Harris vs. Corporate Landlords: A Battle for the Heart of America’s Wallets!

In a dazzling show of political acrobatics, Vice President Kamala Harris has decided that solving the housing crisis is the key to winning the hearts of voters—because nothing says “I care” like promising $25,000 in down-payment assistance for first-time homebuyers. It’s the economic equivalent of offering a free donut to someone whose house just burned down.

Meanwhile, corporate landlords—the bad boys of real estate—are apparently the main reason for skyrocketing rents, according to Harris. Of course, they are now the villains in this great American drama, presumably twirling their mustaches while plotting to charge tenants for using the bathroom.

Shockingly enough, nearly half of renters in the U.S. are spending over 30% of their paychecks on housing. Who knew? It’s almost as if people are living in homes and expecting to be able to afford food or, heaven forbid, an occasional Netflix subscription. The census data reads like a tragicomedy, with America’s renters turning into modern-day jesters in the court of inflated rents.

Now, about those dastardly corporate landlords: there’s no dictionary definition for them, but if we all squint hard enough and conjure up an image of faceless corporations outbidding young couples on their dream homes, we might just get there. Harris is calling on Congress to stamp out the corporate villainy by axing tax benefits for those who dare to buy 50 or more single-family rental homes. Because if there’s one thing that can bring a corporation to its knees, it’s the thought of losing a tax break.

Harris’ campaign promises promise relief for countless communities who feel like someone just swapped their beloved local diner with an outpost of Wall Street’s finest. Spoiler alert: Wall Street’s fine dining establishments have yet to acknowledge that they’re the main course in this economic buffet.

A CNN deep dive found that, surprise surprise, rent increases are outpacing wage growth in cities where corporate investors are as common as avocado toast cafes. But figuring out how much these financial juggernauts actually impact the housing market is as complicated as explaining the plot of “Inception” to a toddler. If Michael Seiler, the real estate guru, is unsure of their power, we might as well grab some popcorn and enjoy the show.

But here’s what we know: As of 2021, individual folks still owned about 71% of single-family rentals. So while the corporate overlords are eyeing smidgens of the market, their 16% ownership couldn’t even fill a small gym on trivia night.

Mega-investors—because “mega” sounds so much more impressive—control around 3% of homes in the U.S. Sure, 3% sounds trivial until you realize they own most of the rental properties in cities where rent is rising faster than the dramatic tension on a reality dating show.

As if that weren’t enough, the housing market is so caught up in its own drama that institutional investors are targeting areas with rents already soaring, like they have a crystal ball for overpriced living. It’s like they’re playing an extreme version of Monopoly, where every square is Park Place, and their ultimate fate is solely in the hands of chance cards.

Renters—who might as well be the new protagonists in a tragic sitcom—reported the importance of housing costs as their top election issue, sending signals to politicians like they’re trying to win a reality show. Meanwhile, home-owning voters look on like they just discovered their beloved long-running soap opera has been canceled.

On the flip side of this housing ping-pong game, former President Trump is tiptoeing around the corporate landlord issue like a cat avoiding a bath. His 2024 agenda suggests shots in the arm for homeownership via tax incentives which might encourage people to buy homes instead of just watching house-hunting shows while clutching their lattes.

During the pandemic, investors swooped in like seagulls over a beach picnic, snatching up single-family homes by the thousands. But come June, the noodle hit the wall—purchases dipped nearly 50%. Apparently, interest and prices can dampen even Wall Street’s taste for real estate takeovers.

In a plot twist worthy of a soap opera, CoreLogic, the housing market’s ruthless number-cruncher, doesn’t bother to track what become of properties once the giants buy them. It’s a mystery worthy of an Agatha Christie novel: Are they flipped like pancakes or just souring in a managed portfolio?

Looking at the broader landscape, Goodman, an urban expert, noted that Wall Street’s retreat from buying homes signifies a more logical business equation than previously thought. The math behind their decisions seems to be penned in some elusive financial dialect that most of us mere mortals would need a Rosetta Stone to decode.

As interest rates soar alongside home prices, the allure of investment properties might just be losing its luster—so few parties are left dancing in this economic waltz. However, as the classic saying goes, when the rent’s due, the fun’s usually over. Welcome to the real-world remaster of “Survivor: Housing Market Edition!”