FTC Targets Rental “Junk Fees”

The FTC has opened a new rulemaking process aimed specifically at hidden and misleading fees in rental housing, building on its broader “junk fees” agenda but targeting long‑term rentals that were excluded from the 2024–25 Junk Fees Rule.

What the FTC just did

• On March 12–13, 2026, the FTC published an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) titled “Rule on Unfair or Deceptive Rental Housing Fee Practices” in the Federal Register and is now seeking public comment.

• The ANPRM asks renters, advocates, and industry to submit information on hidden or unfair fees across the rental lifecycle, from application to move‑out.

• The agency is using its Magnuson‑Moss authority under section 18 of the FTC Act, explicitly linking this effort to its prior “junk fees” rulemaking and enforcement policy.

Scope: which “rental junk fees” are in play

The ANPRM focuses on mandatory or effectively unavoidable charges that are not clearly disclosed up front in the advertised rent. Examples the FTC and commentators highlight include:

• Application and screening fees, reservation or “administrative” fees, amenity charges, utility and trash fees, pest‑control fees, mandatory payment‑processing or “convenience” fees, and various move‑in/move‑out or cleaning charges.

• Practices where advertised rents exclude required charges, obscure the true total monthly cost, or introduce new fees at renewal or after move‑in.

Why rental housing now

• The FTC recently settled with Greystar for allegedly deceiving tenants by advertising lower rents and then adding hidden mandatory fees; Greystar agreed to pay $24 million and to disclose total monthly prices and fees clearly.

• The Commission frames junk rental fees as harming consumers by obscuring the actual cost of housing and undermining price competition, tying this to the Trump administration’s cost‑of‑living and affordability priorities.

• The 2024 Junk Fees Rule—now in effect—covers only live‑event ticketing and short‑term lodging, so long‑term residential rentals are currently outside that rule’s scope.

Potential rule content and compliance implications

The FTC is asking whether a rental‑fee rule should:

• Require any advertised rent to include all mandatory, non‑government fees in a single “total monthly price,” with itemization of each fee’s nature, purpose, and amount.

• Mandate pre‑application disclosures of total monthly charges and move‑in costs, and require accuracy and consistency between marketing, lease documents, and renewals.

• Restrict or prohibit certain fee types outright (for example, some security deposit practices or layered administrative charges) where they may be unfair even if disclosed.

If adopted, a trade regulation rule would:

• Enable the FTC to seek civil penalties and more streamlined monetary relief for violations, overcoming some limits imposed by AMG Capital on Section 13(b) relief.

• Likely interact with emerging state and local “junk fee” laws (for example, Colorado’s 2026 law requiring total‑price advertising across sectors and New York City’s new junk‑fee task force), raising preemption and layering questions for multi‑state operators.

At‑a‑glance: current vs proposed coverage

Timeline and opportunities to weigh in

• The ANPRM’s publication on March 13, 2026 opens an initial 30‑day comment period (with potential extensions); the FTC poses dozens of detailed questions for stakeholders.

• After reviewing comments, the FTC would need to issue a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) with draft text, take further written submissions, and offer informal hearings before finalizing any rule—so any binding rental junk‑fee rule is still some distance away.