The Brief

In the city of Los Angeles, some 650,000 apartments are subject to local rent control. How much rents can go up each year has been the subject of ongoing controversy between tenants and landlords, who often disagree about what’s fair amid a regional crisis in affordable housing.

The L.A. City Council, which sets policy, has been at the center of that tension. Last October, Councilmembers Bob Blumenfield and Hugo Soto-Martinez put forward a motion calling for a fresh look at the city’s decades-old formula for setting annual limits on rent hikes. The council approved that motion and called for a study to “conclude within 3 months.”

This May, the Economic Roundtable, the nonprofit research organization the city commissioned to carry out the study, submitted its report to the L.A. Housing Department. Four months later, the city still has not released it publicly. LAist obtained the report through a public records request.

The independent analysis found some of the city’s rules governing rent increases have favored landlords over tenants. The report recommends changes that could lower the rent hikes tenants face each year, setting up what is sure to be a fierce debate at city hall.

LAist has published the full report here (and you can also read it below).

What’s in the report? 

Over the course of 193 pages, the report offers an extensive analysis of the L.A. rental housing market, challenges facing both tenants and landlords, and the impact of the city’s Rent Stabilization Ordinance. Among the findings:

• About 35% of the rent L.A. tenants pay goes to operating expenses for apartment buildings, on average. This includes maintenance, utilities, insurance, payroll and other routine costs. Landlords can use the remainder to cover mortgages and turn a profit.
• From January 2020 through January 2023, 4 in 10 rent-controlled L.A. apartments became vacant. When a tenant leaves a rent-controlled unit, the city’s rules allow landlords to raise rents to market rates. These higher rents helped landlords absorb the impact of a nearly four-year freeze on rent hikes.
• Many expenses have risen sharply for landlords in recent years, outpacing inflation. Property insurance costs have roughly doubled since 2020. However, the report notes these expenses make up a relatively small portion of overall costs.
• About one-fifth of L.A. renters are living below the federal poverty line. According to U.S. Census data, just over half of those renters spend 90% of their income or more on rent. Rent increases can leave these low-income renters vulnerable to displacement and homelessness.
• The city’s current range of allowable annual rent increases — anywhere from 3% to 8% depending on inflation — is higher than the increases permitted in most other California cities with rent control.

The report makes some recommendations on how the city could change its formula for determining annual rent increase limits:

• Either eliminate a provision allowing landlords to raise rents an extra 1% per year if they pay for a tenant’s gas, plus another 1% if they pay for electricity — or replace it. The report estimates each 1% increase could raise rents an additional $150 to $240 per month after 10 years, more than the actual cost of providing those utilities. One option, the report says, would be to instead use a surcharge that better captures the increased costs of providing those utilities.

The report recommends considering changing which version of the consumer price index is used to calculate allowable increased to one that excludes housing costs, shown as "Less Shelter" in the chart above.

(

Courtesy Equitable Rent report

)

• Change how annual rent increases are calculated. Instead of using a version of the consumer price index driven to a large degree by housing cost inflation, the report recommends a different index that excludes housing costs. The report argues this would stop the feedback loop of allowing high housing inflation to create further housing inflation.

What do landlord advocates say?

LAist shared the report with advocates for landlords and tenants.

Landlord advocates strongly disputed the report’s conclusions. Daniel Yukelson with the Apartment Association of Greater Los Angeles pointed to recent data from the National Apartment Association, a trade group for property owners, concluding that California landlords earn 7 cents of profit on average for every dollar of rent.

“What [the report] is trying to do is make a PR effort to lay the groundwork to chip away at what little ability landlords have in L.A. to be able to raise rents and be able to keep up with their costs,” Yukelson said.

He said the report takes a macroeconomic view of the city’s rental market, but fails to capture the unique struggles facing many small landlords.

“There are plenty of owners out there who have had their renters in place for many years,” Yukelson said. “They're way below market. And they're having trouble today keeping up with the growing costs of insurance, maintenance and supplies.”

What do tenant advocates say?

Tenant advocates took a very different view of the report. They said it correctly identifies problems with L.A. rent control and validates their demands for stronger limits.

“Small landlords are able to maintain their profits and draw income above their expenses — they haven't been overly burdened by rent stabilization,” said Christina Boyar, a legal fellow with Public Counsel and a member of the Keep L.A. Housed coalition.

Tenant advocates have called for a 3% ceiling on annual rent hikes and elimination of the 2% surcharge for landlords who provide gas and electricity. They point to other L.A.-area cities that currently limit rent increases to less than 3% with no add-ons for utilities.

“The report shows that rent costs exceeding what tenants can pay is a primary cause of homelessness,” Boyar said. “We are obviously in a homelessness crisis in L.A., and if this formula isn't updated soon, more folks will just fall into homelessness.”

How LAist obtained the report

The city’s housing officials have been in possession of the Economic Roundtable report since May.

When LAist first requested the report, officials told a reporter the study was not subject to disclosure under the California Public Records Act, saying there was an exemption for “deliberative process.”

They provided the report shortly after LAist’s public records lawyer intervened.

Why had the city not released the report? 

Daniel Flaming, president of the Economic Roundtable and a co-author of the report, said he didn’t have a good answer for why the report was kept under wraps.

“I think when it's a politically contentious issue, there are attempts to manage the conversation,” Flaming said. “The substance of the report is final. It was submitted as a final report and accepted by the city as a final work product.”

Sharon Sandow, a spokesperson for the L.A. Housing Department, told LAist last week the document was still a “draft report,” and they didn't have a specific date lined up for its release.

“There are several rounds of revisions left to go before this report is considered final,” Sandow said in an email. “Economic Roundtable is under contract to complete this report through January 2025 — though clearly we hope to have it finalized before then.”

By the end of last week, Sandow sent LAist a version of the report she described as "final."

Under state public records law, preliminary drafts must be released if they are retained in the ordinary course of business, as this one has been. LAist noted in its correspondence with housing department officials that the report was not a draft but was a finished product submitted by the contractor.

Why it matters

The city’s rent increase limits apply to a huge number of L.A. residents. Almost two-thirds of L.A. households rent their homes. Local rent control rules cover about 650,000 apartments — 44% of the city’s entire housing stock. Apartments in L.A. are generally covered by local rent control if they were built before Oct. 1, 1978.

Housing costs are a major burden for many L.A. households. About 59% of the city’s renters spend more than 30% of their income on rent, a level considered unaffordable by federal government standards.

The report notes that because L.A. has a 3% floor on annual increases — even in years when the consumer price index is lower — landlords have often been allowed to raise rents above inflation. Between 2010 and 2020, the consumer price index in L.A. rose 21%. During the same period, rents in rent-controlled L.A. apartments were allowed to rise 36%.

The issues facing landlords

On the other hand, the report finds that landlords have faced unique challenges — particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic.

State and local regulations allowed tenants who lost income during the pandemic to delay rent payments. Annual increases in rent-controlled housing were banned. And landlords were restricted from evicting tenants who fell behind on rent. That all played out during a time when the cost of maintenance, utilities and insurance was rising faster than inflation.

L.A. kept COVID-19 protections in place far longer than many other jurisdictions. The city faced strong criticism from landlords who argued too little was being done to help property owners.

Some of these hardships were addressed by government rent relief programs, which provided funds to landlords with tenants behind on rent. The report also notes that high turnover helped landlords raise rents to market rates and keep rental income nearly at pace with inflation.

But landlord advocates say some property owners have yet to fully recover from the pandemic. They now worry about the potential cost of proposals to remove gas stoves and install air conditioners.

“The cost of electricity is just going to continue going up,” Yukelson with the Apartment Association said. If the city stops landlords who provide electricity from raising rents an additional 1% per year, he said, “The next tenant is going to have to pay that burden, because the rents are going to have to go up.”

How L.A. stacks up to other cities

On balance, Flaming said the report shows that L.A.’s policies diverge significantly from how other California cities handle rent control. He said the utility surcharge in particular seems “arbitrary.”

“The Los Angeles ceiling and floor are atypically high for rent-controlled cities,” he said. “Among cities that have elected to control rents — and not all cities have — Los Angeles appears to be tilted toward landlords.”

Some L.A. city council members have floated the idea of establishing different rent control rules for “mom and pop” landlords and larger, corporate landlords. The report recommends the city instead target aid to small landlords, rather than allowing additional rent increases on tenants.

What happens now? 

The clock is ticking for the city to develop a new rent-control formula in time for Jan. 1, 2025. That’s when landlords will be required to give tenants notice of any rent increases starting in February. Many tenants in rent-controlled housing received a 4 to 6% annual rent increase on Feb. 1, 2024 due to the lapse of the L.A.’s COVID-19 rent freeze.

Soto-Martinez, one of the council members who requested the report be commissioned — has already called for capping increases at 3%.

In an email reacting to the Economic Roundtable report, Soto-Martínez told LAist, “As we await the finalized version of this report, it’s heartening to see so much data supporting the policy changes that renters have been demanding — especially when it comes to preventing excessive rent increases that can devastate working families.”

The city’s rent control debate is playing out against the larger backdrop of an election season where rent control — and many other housing-related measures — are up for a state-wide vote.

Read the full report

Link: Equitable Rent Rent Stabilization Standards in the City of Los Angeles

Note: The initial report released to LAist early last week was dated May 2024. Late last week, L.A. housing officials resent the report, now dated September 2024.

The Trump administration will resume garnishing wages from student loan borrowers in default in early 2026, the U.S. Education Department confirmed to NPR.

The move comes after a years-long pause in wage garnishment due to the pandemic.

"We expect the first notices to be sent to approximately 1,000 defaulted borrowers the week of Jan. 7," a department spokesperson told NPR. The spokesperson said wage-garnishment notices are expected to increase on a monthly basis throughout the year.

A borrower is in default when they have not made loan payments in more than 270 days. Once that happens, the federal government can try to collect on the debt by seizing tax refunds and Social Security benefits and also by ordering an employer to withhold up to 15% of a borrower's pay. Borrowers should receive a 30-day notice from the Education Department before this wage garnishment begins.

Betsy Mayotte, the president and founder of The Institute of Student Loan Advisors, says even though borrowers have expected this, the timing is unfortunate.

"It will coincide with the increase in health care costs for many of these defaulted borrowers," she said, referring to the premium increases for Affordable Care Act health insurance that kick in in 2026. "The two will almost certainly put significant economic strain on low- and middle-income borrowers."

About 5.5 million borrowers currently are in default, according to a recent analysis of the latest federal student loan data published by the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), a public policy think tank.

Another 3.7 million are more than 270 days late on their payments and 2.7 million are in the early stages of delinquency.

"We've got about 12 million borrowers right now who are either delinquent on their loans or in default," Preston Cooper, who studies student loan policy at AEI, told NPR.

That's more than 1 in 4 federal student loan borrowers.

Cory Turner contributed to this story.

Copyright 2025 NPR

The Justice Department released a new batch of files Tuesday related to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein which contain hundreds of references to President Donald Trump.

Trump has not been accused of wrongdoing in connection to Epstein though he had a well-documented friendship with the disgraced financier in the 1980s, '90s, and 2000s. This latest tranche gives more details on Trump's relationship with Epstein, including documentation of Trump flying on Epstein's private jet in the 1990s. Epstein's relationship with powerful politicians and businessmen — and in particular, to what degree Trump may have been aware of Epstein's crimes — has been a central question as the DOJ has continued to release the files.

Congress required the Justice Department to make all files available by last Friday. The department has taken a piecemeal approach to releasing the files, which are expected to contain hundreds of thousands of pages.

In a Tuesday-morning social media post, the department said that the latest batch contains nearly 30,000 pages, adding that it includes "untrue or sensationalist claims" about Trump. When asked for comment on the newest files, the White House referred NPR to the Justice Department statement.

The latest set of files includes a 2020 email from an unidentified federal prosecutor saying that "Donald Trump traveled on Epstein's private jet many more times than previously has been reported (or that we were aware)."

The prosecutor said Trump was listed as a passenger on at least eight flights between 1993 and 1996, including four on which Ghislaine Maxwell — Epstein's co-conspirator and herself a convicted sex offender — was also a passenger. The prosecutor also wrote that one flight included only Trump, Epstein, and a 20-year-old whose name was redacted.

Flight logs included in the latest files show that Trump's flights were primarily domestic, between New Jersey, Palm Beach, and Washington, D.C.

President Trump has yet to respond directly to the latest document dump, but on Monday told reporters that he thinks the Epstein files are a distraction, and that they unfairly implicate innocent people.

"What this whole thing is with Epstein is a way of trying to deflect from the tremendous success that the Republican Party has," Trump said. "A lot of people are very angry that pictures are being released of other people that really had nothing to do with Epstein, but they're in a picture with him because he was at a party. And you ruin a reputation of somebody."

The files also include a 2019 letter supposedly sent by Epstein to convicted sex offender Larry Nassar — the former U.S. gymnastics team doctor.

The letter, which says Epstein sent it from a correctional facility in Manhattan, says that "our president shares our love of young, nubile girls." A stamp on the letter says it was returned to sender.

The DOJ document release also includes an FBI document requesting that a laboratory perform a handwriting analysis to determine whether the letter was written by Epstein. It's unclear whether the FBI came to a conclusion in this case.

Another document included is a 2021 subpoena to Trump's Mar-a-Lago club for employment records during the investigation into Maxwell.

NPR's Luke Garrett contributed reporting.
Copyright 2025 NPR

I remember feeling very adult the first time I sent out holiday cards with family photos on them.

But the overall cost of this sweet, but fleeting, gesture is getting hard to swallow. The cards are expensive, of course. And then there’s the price of sending them through the mail. Forever stamps now cost 78 cents. When did that happen?

I was rethinking the whole endeavor when I did a little Googling, and bingo! — I found a bunch of websites offering stamps for close to 20 cents a piece. A fraction of the price. Was this for real?

No, as it turns out. The majorly-discounted stamps advertised online are more than likely counterfeit. And if you use fake stamps, you risk your mail being confiscated or sent back.

“Typically, there is no such thing as a discounted stamp,” said Marjan Barrigan-Husted, a federal agent with the U.S. Postal Inspection Service.

Barrigan-Husted said “typically” because the postal service does have agreements with a select number of vendors, mostly big box stores and stamps.com, to sell stamps at a slightly discounted rate — for example, you can get a whopping 25 cents off a roll of 100 stamps from Costco.

That’s not even close to the steals I was finding online with just a little scrolling. And the stamps looked, to me, just like the latest stamps coming hot off the USPS press.

“It takes 'em about six weeks to turn around from the time the stamp is issued until it's available in the United States as a counterfeit,” said Wayne Youngblood, a writer and philatelist — an expert in stamps.

What’s behind the surge in counterfeit stamps?

Youngblood said there has been an “explosion” in counterfeit stamps in recent years, mostly coming from China. Many also come from India, Barrigan-Husted said.

Federal postal agents seized more than 4.4 million fake stamps, worth more than $3 million, just in the first quarter of this fiscal year, according to Barrigan-Husted.

Why the surge? For one thing, they are not easy to detect. “ It's very difficult to tell unless we are analyzing these stamps side-by-side in our lab with very technical equipment,” Barrigan-Husted said.

Plus, she thinks the temptation might just be too great for those on a tight income.

“The economy has been rough ever since COVID,” Barrigan-Husted said. “People with no ill intentions are thinking that they can save some money here and there by cutting costs, and one of those ways of cutting costs is to get discounted stamps.”

‘It’s like wack-a-mole’

Shutting down the websites that sell fake stamps seems like an obvious answer to the problem, or so I thought.

“ We are doing our best to shut these websites down,” Barrigan-Husted said. “But there are millions of them that just keep popping up.”

Plus, the Postal Inspection Service that Barrigan-Husted works for is a small agency, with arguably bigger fish to fry.  They also investigate child exploitation crimes, money laundering, elicit drug trafficking and other major crimes associated with the mail system.

“And so those kinds of things kind of take their priority,” Youngblood said.

What happens if you use fake stamps?

Mail fraud is a federal crime. But postal agents are more focused on suppliers of counterfeit stamps than the often unwitting consumers who buy them. But Barrigan-Husted said your mail might be confiscated and even opened if it has a fake stamp on it. Or, it could be sent back.

She said consumers should also be wary of giving their credit card information to online businesses offering stamps that are too cheap to be legit.

“ The scammers are using that information as well,” Barrigan-Husted said.

In the end, the postal service is likely the biggest victim of the illicit stamp industry — Youngblood estimates that USPS loses more than $1 billion annually when people use counterfeit stamps instead of buying the real ones.

That loss also translates to higher prices for all mail users — including the continual rise in the cost of stamps.

“ We're having to make up for all of the counterfeit stamps that have gone through the mail stream,” Barrigan-Husted said, “we still have to make up that revenue.”

For me, this all translates into an excellent excuse not to send cards this year. It’s getting late anyway. Maybe next year.