End Junk Fees for Renters

Summary#

This bill, the End Junk Fees for Renters Act, would stop some common upfront and ongoing fees that renters pay for many housing units tied to federal programs or federally backed loans. Its main changes ban application and tenant‑screening fees, limit when and how big late rent fees can be, require new pre‑lease disclosures, and direct two federal agencies to define and limit “junk fee” practices. The broad goal is to reduce and curb extra fees that renters often pay and to increase transparency about rental costs and problems.

Key changes:

• Bans owners of “covered dwelling units” from charging application fees or fees for criminal, credit, or other background checks.
• Caps late fees on rent at less than 3% of monthly rent and allows late fees only after 15 days past the due date; leases must disclose these limits.
• Requires owners to disclose before lease signing: the total monthly amount due (including fees), a practicable summary of past litigation between owner and tenants, ongoing pest and maintenance issues, and the property’s rent increase each year for the past 10 years.
• Applies to units that receive HUD assistance or are on properties with federally backed single‑family or multifamily mortgage loans (the bill lists which federal programs and loans are covered).
• Directs the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and the Federal Trade Commission to (within 180 days) define “junk fee” for rental housing and to declare reporting unpaid junk fees to credit bureaus (consumer reporting agencies) an unfair or unconscionable debt‑collection practice.

What it means for you#

• Renters and apartment applicants

  • You could no longer be charged an application fee or a tenant‑screening/background‑check fee for a covered unit.
  • If you pay rent late, late fees on covered units would be limited to under 3% of one month’s rent and could not be charged until 15 days after the due date.
  • Before you sign a lease for a covered unit you must be given the total monthly amount due (including any fees) and information about past owner‑tenant litigation, ongoing pest/maintenance problems, and rent increases for the past 10 years (to the degree practicable).

• Owners, landlords, and property managers

  • Owners of covered units must stop charging application and screening fees and must limit late fees as described.
  • Owners must prepare and provide new disclosures before leases are signed. That may require gathering records on past litigation, maintenance issues, and historical rent levels.
  • Owners of units tied to federal backing or HUD programs will be regulated by specific federal agencies named in the bill (HUD, VA, USDA, or the Federal Housing Finance Agency), depending on the loan or assistance.

• Agencies and enforcement

  • The CFPB and FTC must issue a rule defining “junk fee” for rental housing and declare reporting unpaid junk fees to credit bureaus an unfair debt‑collection practice.
  • The bill names which federal agency will enforce the fee bans for different kinds of covered units.

• Who is affected

  • The rules apply only to “covered dwelling units” as defined in the bill: units with HUD assistance or units on properties with federally backed single‑family or multifamily mortgage loans (the bill lists the specific programs and loan types covered).

Expenses#

No publicly available information.

Possible cost or fiscal effects (inferred from the bill text):

• Owners could lose revenue from fees they currently collect (application, screening, some late fees). This could be significant for some landlords but the bill does not estimate amounts.
• Owners and property managers may incur administrative or compliance costs to prepare and provide the required disclosures and to change lease forms and billing systems.
• Federal agencies (CFPB, FTC, HUD, VA, USDA, FHFA) will likely spend resources to issue rules, oversee compliance, and enforce the new bans. The bill does not provide a fiscal note or budget estimate.
• Tenants and applicants could save money that they now pay in fees, but the bill does not analyze whether landlords might respond by raising rents or adding other charges.

Proponents' View#

The bill appears intended to:

• Reduce extra upfront and add‑on fees that make housing more expensive and unpredictable for renters.
• Increase transparency so renters know the full monthly cost and past issues with a property before signing a lease.
• Prevent landlords from using credit reporting as a tool to collect disputed or small “junk” fees by having CFPB and FTC treat such reporting as an unfair debt‑collection practice.
• Standardize protections across many federally connected rental units by naming specific federal agencies to enforce the rules.

Opponents' View#

Possible concerns or criticisms based on the bill’s text:

• One concern is the impact on small landlords or property owners who rely on application or screening fees to cover screening costs; the bill does not state how those costs should be recovered.
• The disclosure requirement to provide a “summary of any past litigation…to the degree practicable” is vague; it may be unclear how much detail is required and who decides what is “practicable.”
• The bill does not say how enforcement will work in practice at the local level or what penalties apply if owners do not comply.
• Removing some fees could lead owners to shift costs into higher rent or other charges; the bill does not include measures to prevent cost shifting or analyze that trade‑off.
• The 180‑day deadline for CFPB/FTC rulemaking may be short for defining “junk fee” and for issuing guidance on credit‑reporting consequences, which could create uncertainty during implementation.