Prohibits the use of an algorithmic device by a landlord for the purpose of determining the amount of rent to charge a residential tenant; declares that such use is an unfair or deceptive trade practice.
Summary
A04991 would amend New York’s Real Property Law to prohibit landlords from using an “algorithmic device” to determine the rent charged for a residential tenancy when that device uses, incorporates, or was trained with nonpublic competitor data. The bill is aimed at rent-setting tools that analyze market information such as actual rent prices, occupancy rates, and lease dates in order to advise landlords on what to charge. It also expressly covers changes in rent for renewals, not just initial leases.
The bill defines “algorithmic device” broadly, but carves out certain exceptions. It would not apply to periodic, aggregated, anonymous reports published by trade associations, or to products used to establish rent or income limits under affordable housing program guidelines. The bill would take effect 90 days after becoming law and would apply only to rental agreements executed on or after the effective date.
Impact
If enacted, the bill would create a new section 222-a of the Real Property Law and make prohibited algorithmic rent-setting a deceptive act or practice under General Business Law section 349. That means violators would be subject to the penalties and remedies available under article 22-A of the General Business Law, giving the state an enforcement mechanism beyond ordinary landlord-tenant regulation. The measure would directly affect landlords, property managers, and vendors of rent-pricing software that rely on nonpublic competitor data, while preserving certain uses tied to aggregated market reporting and affordable housing programs.
Sentiment
The bill’s stated purpose and caption suggest a strong consumer-protection and anti-collusion rationale, reflecting concern that algorithmic pricing tools may facilitate price fixing, collusion, and higher rents for tenants. Because there are no committee transcripts or recorded votes provided, there is no documented legislative debate or formal vote history to show broader support or opposition. Based on the text alone, the bill appears to be framed positively toward tenant protections and market fairness.
Contention
The main point of contention is likely to be whether the bill goes too far in restricting landlords’ use of pricing software and market analytics, especially where those tools may be used to inform rather than dictate rent decisions. Another likely issue is the breadth of the definition of “nonpublic competitor data,” which includes anonymized or otherwise nonpublic rent and occupancy information, potentially sweeping in a wide range of data-driven products. Supporters would likely emphasize preventing anticompetitive rent inflation and collusion, while critics may argue the bill could limit legitimate business planning and create compliance uncertainty for landlords and software providers.
Same As
Prohibits the use of an algorithmic device by a landlord for the purpose of determining the amount of rent to charge a residential tenant; declares that such use is an unfair or deceptive trade practice.
Same As
Prohibits the use of an algorithmic device by a landlord for the purpose of determining the amount of rent to charge a residential tenant; declares that such use is an unfair or deceptive trade practice.
Prohibits the use of an algorithmic device by a landlord for the purpose of determining the amount of rent to charge a residential tenant; declares that such use is an unfair or deceptive trade practice.
Prohibits the use of an algorithmic device by a landlord for the purpose of determining the amount of rent to charge a residential tenant; declares that such use is an unfair or deceptive trade practice.