← Back to all myths
Myth 3
"Rent controls are the answer to Glasgow's housing crisis."

Study after study shows the same thing: when rent controls are introduced, landlords sell up. The result is a smaller rental market, higher rents for new renters, and a policy that helps the few at the direct expense of the many.

When rent controls are introduced, landlords sell up. Some convert their properties to owner-occupation. Some redevelop for other uses. Some simply sell to owner-occupiers who would otherwise have rented. The result is a smaller private rental market with fewer homes available to the people who need them most.

This is not a theoretical concern. It is one of the most consistently replicated findings in housing economics, documented across cities and countries over more than a century of evidence.


Supply calculator
Adjust the sliders to model how many rental homes would leave the market under different rent control policies, based on the academic evidence below.
3%
5 yrs
Moderate
2025 shows the pre-policy baseline. The reduction begins in 2026 as controls take effect. Exit rate is front-loaded as the most financially marginal landlords leave first. It slows only as that population is exhausted, not because conditions improve. Rent controls prevent yields recovering.
Additional negative effect: new construction
These are modelled estimates based on published academic evidence, not predictions. The actual effect of any rent control policy depends on its design, enforcement, and wider market conditions.
How we calculate this

Winning and losing under rent control
WINNING

Wealthier renters looking to buy

As landlords sell up, more properties enter the sales market. The people best placed to take advantage are those with savings or mortgage access. Rent controls quietly transfer housing wealth upwards.

MIXED

Sitting tenants

This is why rent controls are politically appealing: renters already in a controlled property pay below the market rate in the short run. But the protection is fragile.

A sitting tenant cannot easily move without losing their controlled rent, trapping them in a home that may no longer suit them. And if their landlord eventually decides to sell, they lose their home entirely and re-enter a rental market that is now smaller and more expensive than before.

LOSING

Renters in the cheapest homes

The properties most likely to be sold are those at the bottom of the market: older stock with the thinnest yields. These are the most affordable homes currently available to rent. When they leave the market, the cheapest options disappear first.

LOSING

New renters entering the market

A smaller rental market means more competition for fewer homes. New renters, including young people, people moving for work, and those leaving temporary accommodation, face a market with less choice and higher asking rents on the uncontrolled new-let segment.


Evidence base
Diamond, McQuade & Qian (2019) — San Francisco
Rent control reduced rental housing supply by 15% as landlords converted or redeveloped properties. The policy transferred wealth from future renters to existing ones. Read →
Kholodilin (2022) — 16 countries, 1910 to 2016
Stricter rent regulation consistently reduces rental supply across all country contexts, with harder caps producing larger and faster landlord exits. Read →
Sims (2007) — Massachusetts deregulation
When rent controls were lifted in Massachusetts in 1995, rental housing supply increased significantly, confirming that controls had been suppressing it. Read →
Brookings Institution (2022)
Comprehensive review concludes rent control "decreases affordability, fuels gentrification, and creates negative externalities" in the long run. Read →

Want to model the numbers yourself? Try our interactive rent control supply calculator.

Open the calculator →
← Myth 2: Only build social housing All myths Myth 4: Developers only build luxury →