How These Projections Were Developed

These are not econometric forecasts. They are evidence-based projections derived from three categories of observed outcomes: (1) historical U.S. data from the 1924-1965 immigration pause and the 2020-2021 COVID natural experiment, (2) international policy outcomes from Canada, New Zealand, Singapore, Australia, Switzerland, and Japan, and (3) documented research on each specific policy area (institutional ownership effects, foreign buyer restrictions, H-1B wage impacts, and zoning reform outcomes). All ranges reflect uncertainty; actual outcomes depend on implementation details, economic conditions, and market responses.

Projected Outcomes Over 10 Years

The following table presents projected ranges for six key metrics, with the evidence basis for each projection.

MetricCurrentYear 3Year 5Year 10Evidence Basis
Price-to-income ratio5.1x4.6x - 4.8x4.0x - 4.4x3.2x - 3.8xHistorical: ratio was 3.6x before 1990 Act; 1924-1965 pause saw sustained improvement
Homeownership rate65.7%66.5% - 67.0%67.5% - 69.0%69.0% - 72.0%Historical: rate rose 16.3pts during 1924-1965 pause (45.6% to 61.9%)
Housing shortage (units)3.8M3.0M - 3.3M2.0M - 2.5M0 - 1.0MReduced demand growth + federal construction incentives; current capacity ~1.4M/yr
Cost-burdened renters22.6M (50.8%)20M - 21M17M - 19M13M - 16MInstitutional divestment + reduced demand pressure + wage gains
Real wage growth (low-wage sectors)Near zero (real)+3% - 5% cumulative+8% - 12% cumulative+15% - 25% cumulativeCOVID experiment: 12-28% gains in 2 years; 1924-1965: incomes doubled in 40 years
First-time buyer share21%25% - 28%30% - 35%35% - 40%Historical norm: 40%+ (1981-2010 average); reduced competition from institutional/foreign buyers

Ranges reflect uncertainty in implementation, economic conditions, and market responses. Sources: Census Bureau, BLS, JCHS, NAHB, international government data[1][2][3][4][5]

Policy-by-Policy Projected Effects

Each of the Act's five policies produces distinct, measurable effects. The projections above reflect the combined impact of all five operating simultaneously - which, as documented in our compounding analysis, produces greater effects than any single reform.

Policy 1: End Corporate Ownership

Mechanism: 2-year divestment of 450,000+ homes to owner-occupants

Short-term (Years 1-3)

Increased inventory for individual buyers; moderated price growth in Sunbelt markets

Long-term (Years 5-10)

Permanent structural change: homes as shelter, not financial assets; reduced rent growth

Measured by: Institutional ownership share; first-time buyer share; rent growth rates in affected metros

Evidence basis: Fed research: institutional landlords raise rents 60% faster upon acquisition

Policy 2: Reduce Immigration 90%

Mechanism: Annual admissions drop from ~1M to ~100K for 10 years

Short-term (Years 1-3)

Reduced demand pressure on housing; tight labor markets begin wage recovery

Long-term (Years 5-10)

Housing supply catches up with population; sustained wage growth for working class

Measured by: Housing starts vs. population growth; real wage growth by sector; rental vacancy rates

Evidence basis: Canada 2024: 25% cut → 6.6% rent decline; COVID: largest low-wage gains in decades

Policy 3: End H-1B, Restore H-1

Mechanism: Eliminate staffing firm exploitation; require direct employment at market wages

Short-term (Years 1-3)

Wage correction in tech, healthcare, and professional sectors; reduced displacement

Long-term (Years 5-10)

Domestic STEM wages normalize; H-1 attracts genuine specialty talent at market rates

Measured by: Prevailing wage compliance; staffing firm H-1 participation; sector wage growth

Evidence basis: EPI data: 60% of H-1B at below-median wages; 17-34% wage gap documented

Policy 4: End Foreign Ownership

Mechanism: Green Card minimum; 2-year divestment for existing foreign owners

Short-term (Years 1-3)

Reduced all-cash competition in FL, CA, TX; improved affordability in concentrated markets

Long-term (Years 5-10)

Permanent elimination of offshore capital pressure on residential market

Measured by: Foreign buyer transaction share; all-cash purchase rates; price growth in affected markets

Evidence basis: NZ: foreign share dropped 3.3% to <0.5% in one year; Singapore: 62% reduction

Policy 5: Increase Housing Construction

Mechanism: Federal incentives tied to production targets; streamlined permitting models

Short-term (Years 1-3)

Jurisdictions adopt fast-track permitting; construction accelerates in high-demand areas

Long-term (Years 5-10)

Structural shortage eliminated; housing production consistently matches demand

Measured by: Housing starts; permitting timelines; units per capita by jurisdiction; shortage estimates

Evidence basis: Japan: 2-month permitting; NZ: 12% building consent increase after national zoning reform

Implementation Timeline and Milestones

The Act is designed for phased implementation. The following milestones indicate what should be observable at each stage if the policies are working as intended.

Year 1

  • Immigration reduction takes effect; demand pressure begins declining
  • Corporate divestment period begins; inventory listings increase
  • Foreign ownership divestment begins; all-cash competition decreases
  • H-1B transition provisions activate; workers begin converting to H-1 or Green Card
  • Federal housing construction incentive program launched

Year 2

  • Corporate divestment deadline: 450,000+ homes transferred to owner-occupants
  • Foreign ownership divestment complete in residential markets
  • First measurable wage gains in high-immigration sectors
  • First jurisdictions receive bonus construction funding
  • Rental vacancy rates begin improving in previously tight markets

Year 3-5

  • Housing shortage begins closing (3.8M → ~2.0-2.5M)
  • Price-to-income ratio declining toward 4.0x-4.4x
  • First-time buyer share recovering toward 30%+
  • Real wage growth sustained across working-class sectors
  • Homeownership rate rising toward 67-69%

Year 5-10

  • Housing shortage approaching equilibrium
  • Price-to-income ratio approaching 3.2x-3.8x (pre-1990 Act levels)
  • Homeownership rate approaching 69-72%
  • 10-year immigration reassessment based on housing and wage data
  • Measurable wealth accumulation for new homeowner cohort

What Comparable Countries Achieved

Every projection in this analysis is grounded in observed outcomes. The following table summarizes what comparable policies produced in developed nations and historical U.S. episodes.

Country/PeriodActionTimeframeObserved Result
CanadaForeign buyer ban (2023) + 25% immigration cut (2024)1-2 yearsForeign buying near-zero; national rents fell 6.6%[1]
New ZealandForeign buyer ban (2018) + national zoning reform (2022)1-4 yearsForeign share 3.3% → <0.5%; building consents up 12%[2]
Singapore60% foreign buyer stamp duty (2023)1 yearForeign transactions dropped 62% (4.7% → 1.8%)[3]
U.S. (1924-1965)Immigration reduced ~80%; massive housing construction40 yearsHomeownership +16.3pts; incomes doubled; inequality -20%[4]
U.S. (COVID 2020-21)Unplanned immigration slowdown2 yearsLargest low-wage gains in decades (+12-28% real in affected sectors)[5]

The Compounding Advantage

Each of the examples above involved one or two policy changes. The Affordability and Immigration Act proposes five simultaneous reforms. Based on the compounding dynamic documented in our structural analysis, simultaneous implementation should produce outcomes greater than the sum of individual effects - because each reform removes a feedback loop that would otherwise undermine the others.

Risks and Uncertainties

Projections are not guarantees. The following risks could affect outcomes, along with the Act's built-in mitigations and relevant precedent.

RiskLikelihoodMitigationPrecedent
Market disruption during divestment periodsModerate2-year timelines prevent fire sales; orderly transition preserves valuesCanada's foreign buyer ban caused no market crash; prices stabilized gradually
Labor shortages in specific sectorsModerate90% reduction, not 100%; critical sectors retain access; wages rise to attract domestic workersCOVID labor shortages resolved through wage increases, not economic collapse
Construction slowdown from reduced immigration laborLow-ModerateHigher construction wages attract domestic workers; federal incentives offset; H-1 visa available for genuine specialistsPost-WWII boom achieved 1.35M units/year with immigration at 230K/year
International trade retaliationLow5 developed nations already restrict foreign buyers; trade agreement carve-outs availableNo country has faced trade retaliation for foreign buyer restrictions
Legal challenges delay implementationModerateAll proposals within established constitutional authority; designed to withstand judicial reviewCongressional plenary power over immigration virtually unreviewable; Dole framework for spending

The 10-Year Reassessment

The Act's immigration reduction is explicitly temporary - 10 years - with a reassessment based on housing availability and wage data. This built-in review mechanism ensures that if outcomes differ from projections, policy can be adjusted based on evidence rather than ideology. The measurable benchmarks in this analysis provide a framework for that reassessment: if the price-to-income ratio has not declined toward 3.5x, if the housing shortage has not closed, or if wage growth has not materialized, the data will indicate whether to extend, modify, or end the reduction.

What Success Looks Like

If the Act achieves its projected outcomes, the United States in 2036 would look measurably different from 2026:

2026 (Current)

  • Price-to-income: 5.1x
  • Homeownership: 65.7%
  • First-time buyers: 21% of purchases
  • Housing shortage: 3.8 million units
  • Cost-burdened renters: 22.6 million
  • Real wage growth (low-wage): near zero

2036 (Projected)

  • Price-to-income: 3.2x-3.8x
  • Homeownership: 69-72%
  • First-time buyers: 35-40% of purchases
  • Housing shortage: 0-1 million units
  • Cost-burdened renters: 13-16 million
  • Real wage growth: +15-25% cumulative

These are not aspirational targets. They are evidence-based projections grounded in what comparable policies have produced in comparable countries and in prior U.S. experience. The Affordability and Immigration Act is designed to be measured against these benchmarks - and adjusted if the data indicates it should be.