Taxpayers are covering rents of up to $6,020 per month in Arizona, leading taxpayer advocates to question the growing duration of federal Section 8 housing choice voucher (HCV) usage.
“Section 8 needs to focus on lifting people out of the trap of poverty, not putting them into the lap of luxury,” said National Taxpayers Union president Pete Sepp in an interview with The Center Square. “It’s unfair to ask taxpayers who can’t afford mortgages or rents of six thousand dollars per month to foot the bill for subsidies amounting to that much.”
HCV recipients remain in the program for an average of 15.1 years — that’s up from an average of 12.4 years in 2000, according to a 2024 federal report.
When asked about a 2026 budget proposal from the Trump administration that would limit Section 8 assistance to two years, U.S. Housing and Urban Development Secretary Scott Turner recounted his meeting with a recipient whose family had been housed by the program for multiple generations.
“She’s 52 years old, she’s been living there since 1973. She’s able-bodied, able-minded. She was raised there. She lived there. Now she’s raising her children there,” said Turner in a video his office posted to X on August 25, recounting a meeting with a multi-generational federal housing recipient. “That’s three generations living on government subsidies that are able bodied, able minded.”
“Time limits are kind of an encouragement, like ‘hey, you can do this,’” continued Turner. “We’re not just telling you to work, we’re going to have workforce training around you, we’re going to have skill training around you to get out of government subsidies, to live a life of self-sustainability.”
While the NYU Furman Center warns the change could push 1.1 million households out of the program, taxpayer advocates say some kind of time limits are necessary to prevent intergenerational dependency on the program.
“Congressional overseers are right to ask a question about whether there needs to be a rational time limit,” Sepp said. “It may not be two years, but it can’t be two or three generations.”
The federally funded Section 8 housing assistance program covers up to 110% of 40th percentile rents in the local area, with recipients’ out-of-pocket costs capped at 30% their aggregate gross income (with an additional 10% if the rental includes utilities). The income can include taxpayer-funded welfare payments.
Once admitted to Section 8, a household may use their vouchers for the program anywhere in the country, with the goal of providing recipients with “greater ability to move into ‘Opportunity Neighborhoods’ with jobs, public transportation, and good schools.”
There are now 4.6 million housing units funded by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, including 2.4 million housing units in the HCV program, which houses 5.3 million Americans.
In Arizona, the HCV program covers rents up to $6,020 per month for six-bedroom homes in the Maricopa County ZIP codes of 85298 and 85331.
Of the three available six or more bedroom homes listed for rent in these ZIP codes on Zillow, all were below the $6,020 payment standard.
In 85298, the sole six-bedroom home is on the market for $3,495 per month, and comes in at 3,266 square feet with its own swimming pool and a three-car garage.
In 85331, both available six-bedroom properties are on the market for $6,000 and are two-acre, horse stable-equipped, multi-structure, luxury compounds.
If a family with the average HCV household income — estimated by HUD to be $18,558 per year, or $1546.5 per month, including other welfare payments — were to rent this home, the household’s out of pocket cost for the home $463.95 per month. This would leave taxpayers on the hook for the other $5,536,05 per month in perpetuity, or until the recipient exits or is removed from the program.
According to Sepp, keeping out-of-pocket costs fixed, while allowing for portability encourages households to seek out the most expensive home they can secure, instead of trying to save taxpayers money, or choosing a home they could more easily afford on their own some day.
“By fixing the out of pocket exposure, the program is defeating one of its own purposes of encouraging responsibility in housing — if you’re going to pay the same amount of money, why bother with getting somewhere that costs less?” continued Sepp.
Should a household start to make more money than the area’s maximum Section 8 income limit — which for a seven-member household in Maricopa County is $69,600 per year — the family would be forced off the program. At $69,600 per year, a household that does not want to be rent-burdened — and thus spend no more 30% of its income on rent — could only afford rent of $1,740 per month, or significantly less than the up to $6,020 of taxpayer-funded value provided by Section 8.
As a result, earning more money could cost Section 8 recipients their housing. To not be rent-burdened while paying $6,000 per month on rent, a household would need to make $240,000 per year, or three and a half times the threshold at which a family would be removed from Section 8.
“It makes no sense,” continued Sepp. “There has to be a comprehensive, data-driven adjustment to all of these benefits.”
HUD did not respond to requests for comment.
Syndicated with permission from The Center Square.
