How NYC’s FARE Act Is Reshaping Rentals: A Landlord–Broker’s Take

Living Through the FARE Act, Not Just Reading About It

I’m not looking at the Fairness in Apartment Rental Expenses (FARE) Act from a distance or from a Twitter thread.

I’m living it.

I own rental property in New York City. I represent landlords as a listing broker. I negotiate with tenants, I underwrite deals, I watch renewal conversations get more emotional, and I’ve had more than one client call me and say:

“Josh, is this law good for me… or is it going to crush me?”

One year in, the answer is complicated.

We’ve seen median rents climb—roughly 8.2% year over year as of October 2025. At the same time, some listing platforms are showing steep drops in inventory; REBNY’s RLS, for example, is down about 32% year over year. Landlords, renters, and brokers are all trying to figure out how much of this is the FARE Act—and how much is the reality of a tight, underbuilt housing market finally showing its teeth.

What I want to do here, honestly and calmly, is unpack the law and its ripple effects from my perspective as both landlord and broker. No panic, no sugarcoating—just what I’m seeing in the numbers and in people’s lives.

What the FARE Act Actually Did (In Plain English)

Before the FARE Act, it was common in NYC for tenants to pay a hefty broker fee—Sometimes as high as around 12–15% of the annual rent—even when the landlord was the one who hired that broker.

The FARE Act flipped that.

At its core, the law says:

• If the landlord or property manager hires the broker, the landlord has to pay the broker, not the tenant.

• Landlords and their agents must clearly disclose any other tenant fees—application fees, move-in fees, pet fees, etc.—upfront in listings and lease documents.

• A landlord (or landlord’s agent) can’t condition renting an apartment on a tenant hiring a specific broker.

The intention is understandable and, frankly, emotionally resonant: stop forcing renters to pay thousands of dollars to brokers they never chose, and make the total cost of renting more transparent.

As someone who’s sat across the table from renters counting every dollar of their move-in costs, I get why this law exists.

Did the FARE Act Make Rents Go Up? The Honest Answer

Here’s where people want a simple villain, and it’s tempting to point at one law and say, “There. That’s the problem.”

But the market doesn’t care about our desire for simple answers.

Upfront Savings vs. Ongoing Cost

For many renters, the FARE Act did reduce upfront move-in costs. Not having to wire an extra four, five, or six thousand dollars for a broker fee can mean the difference between:

• Staying stuck in an unhealthy situation

• Or finally moving closer to work, family, or safety

At the same time, landlords don’t magically absorb costs out of goodwill. They do the math.

When you remove a revenue stream (tenant-paid broker fees) and convert it to a landlord expense, most owners will eventually:

• Raise face rents on new leases, or

• Get more selective about who they rent to and how long they want them to stay, or

• Both.

So yes, some of the rent growth we’re seeing is very likely landlords baking those broker costs into the rent. On a spreadsheet, that may “net out” over time, but emotionally, renters feel it as yet another increase in monthly burden.

The Bigger Elephant in the Room: Supply and Demand

Even without the FARE Act, New York City has been dealing with:

• Chronic underbuilding of rental housing

• Strong demand from people returning to the city post-COVID

• Limited options in desirable neighborhoods

The FARE Act is not powerful enough to create those problems—but it can change how they’re felt and who pays when the music stops.

When I speak with colleagues who blame the law for everything, I remind them:We already had a supply problem. The law changed the bill-splitting, not the number of chairs in the room.

Why Listings Disappeared (and Where They Went)

One trend I’ve watched closely as a broker is the drop in publicly visible listings on certain platforms.

Why?

Because once broker fees became a landlord expense, the stakes of each listing went up:

• Landlords want to work with fewer, more trusted brokers who can fill apartments efficiently and stay within the law.

• Agents who used to operate in a looser “open listing” environment are now competing for exclusive relationships, or they’re being pushed out.

• Some inventory is moving into quieter channels—off-market relationships, private networks, direct landlord websites—rather than being blasted everywhere.

That doesn’t always mean the apartments no longer exist. It often means they’ve moved into more controlled ecosystems where landlords feel they have a better handle on cost, compliance, and tenant quality.

From a renter’s perspective, though, it can feel like the city suddenly shrank.

From the Broker’s Side: A Business Model in Transition

As a broker, I’ve had to rethink how my team works.

The End of the “Random Tenant Fee” Era

If I’m representing the landlord, I can’t just push my fee on a tenant anymore. That era needed to end, and it has. As both a landlord and a broker, I actually appreciate the FARE Act because it brings clarity to a part of the process that used to feel murky . For years, tenants were hit with big broker fees from people they never chose, and landlords often assumed those costs could just be passed along without really thinking about the optics or the trust factor. Now the lines are clearer.

Today, I’m crystal-clear about:

• Who I represent in a transaction

• Who is paying my fee

• What value I’m providing to that party

For tenant-side work, I insist on written representation agreements and clear, agreed-upon compensation. Tenants deserve to know when someone is truly working for them versus for a landlord.

Consolidation Is Real

I’ve also watched:

• Smaller, solo operators struggle to survive in this new structure

• Larger firms and teams with strong landlord relationships gain share

• More agents deciding whether to specialize in landlord representation or tenant representation, instead of trying to be all things to everyone

The market is rewarding clarity and professionalism. If you don’t know the law, don’t want to follow it, or try to work the gray area, you’re not going to last long.

From the Landlord’s Side: Underwriting in the FARE Era

When I put on my landlord/investor hat, the FARE Act becomes a line item.

Instead of assuming:

“The tenant will cover the broker fee,”

I now underwrite deals assuming:

“I will pay a leasing cost to fill this unit, and I need to account for that over the life of the tenancy.”

That pushes me to:

• Focus more heavily on tenant quality ( which is a whole different blog post) 

• Value longer-term tenants who renew rather than churn

• Invest in better marketing, better showings, and better tenant experience so units lease faster and stay occupied

For smaller landlords, this can feel painful. If you own a two- or three-family house, one vacancy plus a broker fee you have to absorb can sting. I empathize with that, deeply.

But a harsh truth of investing is this:
The law doesn’t ask whether the deal is comfortable. It just exists. We decide whether to own assets in that framework or not.

What This Means for Renters (And How to Protect Yourself)

If you’re a renter navigating this new landscape, here’s my honest guidance:

1. Understand Who the Broker Actually Works For

Ask, every time:

• “Do you represent the landlord, or do you represent me?”

• “Am I paying you anything? If so, what exactly, and why?”

If the broker represents the landlord, you should not be paying that broker’s fee under the current rules when they’re the one marketing the listing.

2. Look at the Whole Cost, Not Just the Slogan

“No fee” doesn’t automatically mean “great deal.”

Compare:

• Monthly rent × 12 (or 24)

• Upfront deposits and fees

• What you’d pay in a world where you did pay a one-time broker fee but had lower rent

Sometimes the FARE structure genuinely puts you ahead. Sometimes the savings are mostly psychological. Run the real numbers.

3. Don’t Ignore Red Flags

If someone:

• Pressures you to sign a document saying you hired them when you didn’t

• Tacks on vague “admin,” “technology,” or “service” fees that look suspiciously like old broker fees in disguise

• Gets evasive when you ask who they represent

—walk away, or at least slow down and get advice. A law only protects you if you’re willing to enforce your rights.

What This Means for Landlords and Investors

As owners, we have two choices:

1. Complain about the law, or

2. Adapt and build it into our business model.

1. Budget for Leasing as a Real Expense

Just like taxes, insurance, and repairs, leasing costs are now part of the investment picture. When you underwrite:

• Add a reasonable leasing cost per tenancy

• Smooth that out across the expected life of the lease (e.g., 2–4 years)

• Be honest with yourself about turnover risk

If the numbers don’t work with realistic assumptions, the deal may not be a buy.

2. Choose Your Broker Relationships Carefully

In this environment, you want brokers who:

• Know the FARE Act inside and out

• Can fill units fast, with strong tenants

• Communicate well with both you and applicants

• Keep you away from legal exposure and fines

A good broker is no longer “free” because the tenant pays. A good broker is now a paid risk-manager and leasing partner. Treat them that way.

3. See Compliance as a Shield, Not a Burden

The FARE Act comes with real penalties for violations, and real reputational risk. Staying compliant:

• Reduces the risk of lawsuits and fines

• Protects your asset value

• Keeps your brand attractive to quality tenants

That’s not feel-good rhetoric—that’s sound risk management.

The Ongoing Legal Fight (And Why I’m Not Betting On a Miracle Reversal)

Industry groups, including the Real Estate Board of New York (REBNY), have challenged the FARE Act in federal court. A lower court declined to block the law and allowed it to take effect. The case is now up on appeal before the Second Circuit, and as of now, we’re still waiting on the outcome.

Could the law be narrowed or struck down? Possibly.

But as an investor, I don’t build my strategy on:

“Maybe the courts will save me.”

I assume:

• The law is here and enforceable.

• If it changes later, that’s upside—not my baseline plan.

Hope is not a pro forma.

---

FAQs About the FARE Act (From Someone in the Trenches)

Do renters still ever pay broker fees in NYC?

Yes—but only when they actually hire a broker to represent them. If you search for apartments with your own tenant-side broker and sign a clear agreement with them, you can still agree to compensate that professional.

What you should not be doing is paying the landlord’s broker for work you didn’t initiate.

Did the FARE Act “cause” higher rents?

It’s one factor, not the only one.

Landlords now have a new cost line, and many are spreading that cost into the rent. But even without the FARE Act, we’d be dealing with an expensive, supply-constrained housing market. Blaming one law for everything oversimplifies a very complex system.

Why are there fewer listings on some sites now?

Because inventory is being curated more tightly:

• More exclusive relationships between landlords and a smaller pool of brokers

• Some landlords using their own websites, private networks, or off-market channels

• Less incentive to blast listings everywhere when each inquiry comes with more compliance and cost

Is this law good or bad for small landlords?

For small owners, it hurts more in the short term. Losing the ability to shift broker fees onto tenants and absorbing that expense can compress margins on modest buildings.

That’s why it’s crucial for small landlords to:

• Budget realistically

• Focus on tenant retention

• Work with brokers who understand how to lease efficiently in this new reality

---

Will the market “normalize”?

Markets always find a new equilibrium.

My expectation is:

• Rents will continue to reflect the true cost structure of owning and leasing in NYC

• Some brokers will leave the industry; others will become more specialized and professional

• Tenants will gradually become more educated about their rights and tradeoffs

The chaos phase is uncomfortable. But it doesn’t last forever.

---

Closing Thoughts: Empathy, Math, and Reality

As a landlord, I understand the frustration:
Margins are thinner, regulations are thicker, and every new law feels like another squeeze.

As a broker, I see the pressure and confusion:
Agents who built careers on an old fee structure are trying to reinvent themselves overnight.

As a human being, I feel for renters who are simply trying to find a safe, decent place to live without being financially crushed before they even get the keys.

The FARE Act is not perfect. No law is. But it’s not the apocalypse either.

If we treat it as a new set of rules to learn, not an enemy to hate, we can:

• Write better deals

• Build more resilient portfolios

• Create a rental market that is at least a little more transparent and a little less predatory

That’s the lens I’m using, both as an investor and as a broker. And it’s the perspective I’ll keep sharing as the market evolves.