Sign up for alerts on breaking news and exclusive reporting from NPR
Democrats in Congress hailed it as the biggest housing bill in decades. Republicans called it a win for families across the country. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt described it on X as “one of the most significant pieces of housing legislation in American history.” And in June, both houses of Congress passed it with broad bipartisan support.
President Trump called it “a big yawn” and refused to sign it on June 24, shortly after it passed.
On Friday, the president again reiterated that he won’t sign.
In earlier Truth Social posts, Trump dismissed the bill — officially called the 21st Century Road to Housing Act — as “of minor importance” and canceled a June White House signing ceremony, stipulating that he would only sign if Congress passed a strict voter ID bill called the SAVE America Act. That bill would require proof of citizenship to register to vote and photo ID to cast a ballot. It has stalled in the Senate, where it doesn’t have the 60 votes to pass.
“To me, compared to the SAVE America Act, just about everything is a big yawn,” Trump told reporters in June.
Still, House Speaker Mike Johnson delivered the housing bill to the president on June 29, starting a 10-day clock for him to either sign or veto the bill. That clock is set to expire tonight at 11:59 p.m. ET — without action from the president, the bill will become law automatically.
On Friday morning, Trump posted on Truth Social: “I will not sign the Housing Bill, which has been fully approved by Congress and sent to the White House, in PROTEST over the fact that the United States Senate is not capable of passing THE SAVE AMERICA ACT.”
When reached for comment, the White House referred NPR to the president’s post.
The housing bill aims to make homeownership more affordable, primarily by encouraging homebuilding across the country.
It’s packed with more than 40 provisions, contributed by both Republicans and Democrats, on everything from corporate home ownership to manufactured home construction, which helps explain why it passed with overwhelming bipartisan support.
So does lawmakers’ recognition that home prices have skyrocketed past what many families can afford. According to Realtor.com, a household making $75,000 a year can afford fewer than a quarter of the home listings available.
Housing affordability is a potent electoral issue, and both parties are hoping to claim credit for passing legislation meant to address it ahead of the midterms.
What’s in the housing bill?
Despite Trump downplaying the bill, it includes an idea he promoted: capping how many single-family homes big investors can buy. The bill says corporate landlords that own at least 350 houses won’t be able to buy more. The goal is to make the housing market more competitive for individual buyers, who are often outbid by investors who can make all-cash offers.
Some Democratic lawmakers had long supported such a ban; Republicans were more skeptical until Trump backed the idea. Still, House Republicans did quash part of the ban that would have required developers of build-to-rent homes to sell off those rentals after seven years.
It’s not clear yet how much of a change this cap will make on the housing market. Nationally, these large investors only own about 3% of the single-family rental market, although private equity owns a much larger slice of the real estate in some cities and neighborhoods.
Researchers at the government-backed housing finance company Freddie Mac say private equity is only a small driver of the housing shortage, since they typically buy up cheap homes in need of significant repair. And staff at both the left-leaning Urban Institute and right-leaning Taxpayers Protection Alliance argue private equity can actually improve the housing shortage by renovating homes that would have otherwise fallen out of the market.
Other provisions are meant to boost homebuilding, such as by allowing developers to skip an environmental review if a house is going up between two buildings that were already reviewed.
Another provision creates a grant program communities can use to develop “pattern books,” a collection of preapproved housing designs that would need fewer approvals before construction.
Manufactured homes, which are generally cheaper than homes built on site, also get a break. The bill removes a requirement that they have a permanent chassis, a steel frame that makes those homes movable. Housing policy experts say that could save $5,000 to $10,000 in construction costs per home and make more elaborate designs, such as a second story, easier to build.
And while the bill doesn’t add any new housing funding to the federal budget, it’s designed to encourage home construction by sending more of the existing funding to communities that build more.
The limits of the housing bill
Decisions in Washington typically have less influence on housing markets than those made within the halls of local government or a private developer’s office.
Local zoning rules can slow down or prohibit construction — and the federal bill doesn’t make changes to those rules. Homebuilders may choose to not pick up their hammers if market conditions aren’t right, and developers have been pessimistic about those conditions for the last three years, partially due to high material and labor costs.
And Congress doesn’t control mortgage rates, another important factor in housing affordability. Rates for a 30-year fixed mortgage are currently around 6.5% on average, much higher than they were a few years ago during the pandemic.
Even if builders start new development projects, additional homes will take time to hit the market and any affordability improvements won’t be felt for years, according to Sarah Brundage, president of the National Association of Affordable Housing Lenders. She said this also explains why Congress hasn’t bothered with housing legislation for so long: A single development — from construction start to market — can take longer than an elected official’s term.
But Brundage said housing affordability has reached the point where lawmakers can no longer do nothing. In June, the median existing home cost $440,600. And while local reform needs to happen, Brundage said, the federal bill is a needed first step.
“We have to take the time to celebrate that we have bipartisan champions,” Brundage said. “Moving forward in 2028 and beyond, I don’t think anyone can run for public office without having a perspective of how housing needs to be prioritized.”
