WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

SB 391

Revises provisions relating to real property. (BDR 10-84)

2025 Regular Session Introduced by Dina Neal

Nevada SB 391 caps corporate residential purchases at 100 units per year and requires pre-purchase registry for buyers, creating a state registry and slowing bulk property deals.

(No further action taken.)
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · SB 391

SB 391 (BDR 10‑84) — Summary (real property; corporate purchaser limits & registry)

Status (per request): Introduced Feb 14, 2025 — No further action taken.

Main purpose

SB 391 would limit large-scale corporate acquisition of residential real estate in Nevada and create a state registry and pre‑purchase registration requirement for corporate buyers (corporations, LLCs, and their affiliates). The bill is intended to increase transparency about institutional ownership and to slow bulk purchases by investors.

Key provisions

  • Aggregate annual purchase cap: Caps the total aggregate number of residential units that may be purchased in Nevada in any calendar year by corporations, limited‑liability companies (LLCs) and their affiliates at 100 units statewide. A corporate/LLC/affiliate may not complete a purchase that would cause the statewide total for the year to exceed 100 units. (Section 2)
  • Exemptions: The cap does not apply to intracorporate transfers, newly constructed homes, mobile or manufactured homes, or apartment buildings. (Section 2)
  • Mandatory registry and pre‑purchase registration:
    • The Securities Division (Office of the Secretary of State) must create and maintain an online registry of corporations/LLCs/affiliates that purchase or own residential property in Nevada. (Section 2)
    • Except where exempted, such entities must register with the Securities Division each time before purchasing a unit of residential property. Entities that already own fewer than 10 Nevada residential units are exempt from the registration requirement. The Secretary of State may charge registration fees and must adopt implementing regulations. (Section 2)
  • Certificate for recording deeds: County recorders are prohibited from recording a deed for a residential unit purchased by a covered corporate entity unless the purchaser submits a copy of the Secretary of State’s certificate of registration for that purchase concurrently with the deed. County recorders must provide information to the Secretary of State on request. (Section 5 / NRS 111.312 changes)
  • Life‑estate instruments: The Secretary of State must adopt regulations governing form/content of instruments creating life estates; county recorders cannot record such instruments unless they comply. (Section 4)
  • Enforcement: The Attorney General, at the Secretary of State’s request, may sue to enjoin violations or to obtain other equitable relief to enforce the registration/cap provisions. (Section 3.5)
  • Two‑thirds vote: The measure includes a retained requirement that Section 2 (the cap) require a two‑thirds legislative majority for final passage.
  • Appropriation: Early versions included an appropriation to the Secretary of State for implementation; later amendment removed the appropriation.

Who is affected

  • Covered: Corporations, LLCs, and affiliates that purchase residential property in Nevada (with exclusions noted); institutional investors and single‑family rental operators.
  • Government: Secretary of State (administration of registry, regulations), Securities Division, county recorders (new recordkeeping check), Attorney General (enforcement).
  • Private sector: title companies, real estate attorneys, developers, individual buyers (potential market effects).
  • Public: proponents argue it may protect homebuying opportunities for individuals; opponents warn it could deter investment and complicate transactions.

Procedural / timeline notes

  • Introduced Feb 14, 2025 (BDR 10‑84).
  • The bill attracted committee hearings and multiple amendments (notably Amendment No. 257 and Amendment No. 783) changing registration timing, technical language, and removing the appropriation.
  • The bill generated substantial written testimony both supporting (housing advocates, some community groups) and opposing (title industry, developer and rental housing trade groups) the proposal; letters cite concerns about enforceability, loopholes (use of multiple LLCs), impacts on housing supply, and operational burdens for county recorders and title insurers.
  • Final status provided by the request: No further action taken.

Potential impacts & issues to watch

  • Enforcement and evasion: Effectiveness depends on the Secretary of State’s ability to detect and block circumvention through affiliated entities or shell LLCs; stakeholders urged stronger anti‑circumvention and tracking measures.
  • Transaction friction: Requiring a pre‑purchase registration certificate to record deeds could slow closings and add administrative steps for buyers, sellers, title companies, and county recorders.
  • Market effects: Supporters contend the cap could help first‑time buyers and renters; opponents warn reduced investment could constrain supply and raise housing costs.
  • Administrative cost and capacity: Implementing and maintaining the registry and processing certificates would create new workload for the Secretary of State and county recorders; early appropriation language was later removed.

If you want, I can:
- Extract and assemble the bill’s operative text clauses into a plain‑English checklist for title officers and county recorders;
- Draft suggested anti‑circumvention language or enforcement mechanisms that appeared in stakeholder comments; or
- Produce a short one‑page explainer for homeowners about how the bill would affect purchases and recordings.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.