Original research · Electrification
Nobody Asks the Renter Before the Panel Gets Upgraded
HyreElectrical’s hazard-era study counted 67.1 million US homes built when Federal Pacific and Zinsco panels were being installed. It could not say who lives in them. We cross-tabbed tenure against the same construction-era window: 21.7 million occupied homes in it are rented, and the tenant living in one has no legal standing to order the electrical work the unit may need.
Written by HyreElectrical Research Desk Primary-source research and fact checking
The finding
Read this before you use any number on this page
The American Community Survey records who occupies a housing unit — owner or renter — and the decade it was built. It does not record the condition of the electrical panel, whether a landlord has ever been asked to replace one, or the legal mechanics of who is entitled to authorise the work in any specific lease or state. No federal survey asks any of those questions. What follows is a count of the population in which the split-incentive problem can arise — a tenant living in a hazard-era home — not a measurement of how often a landlord actually refuses, delays, or never learns the panel needs attention.
The legal claim in this study’s framing is deliberately narrow and stated once: in ordinary residential tenancies, a lease does not grant a tenant authority to alter a building’s fixed electrical system, and a permit for that work is issued to the property owner or an agent acting for them. That is standard landlord-tenant contract structure, not a finding of this study, and it is why the count below is not a footnote — it is the point.
The cross-tab nobody had run
HyreElectrical’s hazard-era panel study counted 67,068,006 US housing units — occupied and vacant together — built between 1950 and 1989, the years Federal Pacific Stab-Lok and Zinsco panels were on the market, and a narrower 34.7 million built in the 1960s and 1970s aluminium-wiring window. That study used Census table B25034, which records year built for every housing unit but carries no field for who lives there. It could size the hazard. It could not say whose problem it is. The construction-era norms behind that window are in housing age and electrical systems.
The split-incentive barrier is a well-described structural problem in energy research. The U.S. Department of Energy’s Better Buildings program has run peer exchanges specifically on landlord-tenant conflict over efficiency and electrification upgrades, and DOE’s own electrical-panel research program states plainly that “upgrading panels is not always feasible — especially for low-income families.” Add a lease to that constraint and the household facing it may not even be the one with the financial exposure. What that constraint looks like in households already behind on the bill is home energy insecurity. Evidence on the barrier is genuinely mixed: a 2010 evaluation of two Southern California Edison multifamily efficiency programs found that property owners frequently installed efficiency upgrades in tenant units anyway, for reasons unrelated to the split-incentive theory — tenant satisfaction, property value, or the belief that a lower utility bill leaves a tenant more room to pay rent. That evidence concerns discretionary efficiency retrofits a landlord can choose to skip. A panel that an inspector has flagged or an insurer has declined over is a different kind of decision, and nobody had counted how many renters actually sit inside it. That count follows.
The national split, by tenure
Of 127,482,865 occupied US housing units in the 2023 five-year American Community Survey, 82,892,037 are owner-occupied and 44,590,828 are renter-occupied — a 65.0/35.0 split. Cross-tabbed against year built (table B25036), 38,323,134 owner-occupied homes (±91,651 at 90 per cent confidence) and 21,710,304 renter-occupied homes (±53,624) fall in the 1950–1989 window, for a combined 60,033,438 (±106,186).
HYRE calculation. That combined figure is 47.1 per cent of all occupied housing — visibly consistent with the hazard-era study’s 47.1 per cent share of the total housing stock (occupied and vacant together), which is a useful internal check: vacancy is not concentrated in one construction era enough to move the headline number. Within the era-built stock, the tenure split is 63.8 per cent owner-occupied to 36.2 per cent renter-occupied — a full percentage point above renters’ 35.0 per cent share of the occupied stock overall. Framed the other way: 48.7 per cent of every renter-occupied home in America sits in the hazard-era window, against 46.2 per cent of every owner-occupied home. Neither gap is large. Both point the same direction.
An independent check, from a different federal survey
The Energy Information Administration’s 2020 Residential Energy Consumption Survey interviews a national sample of households directly rather than compiling from administrative and self-response housing data the way the Census long-form-descended ACS does. Its public microdata records both tenure and year-built range for every respondent, weighted to represent the full housing stock. HYRE analysed that microdata, weighting each household by its published sample weight and estimating sampling error from EIA’s own 60 Jackknife replicate weights.
The result: 20,644,185 renter-occupied housing units built 1950–1989, against the Census figure of 21,710,304 — a difference of about 5 per cent between two unrelated federal instruments fielded in different years, using different sampling frames and different definitions of a household. RECS puts the renter share of its own era-built stock at 50.8 per cent, somewhat higher than the ACS’s 48.7 per cent; RECS’s overall renter share of all housing (32.9 per cent) also runs below the ACS’s 35.0 per cent, which is most of that gap. Neither survey is being treated as more correct here. Two different federal counting methods land in the same range, and that agreement is the finding worth reporting — not a single, falsely precise decimal.
What RECS could not add. The topic brief for this study asked whether RECS microdata could cross-tab tenure against water heating type and panel age together. RECS does not record panel age, brand, or amperage at all — the same gap the hazard-era study already documented for every federal source — so a three-way cross-tab against a panel characteristic is not possible from any dataset that exists. RECS also does not support state or even Census Division estimates for a category this narrow: the sample is built for national and four-region totals, and the tenure-by-decade cross-tab above is already close to where its margins get wide. The state table below is Census-only for that reason.
Every state, ranked by the share of its RENTAL stock built 1950–1989
| # | State | Renter-occupied units | Renters built 1950–1989 | ± MOE | % of rental stock | % of owned stock |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Hawaii | 183,122 | 110,121 | ±2,359 | 60.1% | 59.3% |
| 2 | Alaska | 89,496 | 52,416 | ±1,952 | 58.6% | 58.2% |
| 3 | California | 5,940,036 | 3,457,300 | ±16,361 | 58.2% | 56.8% |
| 4 | Oklahoma | 527,573 | 299,077 | ±3,827 | 56.7% | 49.4% |
| 5 | New Mexico | 252,957 | 143,332 | ±3,360 | 56.7% | 48.6% |
| 6 | Louisiana | 582,761 | 318,070 | ±5,250 | 54.6% | 49.6% |
| 7 | Michigan | 1,094,011 | 596,252 | ±5,780 | 54.5% | 49.6% |
| 8 | Mississippi | 345,471 | 186,467 | ±3,577 | 54.0% | 45.8% |
| 9 | Alabama | 592,043 | 316,061 | ±4,702 | 53.4% | 44.7% |
| 10 | Florida | 2,794,102 | 1,456,892 | ±12,759 | 52.1% | 48.8% |
| 11 | Maryland | 760,808 | 393,257 | ±5,953 | 51.7% | 50.6% |
| 12 | Ohio | 1,594,003 | 817,804 | ±7,767 | 51.3% | 47.6% |
| 13 | Wyoming | 66,877 | 34,229 | ±1,538 | 51.2% | 48.5% |
| 14 | Kentucky | 568,417 | 289,096 | ±4,644 | 50.9% | 44.7% |
| 15 | Connecticut | 480,258 | 240,648 | ±4,320 | 50.1% | 57.1% |
| 16 | Virginia | 1,091,768 | 544,806 | ±6,537 | 49.9% | 48.3% |
| 17 | Tennessee | 912,950 | 454,536 | ±6,357 | 49.8% | 42.7% |
| 18 | Missouri | 796,762 | 395,931 | ±5,309 | 49.7% | 46.3% |
| 19 | West Virginia | 185,366 | 91,749 | ±2,443 | 49.5% | 45.6% |
| 20 | Kansas | 384,404 | 189,932 | ±3,483 | 49.4% | 47.4% |
| 21 | Delaware | 109,869 | 54,061 | ±2,268 | 49.2% | 41.3% |
| 22 | New Jersey | 1,262,873 | 614,434 | ±7,424 | 48.7% | 53.4% |
| 23 | Minnesota | 630,433 | 305,566 | ±4,526 | 48.5% | 43.9% |
| 24 | Arizona | 923,559 | 447,385 | ±6,240 | 48.4% | 41.2% |
| 25 | Arkansas | 402,626 | 193,755 | ±3,976 | 48.1% | 45.6% |
| 26 | Indiana | 795,052 | 377,960 | ±5,406 | 47.5% | 42.6% |
| 27 | Illinois | 1,658,870 | 781,749 | ±7,674 | 47.1% | 47.7% |
| 28 | Colorado | 783,361 | 368,792 | ±4,814 | 47.1% | 43.5% |
| 29 | Montana | 138,417 | 64,844 | ±1,792 | 46.8% | 42.1% |
| 30 | Nebraska | 263,282 | 123,158 | ±2,456 | 46.8% | 43.3% |
| 31 | Pennsylvania | 1,605,715 | 747,380 | ±7,688 | 46.5% | 45.6% |
| 32 | Oregon | 623,205 | 287,545 | ±4,558 | 46.1% | 43.7% |
| 33 | South Carolina | 591,532 | 271,129 | ±4,417 | 45.8% | 39.0% |
| 34 | Texas | 4,023,511 | 1,839,933 | ±14,247 | 45.7% | 41.2% |
| 35 | New Hampshire | 151,523 | 69,125 | ±2,254 | 45.6% | 50.1% |
| 36 | Georgia | 1,388,484 | 627,334 | ±8,427 | 45.2% | 38.5% |
| 37 | Wisconsin | 785,523 | 351,919 | ±4,846 | 44.8% | 43.3% |
| 38 | Iowa | 371,145 | 164,587 | ±2,938 | 44.3% | 40.0% |
| 39 | Washington | 1,090,864 | 482,141 | ±5,871 | 44.2% | 42.1% |
| 40 | Rhode Island | 160,558 | 70,711 | ±2,444 | 44.0% | 49.3% |
| 41 | Maine | 153,056 | 67,189 | ±2,048 | 43.9% | 40.9% |
| 42 | South Dakota | 112,447 | 49,238 | ±1,651 | 43.8% | 38.7% |
| 43 | North Carolina | 1,408,252 | 610,016 | ±7,011 | 43.3% | 38.8% |
| 44 | Utah | 321,551 | 134,370 | ±2,936 | 41.8% | 37.1% |
| 45 | Idaho | 191,681 | 79,362 | ±2,382 | 41.4% | 35.7% |
| 46 | North Dakota | 118,956 | 47,318 | ±1,811 | 39.8% | 46.3% |
| 47 | New York | 3,504,163 | 1,392,656 | ±10,973 | 39.7% | 49.2% |
| 48 | Massachusetts | 1,033,084 | 409,619 | ±5,579 | 39.7% | 45.3% |
| 49 | Nevada | 481,479 | 189,967 | ±3,672 | 39.5% | 30.5% |
| 50 | District of Columbia | 189,268 | 71,941 | ±2,678 | 38.0% | 24.9% |
| 51 | Vermont | 73,304 | 27,144 | ±1,204 | 37.0% | 45.2% |
US Census Bureau, ACS 2023 5-year table B25036. The margin of error on the 1950–1989 sum is the root sum of squares of the four component decade-band margins, at 90 per cent confidence. The last column — the same figure for owned housing — is shown for comparison, not ranked on.
Hawaii (60.1%), Alaska (58.6%) and California (58.2%) have the largest shares of their rental stock in the hazard-era window. By absolute volume, California (3,457,300), Texas (1,839,933) and Florida (1,456,892) hold the most era-built renter-occupied homes; the ten largest states by volume hold 56.9 per cent of the national total. Vermont (37.0%), the District of Columbia (38.0%) and Nevada (39.5%) have the smallest rental-stock shares — DC because its overall stock skews older still (into the pre-1950 knob-and-tube years the hazard-era study does not measure), Nevada and Vermont because more of their housing was built after 1989.
Where owned and rented housing age differently
In 42 of the 51 jurisdictions measured, the rental stock has a higher hazard-era share than the owned stock — renters are more likely than owners to live in a home from this window, not less. The gap is largest in the District of Columbia (38.0 per cent of renters against 24.9 per cent of owners, a 13.2-point gap) and Nevada (39.5 against 30.5, a 9.0-point gap), and it runs to seven or eight points in Alabama, Mississippi, New Mexico and Delaware.
HYRE analysis. Nine states run the other way, with OWNED housing older than rented housing: New York (49.2 per cent of owners against 39.7 of renters), Vermont, Connecticut, North Dakota, Massachusetts and four others. The pattern in most of these states is a housing market where newer apartment construction has outpaced newer single-family construction — the rental stock skews toward recent multifamily building even as the owner-occupied stock, concentrated in older single-family homes, stays put. Neither pattern is universal, which is the honest finding: the split-incentive population this page counts is not evenly distributed, and a household in New York reasoning from the national 48.7 per cent figure would be using the wrong number for their state.
The largest rental markets, owner share against renter share
Restricting the comparison to the fifteen states with the largest rental populations makes the pattern easier to read at the scale that matters most: these are the states carrying most of the country’s renter-occupied hazard-era stock in absolute terms. Twelve of the fifteen — California, Florida, Michigan, Ohio, New Jersey, North Carolina, Georgia, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Washington, Texas and Nevada — show a higher hazard-era share among renters than owners. Connecticut, New York and the District of Columbia show the reverse, each for the reason given above: an owner-occupied stock that is, on average, older still.
The income context: who has less leverage to force the issue
ACS table B25119 puts 2023 median household income at $97,352 (±143) for owner-occupied households and $51,393 (±84) for renter-occupied households nationally — the renter median is 47.2 per cent below the owner median.
HYRE analysis. Income does not appear anywhere in the tenure-by-year-built table, and this page draws no causal line between a household’s income and whether its panel gets replaced. What the income gap does establish is which side of the split incentive has less room to force the question through a costlier channel — moving, hiring a tenant-side attorney, or covering the work itself and seeking reimbursement. A renter already earning roughly half the area’s owner-occupied median is the same renter this page finds has no legal standing to order the electrical work in the first place. The two facts are separately sourced and they compound.
What a renter can actually do, in order
- 1 Put the request in writing, to the landlord or the property manager
A verbal mention is not a record. Describe what the electrician, inspector or insurer said, keep a copy, and send it in a form that shows a delivery date — email or certified mail, not a text that can be denied later.
- 2 Check the lease for who is responsible for major systems
Most residential leases assign the building’s fixed electrical system to the landlord by default, but read the actual document. Some leases with substantial rent concessions shift specific maintenance duties to the tenant — rare for panel-level work, but worth confirming rather than assuming.
- 3 Learn the local habitability standard, not the national one
Housing habitability law is set at the state and often the municipal level, and it varies on what counts as a hazard a landlord must fix. Some jurisdictions treat a documented unsafe panel as a habitability violation with an enforcement path through code enforcement or a housing court; others do not. This is a local-law question a renter needs answered locally, not a fact this national page can supply.
- 4 Get the hazard documented by a third party
A home inspector’s report, an insurer’s written declination, or a licensed electrician’s findings carries more weight with a landlord and with code enforcement than a tenant’s own description. This is the same documentation a buyer uses in the hazard-era study’s sale scenario — it works the same way in a tenancy.
- 5 Know where the legal standing actually ends
A tenant can request, document and escalate. A tenant cannot pull an electrical permit for someone else’s property, and should not pay a contractor to do panel work without the owner’s written authorisation — that leaves the tenant, not the owner, exposed if the work is ever disputed. This is the boundary the whole page is about.
Limitations
- The renter figures count a population, not a rate of harm
The figures above count renter-occupied homes built in a construction-era window. They do not count homes that actually have a Federal Pacific or Zinsco panel, homes where a landlord has been asked and refused, or homes where the wiring has since been replaced. The hazard-era study’s own caveat about construction era being a weak proxy for a specific product applies here with the same force.
- No dataset records who controls the panel
Landlord-tenant law on habitability, repair responsibility and a tenant’s remedies when a landlord refuses varies by state and sometimes by city. This page states the general contract structure — the owner authorises capital work, not the tenant — and does not attempt to catalogue fifty different legal regimes.
- ACS and RECS measure different populations
ACS 2023 5-year data pools 2019–2023 and covers all occupied housing units. RECS 2020 surveyed households directly in a single year, excludes group quarters and seasonal-only units, and calibrates its total to earlier ACS vintages. Their renter totals differ by roughly 4 million for these reasons; the two are cited as a range, not averaged into a single false-precision number.
- RECS supports national estimates only
The Residential Energy Consumption Survey’s sample size does not support reliable state or even single Census Division breakdowns for a cross-tab this specific. Every state and geographic figure on this page is Census ACS data; RECS appears only at the national level.
- Mobile homes are dated by model year, same as the hazard-era study
Census dates mobile homes and manufactured housing by the manufacturer’s model year, which is a different quantity from site-built construction date. States with a larger manufactured-housing rental share carry more of this effect.
- Income is context, not a modelled relationship
The income figures come from a separate ACS table and are not cross-tabbed against year built. This page does not claim, and the data does not show, that lower-income renters specifically are the ones in era-built homes — only that renters generally earn less than owners generally, a separately documented fact placed alongside the tenure finding for context.
Method
Primary source. US Census Bureau, American Community Survey 2023 5-year estimates, table B25036 (Tenure by Year Structure Built), for the United States and each of the 50 states and the District of Columbia. Retrieved 6 September 2026 from the public table-based Summary File at www2.census.gov after an unauthenticated request to api.census.gov returned a missing-key redirect — the same substitution the hazard-era study records, changing no figure.
Derivation. The 1950–1989 sum for each tenure is table lines 007–010 (owner: built 1980–1989, 1970–1979, 1960–1969, 1950–1959) and lines 018–021 (the same four decades for renter-occupied). Margins of error are the square root of the sum of the squared component margins — the Census Bureau’s published method for derived sums — at 90 per cent confidence. Median household income by tenure is table B25119, same vintage, same retrieval route.
RECS derivation. EIA’s 2020 public-use microdata file (recs2020_public_v7.csv, 18,496 responding households) was aggregated using its published final analysis weight, NWEIGHT. Renter-occupied combines KOWNRENT codes 2 (rent) and 3 (occupy without payment of rent), matching the Census Bureau’s renter-occupied definition. Built 1950–1989 combines YEARMADERANGE codes 2 through 5. Standard errors use EIA’s 60 Jackknife replicate weights (NWEIGHT1–NWEIGHT60) with the variance formula EIA states in its own 2020 RECS Methodology Report: Var = (59/60) × the sum of squared deviations of each replicate estimate from the full-sample estimate. The codebook and methodology report were downloaded directly from eia.gov on the retrieval date.
What this page reuses, and what it does not. The 1950–1989 construction-era window and its significance for Federal Pacific, Zinsco and aluminium-wiring installation dates are established in the hazard-era study and are not re-argued here; see that page for the CPSC and carrier-underwriting evidence. Every housing-unit count on this page is newly derived from B25036, a table that study does not use, because B25034 has no tenure field.
Reproducibility. Every input is a public file: the B25036 and B25119 Summary File extracts, and EIA’s RECS 2020 public microdata and codebook. Anyone with those files can rebuild every figure on this page.
Questions
How many renters live in homes old enough to have a hazardous panel?
Are renters more likely than homeowners to live in a hazard-era home?
Can a tenant get a landlord’s electrical panel replaced?
Does Census data show who has to pay for the panel upgrade?
How does this compare to the EIA’s own household survey?
Which states have the most renters in hazard-era homes?
Do renters or owners have older housing, in general?
Is the split-incentive barrier a proven cause of skipped upgrades?
Written and audited by
HyreElectrical Research Desk
Primary-source research and fact checking
We read the model code, the federal safety notice, the municipal fee sheet or the utility tariff ourselves, and we publish the figure with the document it came from and the date we retrieved it. Where a number cannot be traced to a primary source, we publish the shorter page and say what we could not verify. HyreElectrical does not perform, supervise or warrant electrical work. Authorship is organisational: this desk, not a named persona.
- 10
- long-form launch pages in this layout
- 5
- states with verified licence records
- 16,369
- electrical companies in those records
- 74%
- of the store is Florida — disclosed first, not footnoted
How this desk works
- Primary sources only. Code statements come from NFPA 70 as the model code. Safety statements come from CPSC. Permit fees come from the city or county fee sheet. Utility charges come from the filed tariff. We do not cite a blog that cites a source; we open the source.
- Our contractor store is five states, and 74% of it is Florida. Any figure built on that store is titled to those states and names the concentration in the first screen. It is not a national sample of electricians.
- Load calculations on this site are a published simplification in the shape of NEC 220.82 — first 10 kVA at 100%, remainder at 40%, HVAC at 100%, EVSE at 125%. They are labelled as not a stamped calculation. A licensed electrician using the adopted edition does that work.
- No national price for a panel upgrade is shipped. Labour rates, the adopted code edition, whether the utility is involved, and the state of the existing wiring move the invoice too far for a roundup to help. Cost intent lives on the cost page; this page explains the decision.
- We do not perform electrical work, and we take no payment for placement, ranking or a favourable mention. Nobody buys a position on this site.
Data as of 6 September 2026. Authorship on this site is organisational: the analysis belongs to the desk rather than to a named individual, and we do not publish credentials we do not hold. Our editorial policy sets out how we source, date and correct what we publish.
Sources & retrieval dates
- US Census Bureau — American Community Survey 2023 5-year estimates, table B25036 (Tenure by Year Structure Built) , Public table-based Summary File. Owner- and renter-occupied housing units by decade built, for the United States, the 50 states and the District of Columbia. Retrieved 6 September 2026.
- US Census Bureau — American Community Survey 2023 5-year estimates, table B25119 (Median Household Income by Tenure) , National median household income for all, owner-occupied and renter-occupied households. Retrieved 6 September 2026.
- US Energy Information Administration — 2020 Residential Energy Consumption Survey, public microdata (v7) and codebook , KOWNRENT (tenure) cross-tabbed against YEARMADERANGE (year built), weighted with NWEIGHT; standard errors from the 60 Jackknife replicate weights. Retrieved 6 September 2026.
- US Energy Information Administration — 2020 RECS Methodology Report (June 2022, revised March 2023) , States the Jackknife variance-estimation method and its 59/60 coefficient for the 60 replicate weights used in this study’s RECS calculation. Retrieved 6 September 2026.
- US Department of Energy — Affordable and Equitable Residential Electrification Under Electrical Panel and Service Constraints , DOE program page on the national panel-capacity constraint on electrification, cited for the “not always feasible — especially for low-income families” framing. Retrieved 6 September 2026.
- Dyson, C., Chen, C. and Samiullah, S. — "The Split Incentive Barrier: Theory or Practice in the Multifamily Sector?", ACEEE 2010 Summer Study , Program-evaluation evidence, cited for the contested-evidence framing on whether the split-incentive barrier blocks discretionary efficiency upgrades in practice. Retrieved 6 September 2026.
A landlord, not a tenant, has to make this call
If you rent and a panel has been flagged, the next step is putting the request in writing and getting the hazard documented by a licensed electrician your landlord can act on. We can connect a property owner with local electrical companies for the estimate.
HyreElectrical does not perform, supervise or warrant electrical work, and takes no payment for placement, ranking or favourable mention. This page describes a general population measured from federal data and general lease structure, not the law of any specific state or the facts of any specific tenancy. It is not legal advice.