Congress bans mega-investors from buying homes—but enforcement is up to DOJ
S. 3937 — Homes for American Families Act · Filed by Josh Hawley (R-MO) · 1 cosponsor · Introduced Feb 26, 2026 · Referred to committee
Your members of Congress
Enter a ZIP to see where your representative and both senators stood on this bill.
Looked up on this device — your ZIP is never stored on our servers.
What it does
This bill amends the Sherman Act to prohibit large investment firms—real estate investment trusts (REITs), insurance companies, and investment funds with $150+ million in assets—from purchasing residential homes, condos, townhouses, and land zoned for residential development. The ban is treated as a civil antitrust violation (not a crime), with exceptions for homebuilders and developers constructing units for non-prohibited buyers. The bill also directs the DOJ Antitrust Division to prioritize enforcement against coordinated pricing and vacancy strategies by these entities in local housing markets.
Why we flagged it
The bill's core mechanism is a categorical prohibition on institutional investor purchases of residential property, framed as an antitrust violation. It is a direct market-access restriction on a named class of financial entities, not a subsidy, tax carve-out, or deregulation.
What the text implies
- The $150M asset threshold may capture mid-sized regional investment firms and insurance companies alongside mega-funds, potentially affecting a broader swath of institutional capital than the title suggests.
- Aggregation rules under IRC §414 treat related entities as one for asset-counting purposes, meaning a holding company structure could push a smaller fund over the $150M threshold if parent/subsidiary relationships exist.
The full analysis lists 5 implications of this text.
Who stands to gain
Individual homebuyers (reduced institutional competition); Small and mid-sized real estate investors below $150M AUM threshold; Local homebuilders and developers (reduced competition from institutional capital)