Sullivan
Microsoft has discontinued support for Internet Explorer. To access the Sullivan website, please install a modern browser like Microsoft Edge or Google Chrome.

Biography

Karen has a general commercial real estate development and finance practice representing owners, developers and financial institutions in construction, term and bridge financing transactions for all commercial real estate asset classes. She also leads the firm's Affordable Housing and Community Development Group and has significant experience representing owners, developers, financial institutions and quasi-public agencies in HUD and Fannie Mae-financed developments, federal and state low income housing tax credit, historic tax credit and tax-exempt bond financed projects, New Markets Tax Credit developments and "Comprehensive Permit" projects under Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40B. Karen also has extensive experience structuring complex, multi-tiered and multi-phased projects using creative land use tools such as condominiums, air-rights and ground leases.

Karen is also co-chair of Sullivan's Women's Initiative and serves on the firm's Diversity, Equity & Inclusion Committee.

Education
  • Boston University School of Law (J.D.)
  • University of Massachusetts, Amherst (B.A., cum laude, Phi Beta Kappa)
Bar & Court Admissions
  • Massachusetts
  • U.S. District Court, District of Massachusetts
Professional Qualifications
  • Boston Bar Association, Co-Chair Real Estate Section, 2020-2021
  • American Bar Association, Forum on Affordable Housing, past Chair of Senior Housing Committee, 1997-present
  • Lawyers' Clearinghouse on Affordable Housing and Homelessness, Board Member and Past President
  • Lead-Boston Class of 2005-2006
  • Women's Bar Foundation of Massachusetts, Inc., Past President and Trustee, 2001-2005
  • Women's Bar Association of Massachusetts, Past President, 1989-1990
Awards & Honors
  • Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly, "Go To" Lawyer, Commercial Real Estate (2021)
  • Best Lawyers in America® (2018-2024, 2026-2027)
  • Recommended by The Legal 500 U.S. (2019, 2021-2026)
  • Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly, Top Women of Law (2016)
  • Massachusetts Super Lawyers (2004, 2014-2015)
Community Engagement
  • Town of Brookline, Housing Advisory Board, 2012-2018
Viewpoints
All Viewpoints
Impact of 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act on Institutional Investor Ownership of Single-Family Rental Homes
The U.S. Congress passed the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act (the “Housing Act”) and presented it to President Trump on June 29, 2026. At midnight on July 10, 2026, the Housing Act became law because the President did not return it to Congress within ten days (Sundays excepted). The Housing Act includes a wide range of housing reforms designed with the goal of making housing more available and affordable.  This alert focuses on the impact of the Housing Act on institutional investor ownership of single-family rental homes.  The Housing Act does not prohibit institutional investor ownership of manufactured homes. The section of the Housing Act impacting institutional investor ownership of single-family rental homes is Section 1001 (the Section is titled “Homes Are for People, Not Corporations”).  The primary impacts under Section 1001 are (i) a prohibition on purchases of single-family homes (with important exceptions) and (ii) the creation of a “Renter Outreach Resource” managed by the federal government.  Section 1001 uses a number of defined terms, which are summarized in Appendix A to this alert.  The defined terms are indicated in this alert in italics.  The most important – and most extensive – defined term is excepted purchase, which includes, among other programs, purchases of single-family homes pursuant to build-to-rent programs and purchases of single-family homes from other large institutional investors. No Requirement to Dispose When the U.S. Senate passed a version of the Housing Act in March 2026, the legislation included a controversial, perhaps even unconstitutional, provision requiring institutional investors to dispose of certain single-family homes not later than seven years after the date of purchase.  A relief to such institutional investors, the Housing Act, as enacted, does not include that requirement to dispose. Prohibition on Purchases (with Several Exceptions) The Housing Act prohibits the purchase of single-family homes by large institutional investors, excluding any excepted purchase or any purchase of a single-family home in connection with a restructuring or other reorganization of ownership of single-family homes that were owned or purchased on or before the date of enactment of the Housing Act.  The prohibition on purchases takes effect on January 7, 2027 (180 days after the date of enactment of the Housing Act) (the “Effective Date”) and is repealed on January 7, 2042 (15 years after the Effective Date). Excepted purchases (i.e., those not prohibited) are described in detail in Appendix A under the defined term “Excepted Purchase”, but generally include many of the common methods by which institutional investors in single-family rental homes acquire such homes, including but not limited to: (i) build‑to‑rent programs, (ii) renovate‑to‑rent programs, (iii) repossessions, (iv) foreclosures, (v) purchases from another large institutional investor, or (vi) combinations of (i) through (v). Enforcement of Prohibition on Purchases The Secretary of the Treasury, or the Attorney General at the request of the Secretary of the Treasury, may bring an action against a large institutional investor that violates the prohibition on purchases for a civil penalty in an amount that is not more than $1,000,000 per violation, or three times the purchase price of the property involved, whichever is greater. Renter Outreach Resource As described in detail below, the Renter Outreach Resource is a comprehensive program that includes direct reporting of rental disputes by renters to Federal agencies, with investigation and reporting requirements imposed on applicable Federal agencies, and (at a minimum) provision of applicable state agency contact information to renters to facilitate state-level investigation.  In addition, large institutional investors must respond to information requests in connection with any investigation and are required to regularly provide certain information regarding the Renter Outreach Resource to their renters. Establishment of Renter Outreach Resource The Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (the “HUD Secretary”) is required, not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of the Housing Act, to establish the Renter Outreach Resource that consists of a toll-free telephone number and a public website designed to assist renters of residential properties owned by a large institutional investor in –  notifying Federal agencies about disputes relating to the rental of such properties, including disputes about potential violations of Federal law; sharing information about such disputes with other Federal agencies, including other Federal agencies that manage similar disputes; monitoring such disputes; and resolving such disputes, to the extent practicable.   Response to Outreach The HUD Secretary is required to establish reasonable procedures to promptly respond, in writing where appropriate, to a renter who provides information to the HUD Secretary about a dispute using the Renter Outreach Resource and document such responses.  Such responses are required to include, where appropriate, information about –  steps that have been taken by the HUD Secretary or another Federal agency in response to the information about the dispute provided by the renter, including determining the appropriate large institutional investor involved as described in the bullet below “Investigation of Potential Violations of Federal Law;” any responses received by the HUD Secretary or another Federal agency from the large institutional investor related to such dispute; and any outcome of the dispute, to the extent practicable.   Investigation of Potential Violations of Federal Law The HUD Secretary is required to promptly process and investigate any information relating to a dispute received through the Renter Outreach Resource about a potential violation of Federal law that is received from a renter of a residential property owned by a large institutional investor through the Renter Outreach Resource, including –  requesting information from a large institutional investor; determining the appropriate large institutional investor involved in the dispute; and sharing information about such potential violation of Federal law with any relevant Federal agencies, as the HUD Secretary may determine appropriate.   Upon request for information made pursuant to the Renter Outreach Resource, the HUD Secretary is required to provide a large institutional investor the opportunity to respond, including regarding whether such large institutional investor currently owns the property described in such request for information.   Information for Appropriate State Authority When the HUD Secretary receives information about a potential violation of State law or about a dispute received through the Renter Outreach Resource, from a renter of a residential property owned by a large institutional investor through the Renter Outreach Resource, the HUD Secretary is required, at a minimum, to provide the renter with contact information for the appropriate, State-specific, State authority authorized to process and investigate such information.   Notice About Renter Outreach Resource Each large institutional investor is required to –  provide to each renter of a residential property owned by such investor at the time such renter first occupies such home and annually thereafter –  written notice about the Renter Outreach Resource; and the name, phone number, and email address of the person or entity responsible for receiving and addressing renter disputes for the large institutional investor, and update the name, phone number, and email address within 30 days if such information changes prior to the subsequent time at which such notice is required to be provided; and   prominently feature information about the Renter Outreach Resource on a public website of such investor that is accessible by such renter.   Annual Notification Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of the Housing Act, and not later than December 31st of each year thereafter, each person or entity that satisfies the definition of a large institutional investor is required to –  notify the HUD Secretary each year whether such owner is a large institutional investor; and in such notification, identify how many single-family homes such large institutional investor has direct or indirect investment control of as of the date of the submission of such notice, and the city and State where each such single-family home is located, unless such large institutional investor owns ten or fewer single-family homes in such city. Studies on Large Institutional Investors Not later than two years after the Effective Date, and again not later than ten years after the Effective Date, a GAO report and a HUD report are required to be submitted to the House Banking Committee and the Senate Committee on Financial Services. *     *     * Contacts Tax Cameron N. Cosby Carson Durdel Connie Lee Ameek Ashok Ponda Sarah D. Wellings Private Funds William C. Hanson Real Estate Karen J. Kepler Louis A. Monti John M. Steiner Appendix A Defined Terms in Section 1001 of the Housing Act Consumer Reporting Agency:  The term “consumer reporting agency” has the meaning given the term in section 603 of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. 1681a)). Excepted Purchase:  The term “excepted purchase” means any purchase of a single-family home that is –  Newly Constructed, For Sale Home Newly constructed, renovated, or a rental conversion for sale by a large institutional investor and not as a residence rented pending sale;   Build-to-Rent Program Pursuant to a build-to-rent program where the large institutional investor purchases newly constructed single-family homes to be managed as rental properties, whether as communities exclusively of renter-occupied single-family homes or as communities of single-family homes that are both owner- and renter-occupied;   Renovate-to-Rent Program Pursuant to a renovate-to-rent program that –  substantially rehabilitates single-family homes that do not meet structural or core system elements of local building codes; and makes improvements in an aggregate dollar amount of not less than 15% of the purchase price of the single-family home;   Homeownership Program Pursuant to a homeownership program that –  requires rental payments and any other fees that are not greater than those collected by the large institutional investor on other similarly situated single-family homes not covered by the eligible homeownership program; is subject to a contract between the large institutional investor and renter that shall be considered a consumer credit transaction secured by a dwelling or real property; provides for positive reporting of rental payments to consumer reporting agencies for any renter, who shall be informed of and opts into such reporting; and requires contribution of meaningful financial support from the large institutional investor, including price concessions, for the purchase of the single-family home by the renter;   Program to Boost Homeownership Pursuant to a program to boost homeownership that –  provides for positive reporting of rental payments to consumer reporting agencies for any renter who is informed of and opts into such reporting; provides for the right of first refusal and a 30-day ‘‘first look’’ period; and may entail the meaningful financial support from the large institutional investor, including price concessions, for the purchase of a single-family home by the renter (whether it is the home the renter occupies or another home);   Repossession In connection with the satisfaction of debts previously contracted in good faith and where the large institutional investor has the right to repossess the single-family home under such contract;   Foreclosure Undertaken by a mortgage servicer, lender, or other entity that has a legal right to a single-family home, for the purpose of loss mitigation or compliance with servicing or investor obligations, and not as a long-term investment strategy, and is solely as a result of –  a foreclosure; a deed-in-lieu of foreclosure; enforcement of a mortgage, deed of trust, or other security interest; or operation of law following borrower default;   Purchase from Another Large Institutional Investor Purchased from another large institutional investor that either owned the single-family home on the date of enactment of the Housing Act or purchased the single-family home in compliance with Section 1001;   Purchase from Investor Not a Large Institutional Investor Purchased from an investor not covered under Section 1001, so long as the purchase occurred not more than two years after the Effective Date;   Newly Constructed Single-Family Home in Senior Community Newly constructed, renovated, or a rental conversion that is intended and operated for occupancy as part of a community for households with one or more members aged 55 years or older, and satisfies visitability standards established by the HUD Secretary; or   Combination of Foregoing Purchases Purchased through a single purchase or combination or series of purchases described in the foregoing bullet points.   Large Institutional Investor:  The term “large institutional investor” means an investment fund, corporation, general or limited partnership, limited liability company, joint venture, association, or other for-profit entity that is a legal entity structured in a manner that is not aforementioned that –  is engaged, in whole or in part, in the business of investing in, owning, renting, managing, or holding single-family homes; and alone or in concert with one or more other entities, beginning after the date of enactment of the Housing Act, directly or indirectly has investment control of not less than 350 single-family homes in the aggregate, not including any single-family home purchased in an excepted purchase made after the date of enactment of the Housing Act.   A large institutional investor does not include any local, State, Tribal, or Federal government entity or instrumentality thereof. For purposes of the definition of “large institutional investor”, an entity has direct or indirect investment control over a single-family home if the entity –  owns, or has primary authority or fiduciary responsibility to make material investment or management decisions relating to, the single-family home; is, or directly or indirectly controls, the general partner or managing member of the entity that owns the single-family home; is or controls the investment manager, management company, or investment advisor of the entity that owns the single-family home; owns or controls more than 25% of any class of equity interests of the entity that owns the single-family home, unless such entity is a passive investor; or otherwise controls the entity that owns the single-family home.   Purchase:  The term “purchase” includes any purchase, transfer, or other acquisition of a single-family home, including through mergers, acquisitions, construction, foreclosures, or bulk purchases, whether or not for cash consideration.   Single-Family Home:  The term “single-family home” means a structure that contains two or fewer dwelling units that are each intended for residential occupancy by a single household.  The term “single-family home” does not include a manufactured home, as defined in section 603 of the National Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5402).
Housing Bill Becomes Law, But It’s Not Just About Housing
On Tuesday, August 6th, Governor Healey signed into law House Bill 4977, “An Act relative to the Affordable Homes Act.” The 181-page Bill provides for $5.1 billion in capital funding to support housing production and preservation in the Commonwealth which is almost triple the amount in prior authorizations. In addition to providing significant increases in funding for many existing affordable housing programs such as the Affordable Housing Trust ($800 million), the Housing Innovations Fund ($200 million) and the Housing Stabilization Fund ($425 million), the Act allocates over $150 million to programs that support and encourage mixed and middle-income housing development and innovation, and $275 million for climate related sustainability or “Green Housing” initiatives. The Act also creates new tax credit programs and increases funding for several existing credit programs. The lack of affordable housing at all income levels has been identified as a major factor affecting economic growth in the Commonwealth. A coalition of business leaders and housing advocates posits that 200,000 new housing units need to come online by 2030 to keep up with demand.[1] The new law represents a major step toward meeting this challenge. The new law also includes several important legislative initiatives that are not necessarily only about affordable housing. These include changes to the administration of registered land in the Commonwealth, changes to eviction processes and amendments to zoning and homestead laws. One important aspect of the legislation involves new procedures for withdrawing real estate from the operation of the Massachusetts Land Registration Act. Massachusetts has two separate land title systems— (1) unregistered land, whereby deeds, mortgages and other instruments affecting real estate title are recorded and indexed in a county registry of deeds, similar to the recording systems in most other states, and (2) registered land under the Massachusetts Land Registration Act, whereby the Land Court certifies ownership of the real estate on a “certificate of title.” Although land registration carries with it certain benefits for the owners of registered land, unregistered land can often be more desirable to avoid cumbersome and time-consuming administrative processes that are involved in transferring title or otherwise dealing with registered land. And, although neighboring parcels of real estate can be a mix of registered and unregistered land, it can often be beneficial (or even necessary) for development and/or re-subdivision for the adjacent parcels to either be all registered or all unregistered.  Under the old system, moving property from the land registration system into the unregistered system was only permitted under certain limited circumstances and often took many months, or even years, to accomplish. The new Act, however, provides for a streamlined process to de-register land without the need to satisfy one of the old statute’s limited conditions. Under the new system, the owner of registered real estate would simply file a Complaint and a Notice of Voluntary Withdrawal with the Land Court. The landowner would also either need to include a written assent from any mortgage lender and certain other parties with record interests in the property. Alternatively, the landowner could serve a copy of the Notice of Withdrawal on those parties, who would then have 30 days to object. Unless the Court receives an objection that is grounded in “good cause” or determines that it is necessary to appoint a title examiner to look into the property’s title in more detail, the Court must approve the de-registration within 30 days after it receives all necessary information (unless the Court determines “for good cause” that more time is needed).  The Act also makes a change to existing law to allow the state’s chief title examiner (or one of her deputies) to authorize corrections of clerical errors on certificates of title. Such corrections previously required filing a Complaint with the Land Court and obtaining a Court order. The Act also provides for a number of other changes to Massachusetts law that may be of interest to owners of real estate, including: An amendment to zoning law allowing owners of property zoned for single-family homes to construct an “accessory dwelling unit” (i.e., a separate apartment) on the property provided it is 900 square feet or less and satisfies certain other requirements; An amendment to the Homestead Act allowing homeowners in most circumstances to increase their “declared homestead exemption” from $500,000 to $1,000,000; and A new provision in landlord-tenant law, allowing evicted tenants to seal their eviction records, either immediately (in the case of what the Act calls a “no-fault eviction”) or after waiting 4 or 7 years after the eviction proceeding, depending on the circumstances. The Act was passed with an emergency preamble, meaning it took effect as soon as the Governor signed. However, many sections of the Act do not go into effect right away, and we expect that many aspects of the law may take some time to implement, particularly those requiring changes in Land Court forms and procedures. [1] See, e.g., Future of Work Commission, Final Report, March 2022, page 26 (“Executive Office of Housing and Economic Development Secretary Michael Kennealy testified that there will be an estimated shortage of 125,000-200,000 housing units by 2030”).
44 Sullivan & Worcester Lawyers Selected as “Best Lawyers” Award Recipients
Boston, MA – Sullivan & Worcester today announced that 44 lawyers were recognized in the 2027 edition of Best Lawyers in America®. 40 of the firm’s lawyers in Boston, New York and Washington, D.C. were selected as “Best Lawyers in America®,” and four Sullivan lawyers were recognized as “Ones to Watch” in the U.S. Best Lawyers in America® The firm’s 2027 Best Lawyers in Boston include Victor Baltera (Environmental Law, Real Estate Law); Howard Berkenblit (Corporate Governance Law, Corporate Law); Harvey Bines (Corporate Compliance Law, Corporate Governance Law, Corporate Law); Ashley Brooks (Real Estate Law); Joel Carpenter (Tax Law); Henry Comstock, Jr. (Trusts and Estates); Christopher Curtis (Tax Law); Patrick Dinardo (Bankruptcy and Creditor Debtor Rights / Insolvency and Reorganization Law, Litigation - Bankruptcy); John Graham (Nonprofit / Charities Law, Tax Law); David Guadagnoli (Employee Benefits (ERISA) Law, Tax Law); Warren Heilbronner (Real Estate Law); Zachary Hyde (Patent Law); Richard Jones (Tax Law); Karen Kepler (Real Estate Law); Caroline Kupiec (Tax Law); Thomas Meyers (Patent Law); Lisa Mingolla (Trusts and Estates); Louis Monti (Real Estate Law); Cornelius Murray III (Trusts and Estates); David Nagle (Litigation and Controversy - Tax, Tax Law); Ameek Ashok Ponda (Tax Law); Gregory Sampson (Environmental Law, Land Use and Zoning Law, Real Estate Law); Lewis Segall (Corporate Law, Mergers and Acquisitions Law); Amy Sheridan (Employee Benefits (ERISA) Law, Tax Law); Laura Steinberg (Commercial Litigation); John Steiner (Real Estate Law); Douglas Stransky (Tax Law); Sarah Wellings (Tax Law); and Amy Zuccarello (Bankruptcy and Creditor Debtor Rights / Insolvency and Reorganization Law, Litigation - Bankruptcy). Sullivan’s 2027 Best Lawyers in Washington, D.C. include John Chilton (Mutual Funds Law); Cameron Cosby (Tax Law); Nicole Crum (Mutual Funds Law); David Leahy (Mutual Funds Law); David Mahaffey (Mutual Funds Law, Securities Regulation); and Stephanie Monaco (Corporate Law, Mutual Funds Law, Private Funds / Hedge Funds Law, Securities Regulation). The firm’s 2027 Best Lawyers in New York include Carole Bass (Trusts and Estates); J. Truman Bidwell, Jr. (Corporate Law); Domenick Pugliese (Mutual Funds Law); Constantine Ralli (Trusts and Estates); and Marc Stern (Trusts and Estates). Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch Awardees Best Lawyers awards this recognition to attorneys who are earlier in their careers for their outstanding professional excellence in private practice in the United States. Sullivan’s lawyers earning this award include Alexander Gansebom (Corporate Governance and Compliance Law, Corporate Law, Health Care Law, Mergers and Acquisitions Law, Real Estate Law); Emily Goldschmidt (Corporate Law); Ryan Rosenblatt (Commercial Litigation); and Ashley Tan (Real Estate Law). Best Lawyers Selection Methodology Recognition by Best Lawyers in America® is based on a peer review process designed to capture the consensus opinion of leading lawyers about the professional abilities of their colleagues within the same geographical and legal practice areas. About Sullivan Sullivan & Worcester (Sullivan) is a premier, AmLaw 200 international law firm with lawyers in Boston, London, New York, Tel Aviv and Washington, D.C. Sullivan’s clients, including Fortune 500 companies, leading financial services firms and asset managers, boards of directors, real estate companies, and emerging businesses, rely on Sullivan’s ability to navigate complex legal and operational landscapes, the impeccable judgment of its lawyers, and its commitment to best-in-class client service.
Sullivan & Worcester Selected for Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly “Empowering Women” Award
Boston, MA – Sullivan & Worcester has been selected by Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly for its "Empowering Women" award for the fourth consecutive year, recognizing the firm’s ongoing commitment to elevating, supporting, and empowering women in the legal profession. The annual recognition honors law firms that have demonstrated a strong commitment to supporting women in the profession by fostering opportunities for leadership, professional development, mentorship, and career advancement. “This honor underscores Sullivan’s long-term dedication to equity and inclusion and reflects the culture and values that define us as an organization,” said Erika L. Todd, co-chair of the firm’s Women’s Initiative. “We believe that creating an environment where women can thrive professionally and personally is the right thing to do. It also strengthens our firm, enhances the service we provide our clients, and helps positively shape the future of the legal profession.” The honor reflects Sullivan’s sustained focus on cultivating an inclusive workplace where talented attorneys have the resources, support, and opportunities to build successful, fulfilling careers. “As a firm, we are dedicated to making sure that women are empowered to lead and make meaningful contributions,” said Karen J. Kepler, co-chair of the Women’s Initiative. “At Sullivan, women have a place at the table, where their voices are heard, their perspectives are valued, and their leadership helps shape our future.” Through its Women’s Initiative, the firm gives women a platform to share their career insights, brings attorneys together for enrichment and networking, and celebrates its female clients. Sullivan’s influence extends into the community through its support and involvement in numerous civic and philanthropic initiatives that combat inequality. The Women’s Initiative partners with the Boston Chamber of Commerce Women’s Network, American Bar Association Women Rainmakers Committee, and CREW Boston. About Sullivan Sullivan & Worcester (Sullivan) is a premier, AmLaw 200 international law firm with lawyers in Boston, London, New York, Tel Aviv and Washington, D.C. Sullivan’s clients, including Fortune 500 companies, leading financial services firms and asset managers, boards of directors, real estate companies, and emerging businesses, rely on Sullivan’s ability to navigate complex legal and operational landscapes, the impeccable judgment of its lawyers, and its commitment to best-in-class client service.

Karen J. Kepler

Karen has a general commercial real estate development and finance practice representing owners, developers and financial institutions in construction, term and bridge financing transactions for all commercial real estate asset classes. She also leads the firm's Affordable Housing and Community Development Group and has significant experience representing owners, developers, financial institutions and quasi-public agencies in HUD and Fannie Mae-financed developments, federal and state low income housing tax credit, historic tax credit and tax-exempt bond financed projects, New Markets Tax Credit developments and "Comprehensive Permit" projects under Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40B. Karen also has extensive experience structuring complex, multi-tiered and multi-phased projects using creative land use tools such as condominiums, air-rights and ground leases.

Karen is also co-chair of Sullivan's Women's Initiative and serves on the firm's Diversity, Equity & Inclusion Committee.

Viewpoints
All Viewpoints
Impact of 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act on Institutional Investor Ownership of Single-Family Rental Homes
The U.S. Congress passed the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act (the “Housing Act”) and presented it to President Trump on June 29, 2026. At midnight on July 10, 2026, the Housing Act became law because the President did not return it to Congress within ten days (Sundays excepted). The Housing Act includes a wide range of housing reforms designed with the goal of making housing more available and affordable.  This alert focuses on the impact of the Housing Act on institutional investor ownership of single-family rental homes.  The Housing Act does not prohibit institutional investor ownership of manufactured homes. The section of the Housing Act impacting institutional investor ownership of single-family rental homes is Section 1001 (the Section is titled “Homes Are for People, Not Corporations”).  The primary impacts under Section 1001 are (i) a prohibition on purchases of single-family homes (with important exceptions) and (ii) the creation of a “Renter Outreach Resource” managed by the federal government.  Section 1001 uses a number of defined terms, which are summarized in Appendix A to this alert.  The defined terms are indicated in this alert in italics.  The most important – and most extensive – defined term is excepted purchase, which includes, among other programs, purchases of single-family homes pursuant to build-to-rent programs and purchases of single-family homes from other large institutional investors. No Requirement to Dispose When the U.S. Senate passed a version of the Housing Act in March 2026, the legislation included a controversial, perhaps even unconstitutional, provision requiring institutional investors to dispose of certain single-family homes not later than seven years after the date of purchase.  A relief to such institutional investors, the Housing Act, as enacted, does not include that requirement to dispose. Prohibition on Purchases (with Several Exceptions) The Housing Act prohibits the purchase of single-family homes by large institutional investors, excluding any excepted purchase or any purchase of a single-family home in connection with a restructuring or other reorganization of ownership of single-family homes that were owned or purchased on or before the date of enactment of the Housing Act.  The prohibition on purchases takes effect on January 7, 2027 (180 days after the date of enactment of the Housing Act) (the “Effective Date”) and is repealed on January 7, 2042 (15 years after the Effective Date). Excepted purchases (i.e., those not prohibited) are described in detail in Appendix A under the defined term “Excepted Purchase”, but generally include many of the common methods by which institutional investors in single-family rental homes acquire such homes, including but not limited to: (i) build‑to‑rent programs, (ii) renovate‑to‑rent programs, (iii) repossessions, (iv) foreclosures, (v) purchases from another large institutional investor, or (vi) combinations of (i) through (v). Enforcement of Prohibition on Purchases The Secretary of the Treasury, or the Attorney General at the request of the Secretary of the Treasury, may bring an action against a large institutional investor that violates the prohibition on purchases for a civil penalty in an amount that is not more than $1,000,000 per violation, or three times the purchase price of the property involved, whichever is greater. Renter Outreach Resource As described in detail below, the Renter Outreach Resource is a comprehensive program that includes direct reporting of rental disputes by renters to Federal agencies, with investigation and reporting requirements imposed on applicable Federal agencies, and (at a minimum) provision of applicable state agency contact information to renters to facilitate state-level investigation.  In addition, large institutional investors must respond to information requests in connection with any investigation and are required to regularly provide certain information regarding the Renter Outreach Resource to their renters. Establishment of Renter Outreach Resource The Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (the “HUD Secretary”) is required, not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of the Housing Act, to establish the Renter Outreach Resource that consists of a toll-free telephone number and a public website designed to assist renters of residential properties owned by a large institutional investor in –  notifying Federal agencies about disputes relating to the rental of such properties, including disputes about potential violations of Federal law; sharing information about such disputes with other Federal agencies, including other Federal agencies that manage similar disputes; monitoring such disputes; and resolving such disputes, to the extent practicable.   Response to Outreach The HUD Secretary is required to establish reasonable procedures to promptly respond, in writing where appropriate, to a renter who provides information to the HUD Secretary about a dispute using the Renter Outreach Resource and document such responses.  Such responses are required to include, where appropriate, information about –  steps that have been taken by the HUD Secretary or another Federal agency in response to the information about the dispute provided by the renter, including determining the appropriate large institutional investor involved as described in the bullet below “Investigation of Potential Violations of Federal Law;” any responses received by the HUD Secretary or another Federal agency from the large institutional investor related to such dispute; and any outcome of the dispute, to the extent practicable.   Investigation of Potential Violations of Federal Law The HUD Secretary is required to promptly process and investigate any information relating to a dispute received through the Renter Outreach Resource about a potential violation of Federal law that is received from a renter of a residential property owned by a large institutional investor through the Renter Outreach Resource, including –  requesting information from a large institutional investor; determining the appropriate large institutional investor involved in the dispute; and sharing information about such potential violation of Federal law with any relevant Federal agencies, as the HUD Secretary may determine appropriate.   Upon request for information made pursuant to the Renter Outreach Resource, the HUD Secretary is required to provide a large institutional investor the opportunity to respond, including regarding whether such large institutional investor currently owns the property described in such request for information.   Information for Appropriate State Authority When the HUD Secretary receives information about a potential violation of State law or about a dispute received through the Renter Outreach Resource, from a renter of a residential property owned by a large institutional investor through the Renter Outreach Resource, the HUD Secretary is required, at a minimum, to provide the renter with contact information for the appropriate, State-specific, State authority authorized to process and investigate such information.   Notice About Renter Outreach Resource Each large institutional investor is required to –  provide to each renter of a residential property owned by such investor at the time such renter first occupies such home and annually thereafter –  written notice about the Renter Outreach Resource; and the name, phone number, and email address of the person or entity responsible for receiving and addressing renter disputes for the large institutional investor, and update the name, phone number, and email address within 30 days if such information changes prior to the subsequent time at which such notice is required to be provided; and   prominently feature information about the Renter Outreach Resource on a public website of such investor that is accessible by such renter.   Annual Notification Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of the Housing Act, and not later than December 31st of each year thereafter, each person or entity that satisfies the definition of a large institutional investor is required to –  notify the HUD Secretary each year whether such owner is a large institutional investor; and in such notification, identify how many single-family homes such large institutional investor has direct or indirect investment control of as of the date of the submission of such notice, and the city and State where each such single-family home is located, unless such large institutional investor owns ten or fewer single-family homes in such city. Studies on Large Institutional Investors Not later than two years after the Effective Date, and again not later than ten years after the Effective Date, a GAO report and a HUD report are required to be submitted to the House Banking Committee and the Senate Committee on Financial Services. *     *     * Contacts Tax Cameron N. Cosby Carson Durdel Connie Lee Ameek Ashok Ponda Sarah D. Wellings Private Funds William C. Hanson Real Estate Karen J. Kepler Louis A. Monti John M. Steiner Appendix A Defined Terms in Section 1001 of the Housing Act Consumer Reporting Agency:  The term “consumer reporting agency” has the meaning given the term in section 603 of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. 1681a)). Excepted Purchase:  The term “excepted purchase” means any purchase of a single-family home that is –  Newly Constructed, For Sale Home Newly constructed, renovated, or a rental conversion for sale by a large institutional investor and not as a residence rented pending sale;   Build-to-Rent Program Pursuant to a build-to-rent program where the large institutional investor purchases newly constructed single-family homes to be managed as rental properties, whether as communities exclusively of renter-occupied single-family homes or as communities of single-family homes that are both owner- and renter-occupied;   Renovate-to-Rent Program Pursuant to a renovate-to-rent program that –  substantially rehabilitates single-family homes that do not meet structural or core system elements of local building codes; and makes improvements in an aggregate dollar amount of not less than 15% of the purchase price of the single-family home;   Homeownership Program Pursuant to a homeownership program that –  requires rental payments and any other fees that are not greater than those collected by the large institutional investor on other similarly situated single-family homes not covered by the eligible homeownership program; is subject to a contract between the large institutional investor and renter that shall be considered a consumer credit transaction secured by a dwelling or real property; provides for positive reporting of rental payments to consumer reporting agencies for any renter, who shall be informed of and opts into such reporting; and requires contribution of meaningful financial support from the large institutional investor, including price concessions, for the purchase of the single-family home by the renter;   Program to Boost Homeownership Pursuant to a program to boost homeownership that –  provides for positive reporting of rental payments to consumer reporting agencies for any renter who is informed of and opts into such reporting; provides for the right of first refusal and a 30-day ‘‘first look’’ period; and may entail the meaningful financial support from the large institutional investor, including price concessions, for the purchase of a single-family home by the renter (whether it is the home the renter occupies or another home);   Repossession In connection with the satisfaction of debts previously contracted in good faith and where the large institutional investor has the right to repossess the single-family home under such contract;   Foreclosure Undertaken by a mortgage servicer, lender, or other entity that has a legal right to a single-family home, for the purpose of loss mitigation or compliance with servicing or investor obligations, and not as a long-term investment strategy, and is solely as a result of –  a foreclosure; a deed-in-lieu of foreclosure; enforcement of a mortgage, deed of trust, or other security interest; or operation of law following borrower default;   Purchase from Another Large Institutional Investor Purchased from another large institutional investor that either owned the single-family home on the date of enactment of the Housing Act or purchased the single-family home in compliance with Section 1001;   Purchase from Investor Not a Large Institutional Investor Purchased from an investor not covered under Section 1001, so long as the purchase occurred not more than two years after the Effective Date;   Newly Constructed Single-Family Home in Senior Community Newly constructed, renovated, or a rental conversion that is intended and operated for occupancy as part of a community for households with one or more members aged 55 years or older, and satisfies visitability standards established by the HUD Secretary; or   Combination of Foregoing Purchases Purchased through a single purchase or combination or series of purchases described in the foregoing bullet points.   Large Institutional Investor:  The term “large institutional investor” means an investment fund, corporation, general or limited partnership, limited liability company, joint venture, association, or other for-profit entity that is a legal entity structured in a manner that is not aforementioned that –  is engaged, in whole or in part, in the business of investing in, owning, renting, managing, or holding single-family homes; and alone or in concert with one or more other entities, beginning after the date of enactment of the Housing Act, directly or indirectly has investment control of not less than 350 single-family homes in the aggregate, not including any single-family home purchased in an excepted purchase made after the date of enactment of the Housing Act.   A large institutional investor does not include any local, State, Tribal, or Federal government entity or instrumentality thereof. For purposes of the definition of “large institutional investor”, an entity has direct or indirect investment control over a single-family home if the entity –  owns, or has primary authority or fiduciary responsibility to make material investment or management decisions relating to, the single-family home; is, or directly or indirectly controls, the general partner or managing member of the entity that owns the single-family home; is or controls the investment manager, management company, or investment advisor of the entity that owns the single-family home; owns or controls more than 25% of any class of equity interests of the entity that owns the single-family home, unless such entity is a passive investor; or otherwise controls the entity that owns the single-family home.   Purchase:  The term “purchase” includes any purchase, transfer, or other acquisition of a single-family home, including through mergers, acquisitions, construction, foreclosures, or bulk purchases, whether or not for cash consideration.   Single-Family Home:  The term “single-family home” means a structure that contains two or fewer dwelling units that are each intended for residential occupancy by a single household.  The term “single-family home” does not include a manufactured home, as defined in section 603 of the National Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5402).
Housing Bill Becomes Law, But It’s Not Just About Housing
On Tuesday, August 6th, Governor Healey signed into law House Bill 4977, “An Act relative to the Affordable Homes Act.” The 181-page Bill provides for $5.1 billion in capital funding to support housing production and preservation in the Commonwealth which is almost triple the amount in prior authorizations. In addition to providing significant increases in funding for many existing affordable housing programs such as the Affordable Housing Trust ($800 million), the Housing Innovations Fund ($200 million) and the Housing Stabilization Fund ($425 million), the Act allocates over $150 million to programs that support and encourage mixed and middle-income housing development and innovation, and $275 million for climate related sustainability or “Green Housing” initiatives. The Act also creates new tax credit programs and increases funding for several existing credit programs. The lack of affordable housing at all income levels has been identified as a major factor affecting economic growth in the Commonwealth. A coalition of business leaders and housing advocates posits that 200,000 new housing units need to come online by 2030 to keep up with demand.[1] The new law represents a major step toward meeting this challenge. The new law also includes several important legislative initiatives that are not necessarily only about affordable housing. These include changes to the administration of registered land in the Commonwealth, changes to eviction processes and amendments to zoning and homestead laws. One important aspect of the legislation involves new procedures for withdrawing real estate from the operation of the Massachusetts Land Registration Act. Massachusetts has two separate land title systems— (1) unregistered land, whereby deeds, mortgages and other instruments affecting real estate title are recorded and indexed in a county registry of deeds, similar to the recording systems in most other states, and (2) registered land under the Massachusetts Land Registration Act, whereby the Land Court certifies ownership of the real estate on a “certificate of title.” Although land registration carries with it certain benefits for the owners of registered land, unregistered land can often be more desirable to avoid cumbersome and time-consuming administrative processes that are involved in transferring title or otherwise dealing with registered land. And, although neighboring parcels of real estate can be a mix of registered and unregistered land, it can often be beneficial (or even necessary) for development and/or re-subdivision for the adjacent parcels to either be all registered or all unregistered.  Under the old system, moving property from the land registration system into the unregistered system was only permitted under certain limited circumstances and often took many months, or even years, to accomplish. The new Act, however, provides for a streamlined process to de-register land without the need to satisfy one of the old statute’s limited conditions. Under the new system, the owner of registered real estate would simply file a Complaint and a Notice of Voluntary Withdrawal with the Land Court. The landowner would also either need to include a written assent from any mortgage lender and certain other parties with record interests in the property. Alternatively, the landowner could serve a copy of the Notice of Withdrawal on those parties, who would then have 30 days to object. Unless the Court receives an objection that is grounded in “good cause” or determines that it is necessary to appoint a title examiner to look into the property’s title in more detail, the Court must approve the de-registration within 30 days after it receives all necessary information (unless the Court determines “for good cause” that more time is needed).  The Act also makes a change to existing law to allow the state’s chief title examiner (or one of her deputies) to authorize corrections of clerical errors on certificates of title. Such corrections previously required filing a Complaint with the Land Court and obtaining a Court order. The Act also provides for a number of other changes to Massachusetts law that may be of interest to owners of real estate, including: An amendment to zoning law allowing owners of property zoned for single-family homes to construct an “accessory dwelling unit” (i.e., a separate apartment) on the property provided it is 900 square feet or less and satisfies certain other requirements; An amendment to the Homestead Act allowing homeowners in most circumstances to increase their “declared homestead exemption” from $500,000 to $1,000,000; and A new provision in landlord-tenant law, allowing evicted tenants to seal their eviction records, either immediately (in the case of what the Act calls a “no-fault eviction”) or after waiting 4 or 7 years after the eviction proceeding, depending on the circumstances. The Act was passed with an emergency preamble, meaning it took effect as soon as the Governor signed. However, many sections of the Act do not go into effect right away, and we expect that many aspects of the law may take some time to implement, particularly those requiring changes in Land Court forms and procedures. [1] See, e.g., Future of Work Commission, Final Report, March 2022, page 26 (“Executive Office of Housing and Economic Development Secretary Michael Kennealy testified that there will be an estimated shortage of 125,000-200,000 housing units by 2030”).
44 Sullivan & Worcester Lawyers Selected as “Best Lawyers” Award Recipients
Boston, MA – Sullivan & Worcester today announced that 44 lawyers were recognized in the 2027 edition of Best Lawyers in America®. 40 of the firm’s lawyers in Boston, New York and Washington, D.C. were selected as “Best Lawyers in America®,” and four Sullivan lawyers were recognized as “Ones to Watch” in the U.S. Best Lawyers in America® The firm’s 2027 Best Lawyers in Boston include Victor Baltera (Environmental Law, Real Estate Law); Howard Berkenblit (Corporate Governance Law, Corporate Law); Harvey Bines (Corporate Compliance Law, Corporate Governance Law, Corporate Law); Ashley Brooks (Real Estate Law); Joel Carpenter (Tax Law); Henry Comstock, Jr. (Trusts and Estates); Christopher Curtis (Tax Law); Patrick Dinardo (Bankruptcy and Creditor Debtor Rights / Insolvency and Reorganization Law, Litigation - Bankruptcy); John Graham (Nonprofit / Charities Law, Tax Law); David Guadagnoli (Employee Benefits (ERISA) Law, Tax Law); Warren Heilbronner (Real Estate Law); Zachary Hyde (Patent Law); Richard Jones (Tax Law); Karen Kepler (Real Estate Law); Caroline Kupiec (Tax Law); Thomas Meyers (Patent Law); Lisa Mingolla (Trusts and Estates); Louis Monti (Real Estate Law); Cornelius Murray III (Trusts and Estates); David Nagle (Litigation and Controversy - Tax, Tax Law); Ameek Ashok Ponda (Tax Law); Gregory Sampson (Environmental Law, Land Use and Zoning Law, Real Estate Law); Lewis Segall (Corporate Law, Mergers and Acquisitions Law); Amy Sheridan (Employee Benefits (ERISA) Law, Tax Law); Laura Steinberg (Commercial Litigation); John Steiner (Real Estate Law); Douglas Stransky (Tax Law); Sarah Wellings (Tax Law); and Amy Zuccarello (Bankruptcy and Creditor Debtor Rights / Insolvency and Reorganization Law, Litigation - Bankruptcy). Sullivan’s 2027 Best Lawyers in Washington, D.C. include John Chilton (Mutual Funds Law); Cameron Cosby (Tax Law); Nicole Crum (Mutual Funds Law); David Leahy (Mutual Funds Law); David Mahaffey (Mutual Funds Law, Securities Regulation); and Stephanie Monaco (Corporate Law, Mutual Funds Law, Private Funds / Hedge Funds Law, Securities Regulation). The firm’s 2027 Best Lawyers in New York include Carole Bass (Trusts and Estates); J. Truman Bidwell, Jr. (Corporate Law); Domenick Pugliese (Mutual Funds Law); Constantine Ralli (Trusts and Estates); and Marc Stern (Trusts and Estates). Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch Awardees Best Lawyers awards this recognition to attorneys who are earlier in their careers for their outstanding professional excellence in private practice in the United States. Sullivan’s lawyers earning this award include Alexander Gansebom (Corporate Governance and Compliance Law, Corporate Law, Health Care Law, Mergers and Acquisitions Law, Real Estate Law); Emily Goldschmidt (Corporate Law); Ryan Rosenblatt (Commercial Litigation); and Ashley Tan (Real Estate Law). Best Lawyers Selection Methodology Recognition by Best Lawyers in America® is based on a peer review process designed to capture the consensus opinion of leading lawyers about the professional abilities of their colleagues within the same geographical and legal practice areas. About Sullivan Sullivan & Worcester (Sullivan) is a premier, AmLaw 200 international law firm with lawyers in Boston, London, New York, Tel Aviv and Washington, D.C. Sullivan’s clients, including Fortune 500 companies, leading financial services firms and asset managers, boards of directors, real estate companies, and emerging businesses, rely on Sullivan’s ability to navigate complex legal and operational landscapes, the impeccable judgment of its lawyers, and its commitment to best-in-class client service.
Sullivan & Worcester Selected for Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly “Empowering Women” Award
Boston, MA – Sullivan & Worcester has been selected by Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly for its "Empowering Women" award for the fourth consecutive year, recognizing the firm’s ongoing commitment to elevating, supporting, and empowering women in the legal profession. The annual recognition honors law firms that have demonstrated a strong commitment to supporting women in the profession by fostering opportunities for leadership, professional development, mentorship, and career advancement. “This honor underscores Sullivan’s long-term dedication to equity and inclusion and reflects the culture and values that define us as an organization,” said Erika L. Todd, co-chair of the firm’s Women’s Initiative. “We believe that creating an environment where women can thrive professionally and personally is the right thing to do. It also strengthens our firm, enhances the service we provide our clients, and helps positively shape the future of the legal profession.” The honor reflects Sullivan’s sustained focus on cultivating an inclusive workplace where talented attorneys have the resources, support, and opportunities to build successful, fulfilling careers. “As a firm, we are dedicated to making sure that women are empowered to lead and make meaningful contributions,” said Karen J. Kepler, co-chair of the Women’s Initiative. “At Sullivan, women have a place at the table, where their voices are heard, their perspectives are valued, and their leadership helps shape our future.” Through its Women’s Initiative, the firm gives women a platform to share their career insights, brings attorneys together for enrichment and networking, and celebrates its female clients. Sullivan’s influence extends into the community through its support and involvement in numerous civic and philanthropic initiatives that combat inequality. The Women’s Initiative partners with the Boston Chamber of Commerce Women’s Network, American Bar Association Women Rainmakers Committee, and CREW Boston. About Sullivan Sullivan & Worcester (Sullivan) is a premier, AmLaw 200 international law firm with lawyers in Boston, London, New York, Tel Aviv and Washington, D.C. Sullivan’s clients, including Fortune 500 companies, leading financial services firms and asset managers, boards of directors, real estate companies, and emerging businesses, rely on Sullivan’s ability to navigate complex legal and operational landscapes, the impeccable judgment of its lawyers, and its commitment to best-in-class client service.

Karen J. Kepler