States pursue legislation against Thoma Bravo-owned RealPage and similar software
June 17, 2025
RealPage, the property management software owned by private equity firm Thoma Bravo, continues to earn scrutiny as states across the country introduced legislation to ban its usage.
Several major cities have passed ordinances that ban the usage of RealPage and similar software such as Minneapolis, Philadelphia, and Berkeley. In addition to these city-based ordinances, numerous states have introduced legislation to prohibit the usage of RealPage software. According to policy tracker Fiscal Note, over 22 states have introduced over 40 pieces of legislation in the 2025 legislative session related to algorithmic rent-setting software. These states include California, where in addition to Berkeley, San Francisco and San Diego have also passed bans on price-fixing software.
Legislative sessions are ongoing, and the outcome of all the proposed bills is not yet determined.
In Colorado (which is also one of the plaintiffs in the DOJ’s case against RealPage) both chambers passed legislation banning RealPage via House Bill 25-1004. The bill would have “banned the use, sale and distribution of software that uses an algorithm to set rents.” While the legislation was vetoed by Governor Jared Polis, he stated that he understood “the intent of the bill” and that “any collusion among landlords would already violate existing law.”
As we have discussed, for the past two years RealPage has been accused of anti-trust behavior through artificially inflating rents by providing avenues for competing landlords to share private information about potential tenants. This alleged price-fixing has landed RealPage in hot water as it is now the subject of over 30 class action lawsuits and a lawsuit by the Department of Justice (DOJ) which features a group of eight bipartisan attorneys general as co-plantiffs.
The DOJ’s lawsuit also implicates several corporate landlords who have allegedly used the software. As of May 2025, six landlords are named in the DOJ suit, including private equity landlords Blackstone, Greystar, and Cortland Management. The DOJ settled its lawsuit with Cortland Management in April 2025 with Cortland agreeing to“cease sharing or using any competitively sensitive data from other landlords and property managers to set rent prices or generate recommended rent prices.” The lawsuit against RealPage has continued under Attorney General Pam Bondi, who was appointed by Trump to lead the DOJ.
While not all legislation against RealPage may become law, the proposed state bans and litigation signal that policymakers at every level of the government identify the usage of algorithmic rent-setting software to be a problem. This legislation adds to the extensive list of negative press about the corporation. As RealPage’s reputation continues to be damaged in the public eye and the legality of business practices questioned, investors should ask Thoma Bravo to drop the rental price-sharing component of RealPage software.
Rental price-fixing legislation introduced during 2025 state legislative sessions
(Note: Some legislation failed as state legislative sessions have ended.)
| STATE | PROPOSED LEGISLATION |
| California | California Preventing Algorithmic Collusion Act Preventing Algorithmic Price Fixing Act: prohibition on price-fixing algorithm use Housing rental rates and occupancy levels: algorithmic devices |
| Colorado | No Pricing Coordination Between Landlords |
| Connecticut | AN ACT PROHIBITING THE USE OF CERTAIN SOFTWARE TO ESTABLISH OCCUPANCY LEVELS AND RENTAL RATES FOR THE PURPOSE OF INCREASING LANDLORD AND PROPERTY MANAGER PROFITS AN ACT PROHIBITING RESIDENTIAL RENTAL PROPERTY OWNERS FROM USING PRICING ALGORITHMS AND COMPETITORS’ SENSITIVE DATA TO SET RENTAL PRICES AN ACT CONCERNING LEGAL PROCEEDINGS INVOLVING HOUSING MATTERS AND THE IMPERMISSABLE USE OF PRICING ALGORITHMS AND COMPETITORS’ SENSITIVE DATA TO SET RENTAL PRICES |
| Hawaii | Relating to Antitrust. Urging The Attorney General To Investigate The Extent To Which Algorithmic Price-Setting And Price-Fixing Practices Are Being Used In The State’s Rental Housing Market Relating to Antitrust. |
| Illinois | Algorithmics Prohibited-Rent Prevent Rental Price Fixing |
| Kentucky | AN ACT relating to the use of algorithmic devices in setting the amount of rent to be charged to a residential tenant. |
| Maine | An Act to Prohibit Landlords from Setting Rents Through the Use of Artificial Intelligence |
| Maryland | Residential Leases- Use of Algorithmic Device by Landlord to Determine Rent – Prohibition Residential Leases- Use of Algorithmic Device by Landlord to Determine Rent – Prohibition |
| Massachusetts | An Act relative to preventing algorithmic rent fixing in the rental housing market An Act relative to preventing algorithmic rent fixing in the rental housing market An Act prohibiting algorithmic rent setting |
| Minnesota | Use of tenant screening software that uses nonpublic competitor data to set rent prohibited, and use of software that is biased against protected classes prohibited Use of tenant screening software that uses nonpublic competitor data to set rent prohibition |
| New Hampshire | Creating a public county registry of the monthly rent charged by landlords for each owned unit and prohibiting landlords from using algorithms or software to determine rental rates |
| New Jersey | Prohibits certain coordination among residential rental property owners who restrict competition with respect to residential dwelling units Prohibits use and sale of algorithmic devices for setting rent price or occupancy of residential dwelling units. Makes use of algorithmic systems to influence price and supply of residential rental units unlawful. Prohibits facilitation of agreements among rental property owners who restrict competition with respect to residential dwelling units |
| New Mexico | NO USE OF AI FOR RENT MANIPULATION |
| New York | Relates to the use of algorithmic pricing by landlords for the purpose of determining the amount of rent to charge a residential tenant Regulates the use of artificial intelligence in aiding decisions on rental housing and loans Prohibits the use of an algorithmic device by a landlord for the purpose of determining the amount of rent to charge a residential tenant Prohibits the use of algorithmic systems to artificially inflate the price or reduce the supply of leased or rented residential dwelling units Prohibits the use of an algorithmic device by a landlord for the purpose of determining the amount of rent to charge a residential tenant |
| North Carolina | Preventing Algorithmic Rent Fixing. |
| Ohio | Regulate the use of pricing algorithms |
| Oregon | Relating to residential tenancies; creating new provisions; and amending ORS 90.323 and 90.600 |
| Texas | Relating to the use of certain algorithmic devices in the determination of residential rental prices. |
| Utah | Joint Resolution Regarding Price Fixing in Rental Housing |
| Virginia | Virginia Residential Landlord and Tenant Act; algorithmic device services or products prohibited; civil penalty. Virginia Residential Landlord and Tenant Act; algorithmic pricing devices, report. Va. Residential Landlord and Tenant Act; algorithmic device services or products prohibited. |
| Washington | Prohibiting algorithmic rent fixing and noncompete agreements in the rental housing market. |
| Wisconsin | Algorithmic software for residential housing, and providing a penalty. |
