But what would the one of the largest residential landlords in the world know, amirite?

Rent controls need not stop big investors from funding new homes, one of the world’s largest landlords has said, a stance that goes against the argument of many property investors that price caps worsen housing shortages.

“You do not have to have the windfall of a year of 14 per cent rent increases in order to have a viable investment product,” said Bob Faith, chief executive of Greystar, the $78bn US-based residential developer and landlord.

“We operate in a lot of markets around the world where rent control does exist.”

…Faith said the key issue was whether rent controls allowed investors to cover their expenses in the long run. Greystar has invested almost £20bn in the UK since 2013, and has almost 50,000 units of rental and student housing in its portfolio and under construction. It typically raised its UK rents by 5 to 8 per cent this year, the company said.

“I am not someone who would say, gosh, rent control of any type [is something] I am allergic to because I am not . . . as long as there is an ability over time for revenue to move with inflationary pressures,” he said. “Everybody can argue, should it be [inflation] plus 1 per cent, plus 3 per cent — all of those are just kind of window dressing.”

Given that, in the U.S., rent controls, when available, typically account for ‘inflation plus’, there’s really no need to oppose rent control, unless the landlord overpaid for the property, or has other similar problems (e.g., excessive debt loads). And, in those cases, then those businesses should go under because their owners and investors made bad business decisions.

I realize in the U.S., certainly at the state and local level, the de facto policy is Leave No Landlord Behind, but once the primary costs have been paid, it’s just free money, as long as the rent control isn’t too tight.