Over a million low-income families, many of whom care for children, face the risk of losing their government-subsidized homes if the Trump administration goes ahead with a proposal to impose a two-year limit on rental assistance.
A report from New York University, shared with the Associated Press, indicates that this policy could impact about 1.4 million households supported by the U.S. Agency for Housing and Urban Development (HUD).
The NYU study, released recently, highlights concerns over a plan that hasn’t been extensively tested, pointing out that local housing authorities that tried it in the past mostly opted out of the program.
The report warns that enforcing a two-year limit could lead to significant disruptions and increased administrative costs. It mentions that housing authorities might end up needing to “eel out all of these households and identify new households to replace them.”
Understanding Temporary Support
As the country grapples with a deepening affordable housing crisis, the Trump administration aims to redefine HUD’s role, shifting focus towards stable housing solutions for low-income individuals—a mission that has been central for decades.
During a Congressional Budget hearing, HUD Director Scott Turner claimed that reforms aimed at eliminating waste in public housing and Section 8 programs would encourage families to strive for self-sufficiency.
He stated, “It’s broken and deviating from its original purpose. It’s to temporarily support Americans in need. HUD’s aid should not be permanent.”
While the proposal exempts elderly individuals and those with disabilities, there’s little clarity on how these time-limited housing assistance measures will be applied, enforced, or defined.
NYU researchers delved into HUD’s national dataset, scrutinizing approximately 4.9 million households. They found that around 2.1 million individuals could be impacted by the proposed time limits, particularly affecting households where at least one adult isn’t elderly or disabled. Many of these households have already been receiving assistance for over two years.
In response to the NYU findings, HUD spokesperson Kasey Lovett argued that data supports the idea of time limits, suggesting prolonged government help without incentives could be counterproductive.
Impact on Working Families
Introducing time limits might remove housing support for over a million children, primarily affecting working families living below the local income median.
Claudia Aiken, director at NYU’s Housing Solutions Lab, mentioned that stable housing greatly influences children’s health, education, and future employment opportunities. “With stable housing, they can change in a truly meaningful way,” she stated.
Among those concerned is Habara Hopkins, a single mother living in a Seattle public housing complex since 2022. With the looming two-year limit, she fears homelessness for herself and her 14-year-old son, who has autism but is deemed functional. The way HUD categorizes disabilities might heavily influence whether her family qualifies for continued assistance.
Currently, Hopkins pays $450 a month—roughly 30% of her income—for a two-bedroom apartment and says affordability is what she values most about her home.
Limited Success with Time Restrictions
Out of 17 housing authorities that attempted to implement time limitations, 11 discontinued the trial, with no two-year restrictions successfully tested. Generally, a five-year limit is more common, accompanied by specific provisions for particular programs.
Across the U.S., over 3,000 housing authorities exist, yet only 139 have been authorized to explore time limits with federal funds for support programs.
Jim Crawford, who oversees a collaboration of housing authorities, commented that discussions on time limits should focus locally, emphasizing what works for individual communities rather than enforcing a broad national strategy.
Despite potential aid, some housing authorities continue to struggle with high rents and a lack of well-paying job opportunities. The San Mateo County Housing Authority noted that their five-year time limit encourages personal goal achievement, coupled with a self-sufficiency program at risk of funding cuts from the Trump administration.
However, in areas with elevated rent costs, tenants may find themselves spending over half their income on housing or returning to lengthy waitlists.
“I think this program will really help prepare people,” said Seante Spears, “but this is a serious rent burden in our county. When people exit our time-limited program, they face a tough battle.”
