Mayor Zohran Mamdani says he wants to lighten the load on New York City renters. A veteran Manhattan broker says the mayor’s newest idea will do the opposite.

The proposal, part of Mamdani’s 23-point “Rental Ripoff Report” released Thursday, would stop landlords from requiring both a credit check and proof of income from applicants, forcing owners to pick one screening method over the other. It would also shift the cost of the credit check itself from tenant to landlord.

Cea Weaver, director of the Mayor’s Office to Protect Tenants, likened the idea to the 2024 FARE Act, which made landlords cover broker fees instead of tenants. Like that law, the new rules would need City Council approval. Weaver has said the current standard, often requiring proof that an applicant earns 40 times the monthly rent plus a paid credit check, weighs heaviest on the renters who move most often.

Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s newest tenant protection proposal would stop landlords from requiring both a credit check and proof of income from apartment applicants, forcing them to choose one, while also shifting the cost of the credit check from tenant to landlord. Matthew McDermott for NY Post

But Keyan Sanai, the top ranking rental agent at Douglas Elliman, said the mayor is targeting a cost that barely exists anymore.

“The only permitted charge is the actual cost of a credit and background check, capped at $20, and that must be waived when an applicant supplies a qualifying report completed within the previous 30 days,” Sanai said. “Eliminating that remaining $20 charge may produce a headline, but it will not meaningfully improve housing affordability.”

Sanai said the bigger issue isn’t who pays for the credit check. It’s the rule barring landlords from reviewing both credit and income at once.

“That is not merely a change in who pays a nominal screening cost,” Sanai said. “It is a restriction on basic financial underwriting.”

But Keyan Sanai, the rental producing agent at Douglas Elliman, argues the plan targets a fee that’s already capped at $20 under a 2019 state law, while ignoring the real impact: without the ability to weigh both credit and income together, landlords will lean harder on guarantors instead. Christopher Sadowski for NY Post

He compared it to a 2019 rule capping security deposits at one month’s rent and blocking landlords from also collecting a final month upfront, a change he said made it harder for applicants with irregular income or thin credit to strengthen a weak application.

“That restriction made it more difficult for applicants with substantial assets but irregular income, limited credit or nontraditional financial circumstances to strengthen their applications voluntarily,” Sanai said. “In practice, many of those applicants are pushed toward third party guarantor companies.”

Sanai said those companies typically charge a meaningful share of one month’s rent, and unlike a deposit, tenants never get it back.

A guarantor problem for renters without family money

Sanai’s argument is that landlords won’t stop vetting applicants just because the city narrows their options. They’ll lean harder on whichever tool is left, and on guarantors to fill the gap.

“Owners will not simply abandon financial underwriting and hope for the best,” Sanai said. “They will respond by requiring more applicants to provide personal or institutional guarantors.”

Sanai warns this will push renters without wealthy relatives able to co-sign toward institutional guarantor companies that charge a nonrefundable fee equal to roughly a month’s rent, raising the barrier to entry rather than lowering it. cunaplus – stock.adobe.com

For renters with a relative able to co-sign at the standard guarantor threshold, roughly 80 times the monthly rent, that’s manageable. For everyone else, Sanai said, it means paying a company for the privilege.

“Applicants fortunate enough to have wealthy relatives who can satisfy an 80 times rent guarantor requirement may be fine,” Sanai said. “Everyone else may be forced to purchase an institutional guaranty that can cost approximately one month’s rent and is never returned.”

Sanai pointed to Mamdani’s own upbringing in making his case that the mayor is out of touch with what a guarantor fee means for a working renter.

“For those of us who did not grow up with wealthy parents who owned multiple residences, including a two million dollar condo in Chelsea, an institutional guarantor would be required, which is a one month nonrefundable charge,” Sanai said. “Perhaps the rest of us can ask Mayor Mamdani whether his parents can guaranty our apartments as well.”

The FARE Act as a warning sign

Sanai’s central worry is that the credit check proposal repeats a pattern he says played out with the FARE Act, a law that promised savings for renters but coincided with rents climbing to record highs.

“We have already seen what happens when lawmakers pretend that mandated costs simply disappear,” Sanai said. “The FARE Act prohibited brokers representing landlords from collecting their commissions from tenants.”

By June 2026, Manhattan’s median rent hit a record $5,295 a month, according to Corcoran, up roughly 8% year over year. Active listings that month totaled 5,260, down 16% from a year earlier and the lowest June total in three years.

He points to the FARE Act as a preview, noting that despite promises of savings for tenants, Manhattan’s median rent hit a record $5,295 in June 2026 while inventory fell 16% year over year, and argues landlords don’t simply absorb new costs but pass them along through higher rents, stricter underwriting or reduced services. Rawpixel.com – stock.adobe.com

StreetEasy’s own one year retrospective on the FARE Act estimated its direct effect on pricing at around 1.1%, attributing most of the increase to the city’s broader housing shortage, a distinction Sanai acknowledged.

“That does not prove the FARE Act caused the entire increase,” Sanai said. “But it does demonstrate that owners do not simply absorb new costs indefinitely. At least some portion is ultimately reflected in rents, reduced services, stricter underwriting or lower housing supply.”

He said the same pattern will repeat if the credit check proposal becomes law.

“This newest proposal would raise the barrier to entry even further, especially for applicants without wealthy family members available to guarantee their leases,” Sanai said. “As usual, the policy will be announced as tenant protection. When the predictable consequences arrive, renters will bear the cost and the politicians responsible will accept none of the accountability.”

Asked directly whether the plan would hurt tenants, Sanai did not hedge.

“This will screw people just as bad as the FARE Act, to be honest,” Sanai said.