NAA Five, for the Week Ending July 18th, 2025

GIAA Resources, News,
View in Browser
NAAHQ // July 18, 2025
NAA
 
NAA FIVE
A weekly digest of key rental housing news and takeaways
prepared exclusively for NAA’s leadership
 
The Big Picture: A New York City appeals court is moving forward with a housing voucher expansion. One-third of U.S. housing prices are decreasing. California is adding an in-state housing agency to address the housing crisis.  
This week’s top stories
What We're Advocating

HUD Funding: The formal appropriations process is underway in Congress. Despite concerns of potentially drastic cuts to HUD, the Republican-controlled House Appropriations Subcommittee on Transportation, Housing and Urban Development opted to propose a relatively flat budget from Fiscal Year 2025. Learn more.  

What We're Saying

LIHTC: NAA’s Owen Caine was featured in a Multi-Housing News article on the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit provisions passed in the new tax law. “[Congress] is taking a long-term view of housing, certainly affordable housing, and we are hoping they continue to have that support and long-term financial stability view when appropriations come in (during the fall)… There’s an incredible value for everyone involved in its permanency.” Read the latest. 

What We're Doing

Federal Tax Law: The latest episode of NAA Apartmentcast features a conversation with Owen Caine, discussing what the final federal tax law means for the rental housing industry. Listen to the episode here.  

Driving Local Economic Growth: The Apartment Career Credentials Empowering Student Success (A.C.C.E.S.S.) Program – conducted by the Greater Charlotte Apartment Association – was featured in the U.S. Conference of Mayors Business Council 2025 Best Practices Report. Access the report

What We're Hearing

Housing Vouchers: “Mayor Eric Adams’s administration must put into effect several laws to significantly expand New York City’s housing voucher program, a state appeals court ruled on Thursday, dealing a loss to Mr. Adams, who had opposed the measures over their potential cost.” (New York Times)