A landmark shift in New York City’s rental market promises immediate savings for tenants, but the full impact remains uncertain
New York City’s rental landscape underwent a seismic shift this week as the Fairness in Apartment Rentals (FARE) Act officially took effect, fundamentally altering who pays broker fees in the nation’s most expensive rental market. After months of legal challenges from the real estate industry, a federal judge’s decision to deny a preliminary injunction has cleared the path for implementation of what advocates call the most significant tenant protection measure in years.
The Numbers Behind the Change
The financial impact for renters is immediately tangible. With broker fees typically running 12% of annual rent, the average New York City tenant will save $5,404 in upfront costs, according to new data from StreetEasy. For a market where median rents have consistently broken records, this represents a 41.8% reduction in move-in expenses, dropping average upfront costs from $12,942 to $7,537.
“This is a big win for renters,” says Kenny Lee, an economist at StreetEasy who analyzed the law’s projected impact. The savings come at a critical time when New York’s rental market has reached historic highs, with many potential tenants previously forced out by the combination of high rents and substantial broker fees.
Industry Pushback and Legal Battles
The real estate industry’s resistance has been fierce and coordinated. The Real Estate Board of New York (REBNY), alongside several major brokerages, mounted a comprehensive legal challenge arguing the law violates First Amendment protections and improperly interferes with private contracts. While Judge Ronnie Abrams dismissed the constitutional claims, she allowed the lawsuit to continue on narrower grounds.
“New Yorkers will soon realize the negative impacts of the FARE Act when listings become scarce, and rents rise,” warned James Whelan, REBNY’s president, signaling the industry’s intent to continue fighting through appeals and litigation.
The Rent Adjustment Reality
Critics predicted landlords would simply pass costs to tenants through higher base rents, and early data suggests this is happening—though perhaps not as dramatically as feared. StreetEasy’s analysis shows properties that eliminated broker fees ahead of the law’s implementation increased rents by an average of 5.3%, only 0.7 percentage points above broader market trends.
However, some brokers report more substantial increases. Rachel Fiegler, co-founder of boutique brokerage Pinpointe Group, says landlords in her network have raised asking rents by 8-12% to offset the broker fee responsibility. Bill Kowalczuk of Coldwell Banker Warburg cites a Brooklyn studio that achieved $4,150 monthly rent—a building record—with the landlord covering the broker fee.
When Tenants Still Pay
The law doesn’t eliminate broker fees entirely. Renters who actively hire their own agents to search for apartments will still pay the traditional 12% fee, though this arrangement must now be explicitly disclosed and contracted. The key distinction lies in who initiates the broker relationship: if a landlord hires the broker to market their property, they bear the cost.
This clearer delineation of responsibility represents a philosophical shift toward transparency in a market historically opaque about fee structures and agent loyalties.
Market Dynamics and Unintended Consequences
The law’s implementation creates several potential market distortions that bear watching. Higher base rents mean prospective tenants need greater income to qualify for apartments, potentially pushing out marginal applicants. With landlords typically requiring annual income of 40 times monthly rent, a $300 rent increase translates to needing an additional $12,000 in annual income.
Some landlords are reportedly reducing their online presence to avoid broker fee responsibilities, potentially creating information asymmetries that could disadvantage apartment hunters. Jason Haber of Compass predicts “a huge decline in online supply,” forcing tenants back to less efficient search methods reminiscent of pre-internet apartment hunting.
Rent Stabilization as a Limiting Factor
A significant portion of New York’s rental stock may be insulated from dramatic rent increases due to existing regulations. Nearly half of the city’s apartments fall under rent stabilization rules, while others are covered by Good Cause Eviction protections that cap annual increases at 8.8%.
“The idea that broker fees will be baked into higher base rents doesn’t even apply to a large segment of the housing stock,” argues Lidor BarDavid of apartment platform openigloo, suggesting the law’s impact may be more nuanced than industry critics claim.
Strategic Considerations for Renters
The new landscape creates both opportunities and risks for tenants. Two-year leases become more attractive as a hedge against base rent increases that now include embedded broker costs. For renters planning extended stays, locking in current rates protects against compounding increases calculated on inflated base rents.
However, the complexity of the new system requires more sophisticated decision-making. Renters must now evaluate whether apparent savings justify potentially higher long-term costs, particularly if they plan to renew leases or move frequently.
Enforcement and Compliance
The city has established clear enforcement mechanisms through the Department of Consumer and Worker Protection, with fines ranging from $500 to $2,000 for violations. The Department of State can impose additional penalties up to $2,000 and potentially revoke broker licenses, creating meaningful deterrents for non-compliance.
Tenants can file complaints through the city’s 311 system, providing accessible recourse for fee violations.
Looking Forward
The FARE Act represents a fundamental restructuring of New York’s rental economics, shifting costs from individual transactions to ongoing rental relationships. While immediate savings for tenants are clear, the law’s long-term effects on market dynamics, housing availability, and affordability remain to be determined.
As the city’s rental market adapts to these new rules, both tenants and landlords will need to navigate a more complex landscape where traditional assumptions about costs and responsibilities no longer apply. The ultimate measure of success will be whether the law achieves its goal of making New York’s rental market more accessible without creating offsetting disadvantages for the tenants it aims to protect.
For now, New York renters face a market in transition, with both new opportunities and new challenges as the city’s most significant rental reform in decades takes effect.
Source: Brick Underground