State Policies Could Unlock the Potential of Manufactured Housing

The 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act, which was passed by Congress with broad bipartisan support and became law in July 2026, includes several provisions intended to expand the use of manufactured housing in the United States. However, many states will need to update their policies in accordance with the federal changes so that manufactured housing can grow. Individual states can prepare for and ultimately multiply the effect of federal legislation by passing laws and enacting policies that make it easier to install manufactured housing in more places. Some changes would cost little to nothing and could have a rapid effect.

Manufactured housing could help reduce the U.S. housing shortage, and particularly the shortage of homes priced within reach of moderate-income Americans. Manufactured homes can be constructed more quickly than site-built homes at just 35% to 73% of the cost. Built to standards established by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (the HUD Code), modern manufactured homes are of high quality and often energy efficient. Once installed, they can be indistinguishable from conventional homes.

In the past six years, at least a dozen states have adopted laws and developed programs designed to preserve existing manufactured homes and expand their use. To help more states take advantage of these opportunities, The Pew Charitable Trusts has collaborated with other nonprofit organizations to publish the State Policy Playbook for Manufactured Homes, which identifies five principal policy areas where states could preserve and develop manufactured housing.

The key recommendations from the policy playbook:

• Remove zoning and development financing barriers that limit the installation of manufactured housing.
• Replace aging manufactured homes with new ones and use manufactured housing to fill vacant lots in towns and cities.
• Expand mortgage access through state titling policy.
• Preserve manufactured home communities and improve resident stability.
• Systematically record and collect information about manufactured housing, just as governments track traditional housing.

The State Policy Playbook was developed by Pew, the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, the Next Step Network, and ROC USA, all of which are members of the Innovations in Manufactured and Modular Homes (I’m HOME) Network, an initiative that advances manufactured and modular housing as a key solution to the U.S. housing shortage. On May 27, 2026, Pew and Lincoln gathered builders, lenders, nonprofits, policymakers, and researchers to discuss policies and practices highlighted in the playbook.

Remove zoning and development financing barriers that limit the installation of manufactured homes

Outdated zoning and land use policies prohibit the installation of manufactured homes in most residential areas. These restrictions often reflect old perceptions of manufactured homes rather than the modern design and construction standards that exist today, limiting placement in neighborhoods where need is highest. The playbook suggests that states consider establishing zoning parity—allowing manufactured homes wherever comparable site-built homes are permitted. It also recommends that states develop financing programs designed to fit the differing needs and more rapid timelines of manufactured home development. Together, improved financing programs and zoning parity could expand the use of manufactured housing without the need for subsidies—a market-rate path to attainable homeownership.

Replace aging manufactured homes with new ones and use manufactured housing to fill vacant lots in towns and cities

Cities and towns could use manufactured housing to expedite construction on vacant lots and replace old, irreparable housing with new, cost-effective manufactured homes. If zoning policies were changed and the approval process was streamlined, many homes could be installed and sold without subsidy.

In some cases, however, public grants, subsidized financing, or technical assistance could greatly improve housing supply and quality. Public programs could, for example, help low-income homeowners whose manufactured homes are beyond repair by helping to pay for moving costs or providing access to financing. States and cities could also make manufactured housing more economically feasible by paying for the demolition of irreparable homes—both site-built and manufactured.

Pairing replacement with strategies that promote manufactured housing in locations that have existing infrastructure could improve living conditions and increase supply in a cost-effective and timely manner.

Expand mortgage access through state titling policy

All site-built homes are owned and titled as real estate, a requirement for homebuyers who wish to obtain a mortgage. But in most states, manufactured homes are initially titled as personal property, much as an automobile is. Although most states allow at least some owners to convert to real estate titling, policies vary widely, with limited effect. Nationwide, just 51% of manufactured home owners who borrowed money to acquire their home own it as real estate. 

Without access to mortgages, buyers must rely on higher-cost, less-protective types of financing. Changing how states title manufactured homes would require no subsidy and would expand access to private, state, and federal mortgage programs, saving borrowers money and providing more consumer protections, such as stronger safeguards against loss of the home in the event of missed payments. Research shows that mortgage financing can save buyers up to $50,000 over the life of a $100,000 loan, even when they don’t own the land on which their home is located.

Preserve manufactured home communities and improve resident stability

Nearly 40% of manufactured home residents live in a “land lease” community (often known colloquially as a mobile home park). Most residents of these communities own their homes but rent the land beneath them. Land lease communities can be excellent and affordable places to live. But without strong state protection policies, homeowners can sometimes face steep increases in lot rent with little or no notice, the unexpected sale of a community, and infrastructure deterioration—undermining long-term stability despite the relatively low cost of the manufactured home. At the same time, community owners need to operate profitably so they can afford to maintain infrastructure such as roads, pipes, and sewer systems.

To address these risks, states can strengthen tenant protections and, when necessary, support infrastructure upgrades. These approaches would help stabilize communities, limit unreasonable rent escalation, and preserve low-cost homes.

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac require similar tenant protections whenever they extend financing for the purchase of a manufactured home community (a loan for the land and infrastructure but usually not the homes). Examples of protections include renewable leases, advance notice of rent increases or a community sale, and the right of individual owners to sell their homes in place, rather than the costly requirement of having to move the house.

In addition, more than 20 states have enacted right-to-purchase or opportunity-to-purchase laws, which are designed to make it easier for residents to purchase the community. Common features of these laws include requiring a specific timeline for notice to residents before a sale, allowing a reasonable time for residents to obtain financing to purchase the community, or requiring owners to sell to residents who meet certain criteria.

Systematically record and collect information about manufactured housing, just as governments track traditional housing

Accurate, reliable, and up-to-date information about manufactured homes and manufactured home communities is crucial for owners, buyers, and policymakers alike. Public records help ensure clarity about a home’s ownership, its tax status, and any liens. Because many manufactured home owners don’t own their land, it’s also important to know where homes are located and how many are in land lease communities.

Unfortunately, most states do not collect and record information about manufactured homes and manufactured home ownership in the same way that they record information about other types of housing. For example, homes titled as real estate are recorded on a state’s registry of deeds, where ownership is public and easy to search, but homes titled as personal property are recorded at the Department of Motor Vehicles, where they are harder to track. And, while local governments always record who owns the land itself, public records don't always show the existence and location of a land lease community.

States could close these gaps by standardizing how information is collected and made available, requiring local governments to register all deeds and make transaction and ownership data public. Several states already do these things.

Table 1

Promising State Policy Approaches to Manufactured Housing

Examples of manufactured home policies by subject area and state

Conclusion

About 17 million people currently live in manufactured housing in the United States. With targeted, well-designed policy changes, many more Americans could have access to these comfortable, resilient, and affordably priced homes. The policies described in this analysis are not abstract: States could modernize zoning, support replacement and infill development, expand mortgage access, strengthen protections for residents of land lease communities, and improve the recordkeeping systems needed for effective oversight. Together, these reforms would treat manufactured housing as the durable, attainable housing resource that it is.

Rachel Siegel is a senior officer and Dennis Su is a senior associate with The Pew Charitable Trusts’ housing policy initiative.