Today's Law As Amended


Bill PDF |Add To My Favorites |Track Bill | print page

SB-52 Housing rental rates and occupancy levels: algorithmic devices.(2025-2026)



As Amends the Law Today


SECTION 1.
 The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:
(a) Renters make up a larger share of households in California at 44 percent, compared to the United States average of 35 percent, and California has a higher percentage of renters compared to any other state other than New York, which has a rate of 46 percent.
(b) California’s median rent is two thousand eight hundred dollars ($2,800), which is 40 percent higher than the national median. In the City of Los Angeles, the median rent is two thousand eight hundred dollars ($2,800), while in the City and County of San Francisco, the median rent is three thousand two hundred eighty-five dollars ($3,285).
(c) Recently, algorithmic pricing software has disrupted rental housing markets in cities nationwide.
(d) Algorithmic pricing technology uses proprietary lease information to gather and share rent data, setting prices that can inflate rents and vacancy rates. The public sharing of vast amounts of proprietary data can harm renters by calculating and recommending rent and occupancy levels.
(e) Algorithmic pricing software has led to double-digit rent increases, higher vacancy rates, and more evictions, distorting markets by causing both rents and vacancy rates to rise simultaneously.
(f) Often used by large corporate landlords, algorithmic pricing software promotes the consolidation of corporate and private equity ownership of rental housing. This occurs at the expense of landlords, both large and small, who adhere to standard practices, thereby suppressing competition and creating an unfair market advantage.
(g) Investigations have been launched recently into the use of algorithmic pricing software. California and seven other states joined the United States Department of Justice’s antitrust lawsuit, alleging that an algorithmic intermediary collects, combines, and exploits landlords’ competitively sensitive information, causing renters to pay inflated prices.
(h) Local governments in California have introduced ordinances to ban the use of algorithmic rent pricing software to protect renters from potential market manipulations.

SEC. 2.

 Section 1947.14 is added to the Civil Code, to read:

1947.14.
 (a) It is unlawful for any person to sell, license, or otherwise provide to a landlord an algorithmic device that advises on rental rates or occupancy levels that may be achieved for residential dwelling units.
(b) (1) It is unlawful for a landlord to use an algorithmic device to set rental rates or occupancy levels for residential dwelling units.
(2) Each month that a violation exists or continues, and each dwelling unit for which the landlord uses the algorithmic device, shall constitute a separate and distinct violation.
(c) The following definitions apply for purposes of this section:
(1) “Algorithmic device” means a device commonly known as revenue management software that uses one or more algorithms to perform calculations of nonpublic competitor data concerning local or statewide rents or occupancy levels, for the purpose of advising a landlord on whether to leave a unit vacant or on the amount of rent that the landlord may obtain for a unit.
(A) “Algorithmic device” includes a product that incorporates an algorithmic device.
(B) “Algorithmic device” does not include either of the following:
(i)  A report that publishes existing rental data in an aggregated manner but does not recommend rental rates or occupancy levels for future leases.
(ii) A product used for the purpose of establishing rent or income limits in accordance with the affordable housing program guidelines of a local, state, or federal program.
(2) “Nonpublic competitor data” means information that is not available to the general public, including information about actual rent amounts, occupancy rates, lease start and end dates, and similar data, regardless of whether the information is attributable to a specific competitor or anonymized, and regardless of whether the information is derived from or otherwise provided by another person that competes in the same or a related market.
(d) (1) The Attorney General, in the name of the people of the State of California, and the city attorney or county counsel in the jurisdiction in which the rental unit is located, in the name of the city or county, may file a civil action for a violation of this section for damages, injunctive relief, restitution, or civil penalties of up to one thousand dollars ($1,000) per violation, or any combination of those remedies. The court shall award reasonable attorney’s fees and costs to the Attorney General, city attorney, or county counsel, as applicable, if they are the prevailing party in the action.
(2) A tenant may file a civil action for a violation of subdivision (b) for damages, injunctive relief, or civil penalties of up to one thousand dollars ($1,000) per violation, or any combination of those remedies. The court shall award reasonable attorney’s fees and costs to the tenant if the tenant is the prevailing party in the action. A lease provision that limits a tenant from recovering attorney’s fees shall not be enforceable against a tenant’s claim for attorney’s fees that arise under this paragraph.