Rachel Reeves eyes landlords as soft target with plans to introduce rent controls
The Guardian is reporting that the Chancellor Rachel Reeves is considering imposing a year-long rent freeze on landlords as a special measure to alleviate the cost of living crisis caused by the closure of the Strait of Hormuz.
This will be debated by the government as a package of measures to reduce inflationary pressures on household budgets. The Treasury responded by saying it would not comment on ‘speculation’.
It would be far easier and cheaper for the government to legislate on landlords than tackle the rising cost of fuel, food and mortgage rates.
Ben Beadle, Chief Executive of the National Residential Landlords Association, said: “Introducing a rent freeze would be a disaster for landlord and investor confidence and consequently the supply of homes in England. Any hope of growing the market, or even retaining the homes that millions of families rely on, would be lost.
“There is no evidence to suggest that it would make rents more affordable. In fact, the impact on supply would inevitably drive new rents still higher. Such a move would run completely counter to good economic sense and the Government’s own prior decision to rule out such measures.
“At a time when demand for rental housing continues to significantly outweigh supply, we agree with the Housing Minister’s view that any form of rent controls would make life more difficult for renters.
“Even if these reports prove to be speculation, it is reckless for this kind of uncertainty to be created in the same week that major reforms already causing concern among landlords come into force. For many, it may be enough to conclude that this is the moment to exit the private rented sector for good.”
Cynically, one could see how this coincides with the imminent local elections in a desperate effort to buy votes.
As previously reported on Property118, the government has claimed it has no plans to introduce rent controls and, last month, said it opposed rent controls because they would “push landlords out of the market”.
Timothy Douglas, Head of Policy and Campaigns at Propertymark comments: “With the UK Government introducing huge regulatory change through the Renters’ Rights Act, which will ultimately mean less flexibility and higher costs for landlords and tenants, it is alarming to hear reports that the Chancellor is considering additional rent control measures – particularly when Housing Ministers have recently publicly denounced their role.
“Evidence from across the UK, particularly in Scotland, shows rent controls restrict supply, deter investment, and reduce choice for tenants. Singling out landlords to solve the cost of living is not the answer.
“Rent controls risk distorting the market and undermining investment at a time when demand already far outstrips supply.
“If the UK Government is serious about improving affordability, it must focus on increasing housing supply and supporting long-term investment in the private rented sector, rather than introducing measures that will ultimately make it harder for renters to find a home.”
Comments
Have Your Say
Every day, landlords who want to influence policy and share real-world experience add their voice here. Your perspective helps keep the debate balanced.
Not a member yet? Join In Seconds
Login with
Previous Article
Most renters report positive landlord relationships ahead of RRANext Article
Why fewer landlords are replacing those who exit
Member Since May 2018 - Comments: 2066
3:39 PM, 29th April 2026, About 3 weeks ago
Reply to the comment left by GlanACC at 29/04/2026 – 07:13
According to the Guardian, even if no. 10 did entertain the idea of rent controls on properties in the private sector, it then dismissed them:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/apr/28/no-10-dismisses-reeves-reported-plan-for-freeze-on-private-rents
The Green Party however have made it a flagship policy.
And that’s helpful, because that tells you who you should definitely not vote for in the local elections, because any party promoting rent controls, whilst ignoring tax policies disincentivising investment in the adoption of sustainable technologies, is not competent and has no real grasp on what it takes to embrace either sustainability or energy security.
Member Since May 2024 - Comments: 213
4:13 PM, 29th April 2026, About 3 weeks ago
Just issues my firs form 4 due the RRA and tenant took it really well and was surprised that I didn’t do it years ago and was happy with the increase as it’s still no where near market rates, she knows how much houses go for these days.
Member Since May 2018 - Comments: 2066
4:47 PM, 29th April 2026, About 3 weeks ago
Reply to the comment left by Desert Rat at 29/04/2026 – 16:13
A lot of landlords will be issuing form 4 now because of the Renters Rights Act; my agent already did it for me (having advised me that we should do it) some months ago, and of course I agreed because of rising interest rates and property expenses that I need to be sure of being able to cover not just over the next 12 months but also 1-5 years from now.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/landlords-now-to-fulfil-new-legal-duty-for-renters-rights-act
But what the incompetent parties who talk about rent controls don’t realise is precisely that: Landlords are ISSUING form 4 BECAUSE of the renters rights act when previously they didn’t because they weren’t greedy, they were making enough and just wanted an easy life, or weren’t ‘professional’ landlords who would just be aware of what market rent was anyway. Even their agents didn’t advise them to do it historically because agents also like an easy life and don’t like the expense of marketing properties during void periods. In the short term the RRA means that landlords either have raised rents, or are now raising rents, when previously they didn’t care much or didn’t have to bother.
So because of the RRA small portfolio landlords are considering rents carefully in a way that they did not do before, and raising them to market rent when previously what they did was to provide competition. A secondary effect is that because small landlords are now having to raise rents, the effect of this is that to raise AVERAGE rent. This will push up the average market rent which means that rent inflation will continue.
Another effect of the RRA is that because a landlord can no longer accept an offer above advertised rents, agents now advertise properties at a premium, and as market rent is influenced by advertised rents, this also pushes up rent inflation.
If the labour government wanted to avoid all this inflationary pressure they should have asked the Competition and Markets Authority what the effect of the RRA would be on both rents and housing supply, and listened to the answer. But they just weren’t listening; if no. 10 did listen a couple of days ago to someone who told them that rent controls would raise rents that can only be a good thing.
It’s easy to spot the incompetent parties in the local elections: The most incompetent parties and most incompetent leaders are the ones talking about rent controls. If there are competent parties and leaders out there, they will be the ones recognising that stopping small landlords offsetting their finance payments against their rents is itself part of the problem of rent inflation, and being sufficiently competent communicators to get that message across to the electorate.
Member Since April 2020 - Comments: 97
8:03 AM, 2nd May 2026, About 3 weeks ago
Reply to the comment left by Walker at 28/04/2026 – 09:53
I agree regarding the introduction of retrospective laws and legislation, property investment is not a quick in and outer and any rewards are offset by many challenges and losses ie interest rates, property markets, supply and demand, timing of any re-structuring etc etc these are part of the risk without the now constant sniping from Governments because they see property investors as easy targets to legislate against to further their aims and is making it more and more impossible to navigate and for those of us who invested in property instead of a pension many years ago it is an ongoing headache about which there seems to be no allowance. And if we do sell there is then the matter of Capital Gains Tax not indexed linked, how unfair is that? No matter how hard you worked, sacrifices you made or risks taken to provide for yourself property is a target to be raided and if you fall out of the tree who will care about that ?
Member Since October 2021 - Comments: 43
9:22 AM, 2nd May 2026, About 3 weeks ago
Reply to the comment left by SimonP at 19:34
The RRA has effectively introduced rent controls for the following reasons:
Landlords can only increase rents once a year to the “market rent” using a section 13 notice which will be determined by a tribunal.
Tenants need only pay £47 to challenge any increase and will continue to pay the current rent until a judgement is made.
Further, tribunal decisions will not backdate rent, so any increase, if approved, will be valid from the date of the decision.
This effectively means that a tenant, by paying £47 can benefit from not having to pay any rent increase until a decision is made which could take months, meanwhile by paying only £47 regardless of the Tribunal’s decision, the tenant would be saving 100’s and could potentially encourage tenants to challenge all rent increases as a matter of course.
This is rent control in the making.
Member Since December 2023 - Comments: 6
9:30 AM, 2nd May 2026, About 3 weeks ago
Why the the small landlord trying to sell their properties as all the punitive reforms has to pay for the cost of utilities?
There have been several recent cases that raise questions about fairness and consistency in how regulations are enforced:
Rachel Reeves should have faced a fine of around £40,000 for renting out her flat without the required licence.
Angela Rayner should also have faced a similar penalty if HMRC concluded that she underpaid tax on the sale of her former property.
Keir Starmer should be held to the same standards regarding the acceptance of gifts, including suits and glasses reportedly provided by Lord Alli. Transparency is essential, and the public deserves to know what, if anything, is expected in return.
If Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves want to soften the impact of international tensions and rebuild public trust, they could start by delivering on the promises made before the election. For example:
A windfall tax on energy companies was promised, yet it has not been implemented, despite energy CEOs awarding themselves extremely high salaries — such as the £8.2 million annual package for British Gas CEO Chris O’Shea.
Nationalising the water utilities was also discussed, especially after repeated sewage dumping not only into the sea but also into rivers and lakes — including Lake Windermere. Instead of imposing substantial fines for environmental damage, the government approved 30–40% increases in water bills, placing the burden on customers.
Energy pricing is another area where action is urgently needed. Electricity in the UK remains far more expensive than in several European countries. For example, in Spain electricity can be around 9p per kWh, while UK prices are still several times higher. The standing charge has also risen sharply from around 20p to 71p, despite no direct link to global oil prices.
There is a great deal this government could do to reduce energy costs for households — not just for tenants — if regulators were more effective and less aligned with large corporations. Companies such as EDF have seen profits increase dramatically, yet consumers continue to face rising bills.
Member Since October 2021 - Comments: 43
9:31 AM, 2nd May 2026, About 3 weeks ago
The RRA has effectively introduced rent controls for the following reasons:
Landlords can only increase rents once a year to the “market rent” using a section 13 notice which will be determined by a tribunal.
Tenants need only pay £47 to challenge any increase and will continue to pay the current rent until a judgement is made.
Further, tribunal decisions will not backdate rent, so any increase, if approved, will be valid from the date of the decision.
This effectively means that a tenant, by paying £47 can benefit from not having to pay any rent increase until a decision is made which could take months, meanwhile by paying only £47 regardless of the Tribunal’s decision, the tenant would be saving 100’s which could potentially encourage tenants to challenge all rent increases as a matter of course
This is rent control in the making.
Member Since May 2024 - Comments: 213
7:14 PM, 2nd May 2026, About 3 weeks ago
Reply to the comment left by GlanACC at 29/04/2026 – 07:13
Thats kind of you. I’ve barely increased any tenants rent until this year. S13 form 4 issued to several tenants who’s rent has never increased in years and all due to the RRA and Labour. It’s about time my rents come up to market rate, whatever market rate is
Member Since May 2024 - Comments: 213
7:22 PM, 2nd May 2026, About 3 weeks ago
Reply to the comment left by Ofer Moses at 02/05/2026 – 09:31
Offer, what is actually market rate and who sets it? It’s obviously what someone would pay. Estate agents set selling prices at whatever they think someone will pay and then reduce it if it doesn’t sell. then surely a landlord will now do the same? set it at an inflated rent and then reduce it if it does not rent. Tenant looses out again. I try to be fair to tenants and my rents are low but the RRA is forcing landlords to increase rents.
Member Since May 2018 - Comments: 2066
10:07 AM, 5th May 2026, About 2 weeks ago
Reply to the comment left by Desert Rat at 19:22
Market rents are advertised rents:
https://www.rightmove.co.uk/news/rental-price-tracker
My agent has already changed its advice from what it was a decade ago and now advises me to maximise rents. The provisions of the RRA will cause landlords and agents to advertise high, and this will increase market rent.
This is one of the unintended consequences of interfering in a market. This is the sort of thing that happens when you have a government that does not know what it is doing.
It is not as though the government was not told.