A major shift just shook the New York City rental market. On June 11, a new law took effect that bans landlords from passing broker fees onto tenants—unless the tenant specifically hires the broker themselves. Known as the Fairness in Apartment Rental Expenses Act, or FARE Act, the policy aims to ease the financial burden on renters by making landlords cover the cost of their own representatives.
In a city where broker fees often equaled one month’s rent—or, worse, 15% of the full annual rent—that’s no small change. And with nearly half of New York’s 2.3 million rental units historically subject to such fees, the law could dramatically impact how people find and afford housing.
Take Elizabeth Gyori, for example. She’s a nonprofit attorney who recently rented a place in Brooklyn with her partner. Their broker, hired by the landlord, charged them a $4,000 fee—roughly 12% of their annual rent. “That money could’ve gone into our savings, or helped us afford a nicer apartment,” she says. “We missed the timing, but I’m glad other renters will benefit.”
Under the new law, any broker hired by a landlord is no longer allowed to charge the renter. Fees are only permitted when a renter chooses to work with their own broker—and even then, the landlord is still allowed to pay that fee. The law also mandates full transparency in rental listings: tenants must be informed upfront of all costs, such as pet fees, move-in charges, key replacements, and deposits. Violations could result in fines of up to $2,000, enforced by the city’s Department of Consumer and Worker Protection. Complaints can be filed by calling 311.
Though the law aims to make renting fairer, it’s sparked debate among real estate professionals. Some see it as a long-overdue correction. Others warn of unintended consequences.
Sonia Christian-Bendt, a broker at Berkshire Hathaway HomeServices New York Properties, welcomes the change. “Even wealthy clients hated the broker fee,” she explains. In fact, she recently had a landlord offer to pay the commission before even being asked—just to make her listings more attractive. “High-income tenants didn’t mind the rent,” she says, “but they were thrilled not to shell out an extra month’s rent up front.” She doesn’t expect a wave of rent hikes either. “Landlords need to stay competitive,” she says simply.
But not everyone’s so optimistic. Keyan Sanai, a top rental agent with Douglas Elliman, disagrees. He even testified before City Council against the measure. In his view, landlords will absolutely find a way to recover that lost revenue—by raising rents permanently. “You’re not getting rid of the cost,” he says. “You’re just spreading it out over time, and if you stay in the apartment longer than a year, you end up paying more than you would’ve with a one-time broker fee.”
Couldn’t landlords just raise rent for one year to offset the cost, then lower it again? Sanai laughs. “We’re talking about landlords. That’s not how they operate.”
He also notes that only about half of all NYC rentals included a broker fee to begin with. “If you’re dead set on living in the West Village, where everyone wants to be, that apartment probably comes with a fee,” he says. “But in places like Hudson Yards, you're less likely to encounter one.” He calls the new policy “a short-term win that will cause long-term pain.”
Danielle Nazinitsky, founder of Decode Real Estate, sees other risks. She points out that landlords already face rising property taxes, insurance costs, and payroll expenses. “Now they’re being asked to absorb another fixed cost,” she says. And the impact won’t stop with landlords. Real estate brokerages—especially those focused on rentals—already operate with tight margins. “You’ll see quality drop,” she warns. “Fewer agents will stay in the business, and that means less service, less knowledge, and worse results for tenants, too.”
In short, the broker fee didn’t vanish. It just changed form.
Yet for people like Emily O’Connor, a 27-year-old junior designer working in Manhattan, the new rule feels like a small miracle. Earlier this year, she found a studio on the Upper East Side she loved—until she realized the broker fee would cost more than $3,000. “I had to walk away,” she says. “I couldn’t afford both the rent and the fee up front.” Now, with those costs off the table, she feels she has more breathing room. “Even if the rent’s a bit higher, at least I’m not emptying my savings just to move in.”
The FARE Act is a bold attempt to fix what many consider a broken system. But whether it truly shifts the balance in favor of renters—or simply prompts a new round of pricing maneuvers—remains to be seen. In a housing market as intense and competitive as New York’s, every regulation sets off ripples.
Maybe the question isn’t who pays the broker fee—but whether the city can build a rental market that feels just a little more transparent, a little less predatory, and a whole lot more livable.