When Kevin Weller signed a lease at Portside Towers in Jersey City, New Jersey, the rent was already steep — around $4,500 a month. Living just across the Hudson River from Manhattan might have made it worth it, but it hardly made it manageable. By the time his first lease ended, he was shocked to learn that his rent would jump $1,500 a month. Soon, he discovered that many of his neighbors were facing similar hikes, with increases reaching 30% to 40%.
This wasn’t the result of sudden building upgrades or soaring property taxes. The new rates were being set by an algorithm.
Algorithms are quietly reshaping American housing — not through real market forces, but through engineered scarcity and price manipulation.
RealPage, a Texas-based company, produces rent-setting software now used in roughly one-quarter of the U.S. multifamily housing sector. Landlords feed the system private data about vacancies, rental histories, and competitor pricing. The program then spits out a “recommended” rent, which, according to ProPublica, is followed 90% of the time.
Instead of landlords competing with one another to attract tenants, many are now marching in lockstep, guided by the same software. The White House estimates that in 2023 alone, renters paid an additional $3.8 billion because of this practice. For tenants, that means higher costs, fewer concessions, and diminished bargaining power, all while corporate landlords reap higher profits.
A price manipulation monopoly
The Justice Department, joined by attorneys general from eight states, has filed an antitrust lawsuit against RealPage in federal court. The complaint alleges that RealPage’s software violates Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act by reducing competition and monopolizing the rental pricing software market.
The system relies on landlords sharing sensitive rental data, which the algorithm uses to set prices and restrict independent decision-making. Features like “auto accept” and built-in pricing advisers push landlords to maximize rent and minimize discounts.
With an estimated 80% market share, RealPage has created a data-driven feedback loop that entrenches its dominance. Internal documents reveal executives boasting about preventing a “race to the bottom,” while one landlord even admitted the software felt like “classic price fixing.”
RealPage’s defenders argue the program simply improves efficiency and that landlords still act independently. They claim there is no proof of coordinated intent — a requirement for antitrust violations — and warn that the government’s case could stifle innovation and restrict housing supply. Yet the software’s design undermines those defenses. When landlords feed the same data into the same system and overwhelmingly follow its recommendations, independence is more fiction than fact.
Some cities aren’t waiting for the courts to decide. San Francisco, Philadelphia, Minneapolis, and San Diego have already passed bans on algorithmic rent setting, and others are considering similar measures. RealPage, in response, has begun challenging these laws, even going so far as to argue that its rent recommendations are protected speech.
But housing isn’t a luxury like a rideshare you can cancel when prices surge. It is the foundation of stability, family, and community. Treating homes as mere commodities to be optimized for corporate profit through opaque algorithms erodes that foundation.
Federal action required
Congress and state legislatures should follow the lead of cities that have acted. Whether through outright bans on algorithmic rent-setting, requirements for transparency in AI pricing tools, or stronger tenant protections against extreme hikes, higher levels of government must step in.
RELATED: America’s ‘prosperity’ is built on broken families and debt
Photo by Greggory DiSalvo via Getty Images
Kevin Weller’s story shows what is at stake. He and millions like him face an impossible choice: Accept rent hikes dictated by a line of code, or risk losing their homes and communities. Multiply his story across the station, and it becomes clear that algorithms are quietly reshaping American housing — not through real market forces, but through engineered scarcity and price manipulation.
Overriding the free market
We should not wait for a court to tell us what common sense already makes clear. The question is not only whether RealPage’s tactics are legal. The question is whether they are fair to everyday Americans.
Some might say that banning the use of these algorithms is anti-free-market, but the opposite is true. This powerful technology is being used to manipulate markets, often to the benefit of large corporations that are supposed to provide a public benefit in exchange for special tax breaks and liability protections.
No families should be forced from their homes by corporate software designed to squeeze every last penny from working Americans.
Read the full article here
