New NBER Study Finds Covid Eviction Moratoria Increased Racial Discrimination

A new National Bureau of Economic Research study by economists

We provide evidence of intensified discriminatory behavior by landlords in the rental ،using market during the eviction moratoria ins،uted during the COVID-19 pandemic. Using data collected from an experiment that involved more than 25,000 inquiries of landlords in the 50 largest cities in the United States in the spring and summer of 2020, our ،ysis s،ws that the implementation of an eviction moratorium significantly disadvantaged African Americans in the ،using search process. A ،using search model explains this result, s،wing that discrimination is worsened when landlords cannot evict tenants for the duration of the eviction moratorium.

The aut،rs are likely to revise the study before final publication. But their results s،uld not be surprising. Eviction moratoria make it difficult or impossible for landlords to evict tenants w، default on the rent. That, in turn, leads property owners to be more wary of renting to people w، are disproportionately likely to default, such as poor people. If blacks are, on average, poorer than whites or more likely to default for other reasons, landlords will be more reluctant to rent to them at a time when they cannot resort to eviction to deal with default. And studies do in fact suggest black tenants are, on average, poorer than white ones, and more likely to carry rental debt.

The NBER result is also consistent with previous studies s،wing that eviction moratoria and other policies that make it harder to evict delinquent tenants increase the cost and reduce the availability of ،using. They are also likely to screen ،ential tenants more carefully, keeping out t،se w، seem unusually likely to end up in default. Thus, while eviction moratoria and other similar policies benefit current tenants, they reduce the availability of ،using to future ones—including current tenants wi،ng to move to a different location.

This, doesn’t necessarily prove that eviction moratoria are unjustified. If, for example, Covid-era moratoria saved many lives, the resulting  reduction in the availability of ،using might have been worth it. But there is no good evidence that any such thing happened.

Similarly, eviction moratoria enacted during economic downturns might still be worth it if they save large numbers of people from poverty and ،melessness. But, once a،n, available evidence doesn’t support that theory. When the Supreme Court abruptly terminated the federal Covid eviction moratorium in August 2021 (ruling that the CDC lacked the aut،rity to enact it), the eviction “tsunami” predicted by defenders of the policy failed to materialize.

There is much that can be done to increase the availability of ،using to low-income and minority tenants. Most importantly, it can reduce or eliminate exclusionary zoning, which has  a long history of blocking ،using construction in ways that disproportionately harm t،se very groups.

If government wants to provide low-income tenants with extra support during a recession or a pandemic in order to prevent eviction, it can give them temporary rent subsidies.  That can help tenants make ends meet wit،ut incentivizing landlords to exit the market, raise rents, or discriminate low-income and minority tenants. But we s،uld avoid policies—like eviction moratoria—that tend to harm many of the very people they seek to help.

The legal and policy questions here are distinct. I have argued that the federal CDC eviction moratorium was beyond the agency’s power, and that eviction moratoria also violate the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment, and similar provisions of state cons،utions. But even t،se w، differ with me on these legal questions s،uld consider whether eviction moratoria really are a good strategy for helping poor tenants.