Fair Housing Rules for Property Managers in 2026: What Changed

The Fair Housing Act and HUD's fair housing regulations in 24 CFR part 100 did not change in 2025 or 2026, so every duty they place on a property manager still applies.¹² What changed is HUD's guidance: HUD withdrew 21 guidance documents effective September 17 and September 25, 2025, and it has proposed to remove its disparate impact rule, a proposal that is not final as of October 7, 2026.³⁴⁵ The Justice Department, state and local agencies, and private plaintiffs with a two-year window to sue still enforce the Act.⁶⁷

State rules are at /states and in the comparison at /laws/fair-housing-protected-classes-by-state. Federal summaries are at /federal.

What the Fair Housing Act prohibits

The Act protects seven classes: race, color, religion, sex, familial status, national origin and disability (the statute still uses the word "handicap").¹ Familial status means a child under 18 living with a parent, a legal custodian or the custodian's written designee, and it also covers anyone who is pregnant or in the process of getting custody of a child.⁸

Four sections of the statute do most of the work for a management company.¹⁹¹⁰¹¹

Two points matter more for managers than for individual landlords. First, the small-owner exemption for a single-family house is lost when the owner uses a broker, agent or anyone in the business of renting dwellings, and the advertising ban in section 3604(c) applies even to exempt owners.¹² Once a management company handles the rental, the exemption is generally gone. Second, HUD's regulation makes a firm directly liable for its own conduct and for failing to correct discrimination by its employees or agents that it knew or should have known about. It is also vicariously liable for its agents and employees under agency law, whether or not it knew.¹³

Which HUD guidance was withdrawn in 2025, and what replaced it

HUD's fair housing office (FHEO) withdrew eight documents effective September 17, 2025, and published the list in the Federal Register on April 6, 2026 (91 FR 17291).³ HUD's Office of General Counsel withdrew 13 more effective September 25, 2025, and published that list on July 17, 2026 (91 FR 44867).⁴ Both say the documents "should not be relied upon as authoritative."

The withdrawn documents most relevant to property managers:³⁴

For most of these documents, nothing replaced them. HUD said new guidance "will be issued where necessary and appropriate," and the FHEO notice says actions that do not comply with the text of the Act remain subject to HUD enforcement.³ The one replacement we found is a May 22, 2026 FHEO enforcement memo on animal accommodations, which limits HUD's own charges to cases involving trained animals.¹⁴ That topic is covered in our guide to assistance animal rules for 2026.

Two documents are not on either list. HUD's April 2024 guidance on screening rental applicants does not appear in either notice, and we could not confirm whether HUD still posts it, so treat its status as unsettled. The occupancy standard known as the Keating memorandum is also absent, and it rests on a 1998 statute rather than on guidance alone (see below).¹⁵

The FHEO notice also asks parties whose past conduct followed the old guidance, but may have violated the Act, to correct it now, and says HUD will weigh that favorably.³

Disparate impact: the rule, the 2026 proposal and Inclusive Communities

HUD's discriminatory effects rule, 24 CFR 100.500, says a practice can violate the Act because of its effect, even without discriminatory intent. A practice has a discriminatory effect when it actually or predictably causes a disparate impact on a protected group. The practice is still lawful if it is necessary to achieve a substantial, legitimate, nondiscriminatory interest that a less discriminatory practice could not serve, and that justification must be supported by evidence, not speculation.¹⁶

On January 14, 2026, HUD proposed to remove section 100.500 and the related sentence in section 100.5(b), and to leave disparate impact questions to the courts (91 FR 1475). Comments closed February 13, 2026.⁵ HUD cited Executive Order 14281 of April 23, 2025, which set a federal policy to eliminate disparate impact liability "to the maximum degree possible."¹⁷ On August 10, 2026, HUD published a supplemental proposal that would also remove disparate impact provisions from its Title VI regulations for recipients of HUD funding, and reopened comments on those topics through October 9, 2026 (91 FR 51416).¹⁸

The removal is not final. We found no final rule in the Federal Register as of October 7, 2026, and the eCFR, current through October 5, 2026, still contains section 100.500.¹⁶

Even a final rule would not end disparate impact liability. In Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs v. Inclusive Communities Project, decided June 25, 2015, the Supreme Court held 5 to 4 that disparate impact claims are cognizable under the Fair Housing Act itself.¹⁹ That holding interprets the statute, so it binds courts whether or not HUD keeps its regulation.

The Court also set limits that defendants rely on. A claim based on a statistical disparity fails if the plaintiff cannot point to the defendant's policy as the cause. Providers may explain the valid interest a policy serves, an analysis the Court compared to the business necessity standard in employment law. Policies are not unlawful under this theory unless they are "artificial, arbitrary, and unnecessary barriers."¹⁹

For managers, the practical point has not changed. A blanket screening rule, such as automatic denial for any criminal record, is the kind of neutral policy this theory reaches, and a written business reason for each criterion is the evidence a firm would need to defend it.

Who still enforces the Fair Housing Act

The Justice Department confirms that individuals can file with HUD or sue on their own, and HUD's withdrawal notice says complainants keep the right to sue within two years whatever HUD decides.²³³

Advertising and targeted digital ads

Section 100.75 bans any notice, statement or ad, written or oral, that indicates a preference, limitation or discrimination based on a protected class, including applications, flyers and signs.² It lists four kinds of discriminatory ads:

• words, phrases, photos, illustrations or symbols that convey a unit is or is not available to a group;
• telling agents, employees or anyone else that you prefer or limit renters by protected class;
• selecting media or locations for ads that deny particular segments of the housing market information about housing opportunities because of a protected class;
• refusing to publish ads, or charging different terms for them, because of a protected class.²

The third item is the rule that governs targeted digital ads. HUD withdrew its 2024 digital platform guidance, but the regulation's text on media selection still applies.³² One enforcement example is the Justice Department's 2022 case against Meta, which alleged that Meta's housing ad system relied in part on characteristics protected by the Act. Under the settlement the court approved on June 27, 2022, Meta stopped using its "Special Ad Audience" tool for housing ads, built a system to reduce disparities in ad delivery, agreed not to offer housing advertisers targeting options that directly describe or relate to protected characteristics, and paid a civil penalty of $115,054.²⁴

Audience choices such as age bands, gender, or ZIP codes picked to match a neighborhood's demographics can still fit the media selection language in section 100.75(c)(3).

Showings, screening and occupancy limits

Showings. Steering is unlawful. That includes discouraging someone from viewing a unit, exaggerating drawbacks, saying a person would not be "comfortable" with current residents, or assigning people to a floor or section of a building because of a protected class.²⁵ Giving false availability information is also unlawful, including to testers who are not actually looking for housing.²⁶

Screening. Using different qualification criteria, income standards, application fees or credit analysis because of a protected class is unlawful, as is charging different rent.²⁷ After move-in, delaying repairs for a protected reason is a separate violation.²⁸ Whether a neutral criterion applied to everyone has an unjustified effect is the disparate impact question above.

Occupancy limits. The Act does not limit "reasonable local, State, or Federal restrictions" on the maximum number of occupants.²⁹ For private policies, HUD applies the March 20, 1991 Keating memorandum, which Congress made HUD policy in section 589 of the Quality Housing and Work Responsibility Act of 1998. HUD published it on December 18, 1998, at 63 FR 70256.¹⁵

The memo says two persons per bedroom is generally reasonable, but that presumption can be rebutted. HUD looks at:

• the size of the bedrooms and the unit;
• the age of the children, since an infant sharing a large bedroom differs from a teenager;
• the unit's configuration, such as a den or study;
• physical limits such as septic, sewer or other building systems;
• state and local occupancy law, which tends to show a policy is reasonable;
• signs of pretext, such as statements against children or enforcing the limit only against families with children.

The memo also says a cap on the number of children per unit is less likely to be reasonable than a cap on the number of people.¹⁵ Senior communities are a separate exemption. Housing for people 62 or older, or 55-and-older housing where at least 80 percent of occupied units have a resident 55 or older and that meets HUD's verification rules, is exempt from the familial status provisions.²⁹

Harassment, retaliation and interference

HUD's harassment rule, 24 CFR 100.600, added in September 2016, defines two kinds of harassment because of a protected class.³⁰

• Quid pro quo: an unwelcome request or demand, where going along with it is made a condition of renting, lease terms or services. It can be harassment even if the person gives in.
• Hostile environment: unwelcome conduct severe or pervasive enough to interfere with the use or enjoyment of the home or with services. It is judged from the view of a reasonable person in the resident's position, and no physical or psychological harm needs to be shown.

A single severe incident can be enough, harassment can be verbal or written, and it needs no physical contact. The defense employers use in employment harassment cases does not apply.³⁰ Liability reaches beyond staff. A firm is directly liable for failing to act on harassment by a third party, such as one resident targeting another, when it knew or should have known and had the power to correct it. The fix may not penalize the victim, for example by evicting the person who complained.¹³

Section 3617 and its regulation cover retaliation and interference. Threatening or interfering with residents because of a protected class, threatening an employee for helping an applicant, and retaliating against anyone who filed a complaint, testified, or reported discrimination to the housing provider are all unlawful.¹¹³¹ A non-renewal or rent change soon after a complaint is the fact pattern to review before it goes out.

State protected classes beyond federal law

State law is where most of the extra protected classes are. These six examples were checked against official sources on October 7, 2026.

Virginia treats words or symbols tied to a religion, national origin, sex or race in an ad as prima facie evidence of an illegal preference that a disclaimer cannot cure.³⁴ New Jersey requires an individualized assessment and a written notice before a conditional offer is withdrawn over a record.³⁶

The federal picture on sexual orientation and gender identity is less clear than it was. HUD withdrew both its 2021 Bostock memo and its implementation of Executive Order 13988, so HUD guidance no longer says the Act's ban on sex discrimination covers those traits.³⁴ State laws like those above still do.

What to do now: a fair housing compliance checklist

• Remove citations to withdrawn HUD documents from policies and training, and cite the statute and 24 CFR part 100 instead.
• Write down each screening criterion with its business reason, and apply it in the same order to every applicant. See the tenant lead-to-lease playbook.
• Replace blanket criminal history bans with defined lookbacks and individual review, and follow state rules such as New Jersey's.
• Set occupancy limits by bedrooms and unit size, using two per bedroom as a starting point, adjusted for state and local codes. Never cap children per unit.
• Review every ad, listing template and paid campaign audience against section 100.75.
• Map each property to its state and city protected classes, starting with /states, and check source of income rules before refusing any voucher.
• Adopt a written harassment policy covering staff, vendors and residents, with a reporting channel and an investigation deadline.
• Require a manager to review any adverse action that follows a complaint, accommodation request or report of discrimination.
• Train leasing, maintenance and accounting staff at hire and every year. Use the staff onboarding playbook.
• Keep applications, denial reasons and accommodation files for at least two years, the private lawsuit window, or longer if state law requires.
• Put HUD's final disparate impact rule and state legislative sessions on the compliance calendar.