Fiscal impact reports (FIRs) are prepared by the Legislative Finance Committee (LFC) for standing finance
committees of the Legislature. LFC does not assume responsibility for the accuracy of these reports if they
are used for other purposes.
F I S C A L I M P A C T R E P O R T
SPONSOR Cates
LAST UPDATED
ORIGINAL DATE 1/24/25
SHORT TITLE
Housing Income to Rent Screening
Calculations
BILL
NUMBER House Bill 43
ANALYST Hilla
ESTIMATED ADDITIONAL OPERATING BUDGET IMPACT*
(dollars in thousands)
Agency/Program
FY25 FY26 FY27
3 Year
Total Cost
Recurring or
Nonrecurring
Fund
Affected
NMFA
No fiscal
impact
No fiscal
impact
No fiscal
impact
$0 Recurring General Fund
Total
No fiscal
impact
No fiscal
impact
No fiscal
impact
$0 Recurring General Fund
Parentheses ( ) indicate expenditure decreases.
*Amounts reflect most recent analysis of this legislation.
Sources of Information
Agency Analysis Received From New Mexico Finance Authority (NMFA) Aging and Long-Term Services Department (ALTSD)
Office of Housing (HOU)
New Mexico Attorney General (AG)
SUMMARY
Synopsis of House Bill 43
House Bill 43 (HB43) adds a new section to the Uniform Owner-Resident Relations Act (47-8-1
through 47-8-51 NMSA 1978) defining rental dwelling unit applicant income screening. The bill
defines income screening as “an evaluation that calculates, examines, and validates an applicant's
income and ability to reliably make payments of rent to the owner.” HB43 requires an owner or
owner’s agent to subtract federal, state, local, or tribal housing assistance from the total amount
of rent payment before calculating a ratio of income to rent for an income screening. The bill
also requires income screening to include as a source of income money derived from lawful
possession, occupation or job, pension, annuity, alimony, child support, or any other recurring,
lawful, and verifiable monetary consideration, provided the applicant can provide documentation
of the income.
This bill does not contain an effective date and, as a result, would go into effect 90 days after the
Legislature adjourns if enacted, or June 20, 2025.
House Bill 43 – Page 2
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS
HB43 does not appropriate state funds, generate revenue for the state, or impact the state
government operating budget.
SIGNIFICANT ISSUES
The Aging and Long-Term Services Department (ALTSD) states that older adults and adults
with disabilities face barriers to securing affordable housing. According to ALTSD, 33.8 percent
of New Mexican households house one or more persons 65 years of age or older, with the
national average being 11.5 percent. Of New Mexico senior households, 41.8 percent earn less
than $40 thousand annually. The department adds, “recent data indicates a deficit of
approximately 41,090 rental homes affordable and available for extremely low-income renters.
Further, rising rents are outpacing wage growth and are putting low-income renters at greater
risk, as shown by a 14.5 percent increase in median rent from 2018 to 2022.”
The New Mexico Finance Authority states “the income to rent ratio for a prospective tenant
earning $1,500 a month seeking to rent a unit with a monthly rent of $1,500 is 1 to 1 ($1,500 /
$1,500), even if the prospective tenant has a housing voucher that provides a $1,000 monthly
rent subsidy. Were the bill to be passed, the ratio would be 3 to 1 ($1,500 / ($1,500 - $1,000)).”
Both agencies state that HB43 would allow access to housing for voucher holders and low-
income individuals and families. ALTSD says the bill could reduce reliance on emergency
housing and shelter services funded by public and non-profit programs.
The bill could lead to one-time costs for rental owners implementing systems to calculate the
new income screening formula.
ADMINISTRATIVE IMPLICATIONS
ALTSD states HB43 would improve the ability of its Adult Protective Services Program to
further advocate for clients facing housing insecurity or homelessness.
OTHER SUBSTANT IVE ISSUES
The New Mexico Attorney General states:
[HB34] could be confusing to interpret/apply due to the ambiguity of the words
“calculation of the remaining ratio of income to rent-payment-due” and the
characterization of housing assistance as “income” in Subsection B (1), read together
with the listed sources of income in B (2). It is not clear whether the applicant’s total
income used in the calculation must include the housing assistance (presumably not,
since it is being subtracted from the rent), or what type of calculation is permissible.
The Office of Housing states that HB43 creates a “statewide source of income protection,” which
would prevent discrimination.
EH/rl/SL2