A Texas investor bought a California MHP and implemented the same rent increase strategy that worked back home. Six months later: $180,000 in legal fees and tenant settlements. What's legal in Texas may violate California law—and getting regulations wrong can destroy your entire investment thesis.
This guide covers the 10 most important regulatory markets for MHP investors, organized by investor-friendliness. Use it to understand where you're investing and what rules apply.
Disclaimer: This information is for educational purposes only and should not be construed as legal advice. Regulations change frequently—always consult with a qualified attorney licensed in your target state before making investment decisions.
State-by-State Analysis
Tier 1: Landlord-Friendly States
These states have minimal rent restrictions and favor property owner rights.
Texas (5,176 parks as of 2024 — largest MHP market)
| Factor | Status |
|---|---|
| Rent control | Prohibited statewide since 1990s |
| Maximum increase | No limit |
| Notice required | 30 days (month-to-month) |
| Eviction restrictions | Minimal |
Sources: Texas Property Code Chapter 94, Landlord Studio
Arizona
| Factor | Status |
|---|---|
| Rent control | Prohibited by state law |
| Maximum increase | No limit |
| Notice required | 30 days (month-to-month) |
| Eviction restrictions | Minimal |
Florida (3,785 parks as of 2024 — third largest market)
| Factor | Status |
|---|---|
| Rent control | Banned statewide since 1977 |
| Maximum increase | No limit (exception: West Palm Beach) |
| Notice required | 30 days |
| Eviction restrictions | Minimal |
Investment implication: Favorable regulations, but significant climate and insurance risks (covered separately).
Tier 2: Moderate Regulation States
These states have procedural requirements without strict rent caps.
Colorado
| Factor | Status |
|---|---|
| Rent control | No cap on amount |
| Maximum increase | Unlimited, but procedural requirements |
| Notice required | 60 days |
| Increase frequency | One per 12 months maximum |
| Registration | Park must be registered with state |
Source: Colorado Division of Housing
New York
| Factor | Status |
|---|---|
| Rent control | 6% cap unless hardship approved |
| Maximum increase | 6% above current rent |
| Notice required | Varies by lease type |
| Eviction restrictions | Strong tenant protections |
| Dispute process | Court-based, tenant can challenge |
- Increases above 6% require court-approved hardship application
- During pending challenges, tenants pay increase into escrow
- No eviction for non-payment of disputed increase until final disposition
Source: New York Real Property Law 233-B
Tier 3: Tenant-Protective States
These states have significant rent restrictions and tenant rights.
California (~4,000 parks as of 2024 — second largest market)
| Factor | Status |
|---|---|
| Statewide rent control | No statewide cap |
| Local rent control | Common — varies by jurisdiction |
| Notice required | 90 days |
| Eviction restrictions | Only 7 allowable reasons |
| Registration | Required in many jurisdictions |
| Jurisdiction | 2024-2025 Limit |
|---|---|
| Los Angeles County | 4% maximum |
| Mountain View | 1.6% (2025) |
| San Jose | CPI-based |
| Other cities | Varies widely |
Sources: California MRL, CA RSO Database
Washington
| Factor | Status |
|---|---|
| Rent control | 5% maximum annual increase (MHPs) |
| Grace period | No increases in first 12 months |
| Notice required | 90 days written notice |
| General housing | 7% + inflation or 10%, whichever lower |
- 5% annual cap applies specifically to manufactured home park spaces
- First 12 months of tenancy: no increases allowed
- General residential has separate formula (7% + inflation or 10%)
- Retaliation prohibited
- AG enforcement with tenant complaint process
Source: Washington State AG, Washington State Standard
Oregon
| Factor | Status |
|---|---|
| Rent control | 10% maximum annual increase |
| Pending legislation | HB 3054 (CPI-based cap proposed) |
| Notice required | Per state law |
| Eviction restrictions | Strong tenant protections |
Source: OPB reporting
Summary Table: Top 10 MHP States
Park counts as of 2024
| State | Parks | Rent Cap | Notice | Investor Rating |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Texas | 5,176 | None | 30 days | Excellent |
| California | ~4,000 | Local varies | 90 days | Poor |
| Florida | 3,785 | None* | 30 days | Good |
| Arizona | ~1,500 | None | 30 days | Excellent |
| Pennsylvania | ~1,500 | None | 30 days | Good |
| Indiana | ~1,000+ | None | 30 days | Good |
| Colorado | ~800 | None** | 60 days | Moderate |
| New York | ~700 | 6% | Varies | Poor |
| Washington | ~600 | 5% | 90 days | Poor |
| Oregon | ~500 | 10% | Varies | Moderate |
*Florida: Exception for West Palm Beach (5% or CPI)
**Colorado: No cap but strict procedural requirements
Regulatory Trends to Watch
Federal Scrutiny
Senator Maggie Hassan's 2024 investigation targeted six major MHP firms:
- Alden Global Capital (Homes of America)
- BoaVida Group
- Legacy Communities
- Patriot Holdings
- Philips International
- Sun Communities
The investigation requested internal documents on business practices and impact on residents. Federal legislation remains unlikely, but scrutiny creates reputation risk and may encourage state action.
Federal scrutiny of MHP operators has increased significantly. While legislation remains unlikely, the reputational risk for aggressive rent practices is real—and may encourage state action.
Source: NBC News
State-Level Momentum
States considering new protections (as of 2024-2025):
- Oregon: HB 3054 (CPI-based cap)
- Washington: HB 1217 (5% cap for MHPs, 7% + inflation for other housing)
- Colorado: Ongoing enforcement strengthening
- California: Continued local ordinance adoption
The trend is toward more protection, not less. Build this into long-term planning.
Resident-Ownership Models
Several states are promoting resident-owned communities (ROCs) as an alternative to investor ownership:
- Right of first refusal for resident associations
- State financing for resident purchases
- Technical assistance for resident ownership
This doesn't affect existing investor-owned parks directly but signals policy direction.
How Regulation Affects Your Investment Thesis
Underwriting Adjustments
| Regulatory Environment | Rent Growth Assumption |
|---|---|
| No restrictions (TX, AZ, FL) | Market-based (3-7%/year) |
| Moderate (CO, PA) | 5-6%/year |
| Restrictive (CA local, NY) | 3-5%/year |
| Capped (WA, OR) | Cap rate (5-10%/year) |
Use the MHP calculator to model how different rent growth assumptions affect your projected returns.
Value-Add Viability
| Strategy | Landlord-Friendly | Restrictive |
|---|---|---|
| Raise below-market rent to market | Viable | Limited by cap |
| Annual increases above inflation | Viable | Limited by cap |
| Fill vacant lots | Viable | Viable |
| Reduce expenses | Viable | Viable |
| Submeter utilities | Viable | May be regulated |
In restrictive states, focus value-add on occupancy and expense reduction rather than rent growth.
Exit Considerations
Buyers will underwrite to the same regulations. In restrictive states:
- Cap rates may be lower (less perceived risk)
- Value-add premium may be limited
- Exit may take longer (smaller buyer pool)
Due Diligence Checklist
Before buying in any market:
- Identify state-level rent laws
- Check for local rent stabilization ordinances
- Verify notice requirements
- Review eviction protections
- Check registration/licensing requirements
- Research pending legislation
- Consult local MHP attorney
Do not rely on general information. Laws change, and local regulations can differ significantly from state law.
Analyze Deals in Your Target Market
Understanding regulations is essential—but so is running the numbers with realistic rent growth assumptions. In restrictive states, model conservatively (cap rate or below). In landlord-friendly states, you have more flexibility.
Use our MHP calculator to model how different rent growth assumptions affect your returns based on your target state's regulatory environment.
Next Steps
- Climate Risk in MHP Investing → — Location-based risk assessment
- The MHP Insurance Crisis → — Coverage challenges by market
- The Real Challenges of MHP Investing → — The full advanced series