The overwhelming consensus among economists is that rent control reduces both the supply and quality of housing

While rent controls might help slow the growth of rents in the short term, they do this by interfering with how prices normally balance supply and demand. By keeping rents below market levels, they discourage new investment, delay or stop needed repairs, and ultimately lead to fewer units being available.

The downsides don’t end there. Rent control also messes with how people use housing. Tenants often stay in units that no longer fit their needs just because the rent is cheaper than what they’d find elsewhere, which leads to a poor use of available space. Landlords may decide to convert rentals into condos or Airbnbs to avoid the rules, which just reduces the supply further. And new renters or lower-income folks, who actually need help the most, end up facing more competition for a shrinking pool of units.

Instead of trying to cap prices, economists usually push for solutions that go to the root of the problem: we’re just not building enough homes. One big issue is zoning. Rules that limit what can be built- like banning duplexes or setting height limits- make it harder to add new housing, especially in high-demand areas. Loosening up those restrictions helps. So does making it easier and faster to get permits, cutting down fees, and encouraging building near transit where people actually want to live.

Public investment has a role too. Not everything has to be left to the market. More social or non-profit housing can help meet the needs of people who can't afford market rents. But that needs to go hand in hand with allowing more private sector building, not instead of it.

At the end of the day, rent control might sound good in theory, but in practise it often causes more harm than good. If we’re serious about making housing more affordable and widely available, we need to focus on increasing supply, not freezing prices.