement the act. The bill exempts certain transactions and entities, including transfers within the same investor, acquisitions by devise, governmental entities, 501(c)(3) nonprofits, land trusts, and employers renting homes to employees.
The bill would significantly affect state housing and property law by creating new limits on ownership of single-family residences by out-of-state investors and by adding a new regulatory role for MSHDA. Violations would be referred to the attorney general, who could seek civil fines of $100,000 per home for unlawful purchases or acquisitions and $100,000 per year for continued unlawful ownership. Investors who violate the act would also be barred from charging rent on the affected property. Fines collected would be deposited into the state housing development fund.
Overall sentiment, based on the bill’s structure and stated purpose, appears to favor increasing homeownership access for Michigan residents by discouraging large-scale investor ownership of single-family homes. The bill text itself does not include committee testimony or recorded votes, so there is no direct evidence of support or opposition in the provided materials. The main point of contention likely centers on whether restricting out-of-state investors would improve housing affordability and availability, versus concerns that the bill could limit investment activity, complicate property transactions, or raise legal and administrative issues around enforcement and residency-based distinctions.
The bill would add a new chapter of restrictions on acquisition and ownership of single-family residences by out-of-state investors, while assigning MSHDA new registration, registry, and rulemaking duties and giving the attorney general enforcement authority. It would also create new civil penalties and redirect penalty revenue to the housing development fund, affecting investors, landlords, and certain property owners statewide.
No committee transcript or vote record was provided, so there is no documented legislative debate in the materials. The bill’s stated purpose suggests a pro-homeownership, anti-speculation policy approach, with likely support from advocates of housing affordability and likely concern from real estate investors and property-rights opponents.
The likely areas of contention are the bill’s limits on out-of-state investors, the 10-property cap, and the use of residency and entity-based definitions to distinguish covered owners from exempt parties. Supporters would likely argue the bill protects access to starter homes and reduces investor competition in the housing market, while opponents would likely argue it could reduce capital availability, interfere with legitimate investment and rental operations, and create enforcement challenges for MSHDA and the attorney general.