Renters Caught in the Health Insurance Coverage Gap as ACA Premiums Take Center Stage

Subscribe

Renters vs. Homeowners

Health insurance coverage patterns reveal a clear divide between renters and homeowners. Renters are nearly three times as likely to be uninsured as homeowners (11.7% versus 4.4%) and are far more reliant on public coverage.Just under half of renters (48.8%) have private insurance, compared with a majority of homeowners (54.5%). Meanwhile, nearly one in three renters (29%) rely exclusively on public insurance, underscoring the income and employment disparities that shape access to private plans. The higher rate of mixed coverage among homeowners (21.5% versus 10.5% for renters) likely reflects both age and household composition: owner households are more often multi-adult and older, boosting the odds that one member carries employer coverage while another qualifies for public or supplemental insurance.

Differences Across Rental Property Types

Within the rental market, coverage outcomes vary meaningfully by property type. Multifamily renters are the most securely insured, with the highest share of private coverage (51.2%) and the lowest uninsured rate (9.8%). That advantage likely stems from greater access to urban labor markets and employer plans. Single-family renters show the weakest coverage profile — 49.2% private and the highest uninsured rate (12.8%) — pointing to coverage gaps in lower-density, suburban or exurban settings. Two-to-four-family renters fall in between but lean more on public programs (32.6%), consistent with the older, smaller-building stock that often serves lower-income households.

 ACA Subsidies

Subsidy uptake adds nuance. Roughly 18% of privately insured renters receive a subsidy, versus 21% of homeowners. Within rentals, uptake runs from about 16% among single-family renters to 19% among multifamily renters. Two dynamics likely explain why renter subsidy use isn’t higher: (1) a “missing-middle” affordability gap—households too high-income for Medicaid but facing premiums and cost-sharing that still feel out of reach even with ACA subsidies; and (2) younger renters’ self-assessment that expected utilization is low, leading some to remain uninsured despite qualifying for assistance. Both forces suppress subsidy penetration on the renter side relative to what raw income differences might imply.

What It Means for Real Estate

These patterns signal elevated budget fragility for a sizable slice of renters, particularly in small-building and single-family rentals. With the current government shutdown putting ACA premium support in play, any disruption to subsidies or exchange operations would disproportionately affect renters who already sit on the margin between coverage and going uninsured. Higher out-of-pocket costs—or lapses in coverage—can translate into tighter monthly cash flow, raising delinquency risk and softening leasing velocity at the value end of the market. For operators, the takeaway is straightforward: coverage instability is rent-roll risk. Monitoring subsidy policy, offering flexible payment options, and targeting resident services (e.g., enrollment guidance via community partners) can help cushion exposure if policy uncertainty lingers.

About the Data

Data are from US Census Bureau's 2023 American Community Survey and were retrieved via IPUMS. Data are measured and reported at the household level unless otherwise states.