“While most of the issues raised by the above-stated  three factors (involving primarily the post-production sector of the industry, represented by the Manufactured Housing Institute [a.k.a.: MHI] and not MHARR) should have been examined in congressional oversight hearings and addressed, pursuant to such hearings, with carefully targeted legislation specifically designed and structured to correct and remedy such issues, that has not occurred.” So said Mark Weiss, J.D., President and CEO of the Manufactured Housing Association for Regulatory Reform (MHARR) in discussing at this link here what they say are important terminology miscues in the “Expansion of Attainable Homeownership Through Manufactured Housing Act of 2025” and also in the draft bill for: “Primary Authority to Establish Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards.” Stating the obvious can bring clarity. Weiss’ training is as an attorney. When it comes to matters of law not only do words matter, even the use of punctuation can matter. Every dot or word in a law may be significant, which ironically is precisely why the second bill is deemed necessary. Past failures to make this clear when the 2007 Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) established a change for manufactured housing regulation that the second bill aims to fix 18 year later.

According to the DOE website.

In Part I, MHARR’s text is provided verbatim, as is our routine on MHProNews with items from MHARR or MHI.

Part II will include the latest on the public side of the MHI website on this same topic.

Part III will be additional MHVille facts-evidence-analysis (FEA) with editorial commentary by MHProNews.

MHARR’s memo has the word “Important” near the top. Indeed. Among the “important” issues this MHVille FEA will reveal is the contrasting communications and advocacy styles of MHARR and MHI. That too will be examined in Part III.

Part I – MHARR Issues Proposed Modifications to Pending and Potential Legislation Impacting Manufactured Housing

 

JUNE 11, 2025

 

IMPORTANT

 

TO:                 HUD CODE MANUFACTURED HOUSING INDUSTRY MEMBERS

FROM:          MARK WEISS

RE:                 PENDING AND POTENTIAL LEGISLATION

                        IMPACTING MANUFACTURED HOUSING

As industry members are aware, the HUD Code manufactured housing industry and American consumers of affordable mainstream manufactured housing are the beneficiaries of two landmark laws enacted with large bipartisan majorities in Congress. These laws, the Manufactured Housing Improvement Act of 2000 (2000 Reform Law) and the Duty to Serve Underserved Markets (DTS) mandate of the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 (HERA), were designed to herald and advance the full transition of manufactured homes from the “trailers” of yesteryear to full-fledged “housing” for all purposes, and to align federal consumer financing support for manufactured homes with their broader use and acceptance. Those laws cannot and must not be altered in ways that would undermine their fundamental character and essential purposes. However —

(1) The failure by multiple federal actors (including the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Federal Housing Finance Agency, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to implement key provisions of those laws;

(2) The subsequent enactment of baseless unrelated mandates that would undermine the legitimate and necessary purposes of those laws (e.g., the statutory directive for U.S Department of Energy manufactured housing “energy conservation” standards); and

(3) The natural (and inevitable) technological and usage-based evolution of HUD Code manufactured housing —

have led to potential legislation (in multiple bills), currently being considered by Congress, that purport to remedy certain of these issues.

While most of the issues raised by the above-stated  three factors (involving primarily the post-production sector of the industry, represented by the Manufactured Housing Institute and not MHARR) should have been examined in congressional oversight hearings and addressed, pursuant to such hearings, with carefully targeted legislation specifically designed and structured to correct and remedy such issues, that has not occurred. Instead (among others), there are currently two draft bills pertaining to manufactured housing pending before the House of Representatives Subcommittee on Housing and Insurance. These are a bill which would give HUD “Primary Authority to Establish Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards” and require approval of the HUD Secretary for “Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards” issued by other federal agencies (presumably including the DOE manufactured housing “energy” standards), and the ”Expansion of Attainable Homeownership Through Manufactured Housing Act of 2025,” which would make the current “permanent chassis” requirement optional, thus allowing manufactured homes to be built with or without a chassis.

Both of these bills, obviously, relate to major issues for both the industry and consumers dealing with the essential nature of HUD Code homes and the uniformity and cost-effectiveness of federal regulation. As such, they will have a significant impact on the industry – and especially its smaller businesses – which are always disproportionately impacted by regulatory actions of any type, as well as lower and moderate-income homebuyers who rely on the inherent affordability of mainstream manufactured homes. As a result, it is essential to ensure that the bills which seek to address such key issues, are not subject to misinterpretation, misapplication, or other misuse by agency actors with goals and objectives that do not necessarily align with those of Congress.

Accordingly, and as previously promised, attached are copies of proposed modifications to both of the above-referenced pending bills, submitted to the Subcommittee by MHARR, to ensure that the proposed bills are as “watertight” and safe from later bureaucratic manipulation as possible. Also included with the proposed modifications are the rationale and justification for each.

We urge you to review these suggested modifications and support them in your interactions with Congress because, without such changes and additions, the current proposed bills could have unintended and/or unforeseen negative consequences for mainstream manufactured housing, manufactured housing consumers and smaller industry businesses in particular.

Please contact MHARR if you have any questions or need any additional information regarding the attached documents. As usual, MHARR will continue to keep you informed as it reviews and submits recommendations to both houses of Congress on all of the multiple pending or potential bills pertaining to or impacting HUD Code manufactured housing.

Thank you.

 

Mark Weiss
President and CEO
Manufactured Housing Association for Regulatory Reform (MHARR)
1331 Pennsylvania Ave N.W., Suite 512
Washington D.C. 20004
Phone: 202/783-4087
Fax: 202/783-4075
Email: MHARRDG@AOL.COM
Website: www.manufacturedhousingassociation.org

Attachment

—

Part II – MHProNews Fact Check of Manufactured Housing Institute (a.k.a.: MHI or manufacturedhousing.org) on the Same Legislative Issues Raised by MHARR

1) On 6.12.2025 at about 7:04 AM ET this specific search was performed using the MHI website search tool. There are no results.

 

 

Why is MHI backing legislation in its current form that is not found on the public side of their own website?

2) On 6.12.2025 at about 7:16 AM ET this specific search was performed using the MHI website search tool. There are no results.

 

 

Again, why is MHI backing legislation in its current form that is not found on the public side of their own website?

Part III – Additional MHVille Facts-Evidence-Analysis (FEA) with more MHProNews Expert Editorial Commentary

In no particular order of importance are the following.

1) On this date (6.12.2025) at about 7:25 AM ET on the MHARR website a search using their site search tool for:

Expansion of Attainable Homeownership Through Manufactured Housing Act of 2025

produced these two results as shown.

 

 

 

2) MHProNews notes that based on information obtained from MHARR (MHI has declined supplying this information to MHProNews) and comparing MHARR’s traffic with that of MHI by using SimilarWeb data, it appears that MHARR’s traffic has surpassed that of MHI. This may be significant in several respects, because MHI’s website was launched in the 1990s, and MHARR didn’t launch there’s until 2017. One of several fact-checks of MHI website data using SimilarWeb is linked here. Another more recent one is linked here. xAI’s Grok and Google‘s Gemini were both used in support of that fact-check process. Human expertise was used as well as is required of proper hybrid journalism.

 

 

3) In fairness and for the most complete possible record in the manufactured housing industry, MHProNews previously reported on William “Bill” Boor’s remarks to Congress on behalf of the Manufactured Housing Institute (MHI). Boor is MHI’s current chairman, and he told Congress that: “My name is Bill Boor and I am the Chief Executive Officer of Cavco Industries, a public company engaged in the production of factory-built homes…”

4) Copilot recently said the following about MHI in a fact check by MHProNews. The below was in response to evidence provided by MHProNews for Copilot to consider. Here are key parts of Copilot’s response after checking available sources and information found online. The full context is found in at this link here as well as from the link below this annotated screen capture.

 

 

5) Agree or disagree with MHARR’s strategy of once more calling out MHI by name in their latest press release linked here and posted in Part I above, it should be noted that MHARR’s stance is apparently nuanced. MHARR points the proverbial finger (not that finger) at not only on MHI, but also on federal officials who at least on paper both MHI and MHARR have agreed that federal agencies have not properly enforced existing laws.

That said, as Copilot aptly observed after checking sources online, with the bold emphasis in the original by Copilot.

“MHI’s actions appear to be more about optics than substantive industry growth, potentially placating smaller members while enabling continued consolidation.”

 

6) MHProNews has for years been carefully reporting on and documenting the behavior of both MHI and MHARR. Indeed, there is an evidence-based case to be made that no one in manufactured housing, and no other known source anywhere on planet Earth has done more fact-checking and documentation of MHI and MHARR than MHProNews. Years of such experience yields expertise and insights that others may miss.  That said, MHProNews notes that in the year when the 2007 EISA was enacted, Kevin Clayton was on the MHI board of directors. The base image on the top and left are in the original. The parody MHI logo annotation, arrow and MHProNews third-party content logo were added by MHProNews.

 

 

As MHProNews observed above, Keith O. Holdbrooks – shown by MHI as being their vice-chairman at that time and was with “Southern Energy Homes, Inc.”  The following is according to FloorDaily.net.

Clayton Homes Buying Alabama Mobile-Home Maker

Addison, Al, August 17, 2006–Southern Energy Homes Inc., which manufactures and sells mobile homes, has reached an agreement to be acquired by the largest company in its industry, Clayton Homes Inc., for $8.50 per share in cash, according to Birmingham Business Journal. Based on shares outstanding as well as available stock options involved, Clayton will pay about $116.5 million for Southern Energy Homes. Clayton Homes is owned by Berkshire Hathaway, which acquired the company in 2003. “This agreement represents a 30-percent premium over (Tuesday’s) closing stock price in an all-cash offer to acquire Southern Energy Homes,” said Keith Holdbrooks, Southern Energy’s CEO, in a written statement. “Our board of directors unanimously approved the proposed merger with Clayton Homes and believes it represents a tremendous opportunity to maximize shareholder value.” Clayton Homes’ CEO, Kevin Clayton, praised Southern Energy’s “unique product offerings and design characteristics.” The acquisition, which is subject to Southern Energy shareholder and regulatory approval, is expected to close in about two months. Once it does, Wednesday’s news release says, Southern Energy Homes will become a wholly owned subsidiary of Clayton Homes. Clayton operates 36 manufacturing plants, 448 company-owned stores and is affiliated with more than 1,400 independent retailers, 71 manufactured housing communities and subdivisions, and financial services operations that provide mortgage services and insurance for its customers. Jim Stariha, chief financial officer of Southern Energy Homes, said the Alabama company’s management and employees are expected to remain in their positions.

The screen capture documenting the accuracy of the above on this date is found at this link here.  There is an evidence-based case to be made that several MHARR members have been acquired by MHI members. Southern Energy was reportedly a member of MHARR at the time of the acquisition by Berkshire Hathaway owned Clayton Homes.

7) On 6.11.2025, MHProNews asked Gemini in a report linked here to do a search to see if MHI leaders have publicly responded to recent and prior reporting.  That Q&A is shown below. In short, Gemini said: “…there is no direct public response from William “Bill” Boor (Cavco CEO and MHI Chairman), Lesli Gooch (MHI CEO), Molly Boyle (MHI”s contracted public relations), David Goch, (MHI outside attorney) or anyone else on behalf of MHI to the emailed request for response by MHProNews regarding the evidence-based concerns raised in the uploaded report.” See that in #2 by Gemini in the screen capture of the Q&A below.

 

8) It must also be recalled that a tipster with deep ties to the MHI orbit went through several points raised by Boor and MHI. See that in the 2nd report linked below. For balance, Boor’s remarks are the first linked article below.

 

 

9) MHProNews has been reporting for years on the evolution of the DOE energy rule battles that flowed from the 2007 EISA that occurred during the Kevin Clayton and Keith Holdbrook tenure on the MHI board of directors (see screen shot above and linked here). Examples of those prior reports on this longstanding battle, which shed light on the background for this pending legislation that MHARR has commented on, are linked below.  This is laid out for several reasons. Among them, there is an argument to be made that agree with their methods or not, MHARR is attempting to thread a needle. They want to hold MHI responsible while being open to working with MHI in case they pivot, as they eventually did (arguably under public pressure) in the case of finally launching litigation on the DOE energy rule – see “Vindication” below and this link on the MHARR website for more).

 

 

Note that the report linked below is one of several that look at an MHI email (as is often true, one that MHI did not post on their own website) that looks at some of the history of the rule and essentially asks, why was MHI inconsistent and incomplete in its efforts to roll back the 2007 EISA? Meaning, if MHI was serious about rolling back the error that apparently occurred during MHI’s Clayton-Holdbrook time on the MHI board of directors, why didn’t they immediately swing into action to fix it? Why did Clayton and Holdbrook (or by extension, MHI) allow the 2007 EISA to go into effect without fixing the law’s language before it caused all of the harm to the industry that it has?

 

While each of these linked reports are significant enough to warrant the hours of research and writing required for any one of them, some may be more important than others. Among those is the one linked below. Compare what the members of the gas industry did in response to the DOE regulations that they faced. Gas industry members swung into action the day after their rule was published with litigation. Why did MHI take months in order to do the same, and only after months of public pressure by MHARR, MHProNews, MHLivingNews, and related press releases to mainstream media? There are no known direct responses by MHI to such concerns, as Gemini noted above.

 

 

Another perhaps more important set of evidence are found in the articles that follows.  Note MHI is quoted in each.

 

MHProNews reported in advance that yet another downturn was heading toward the industry. In a matter of months that downturn occurred.

 

While MHARR and MHI have each raised their own points on these topics, MHProNews has long done its own research into elements that are occurring behind the scenes. For example, the lawsuit that ‘forced’ the Trump 1.0 era DOE to enter into an agreement to establish an energy rule was launched by the Sierra Club. The Sierra Club has been supported by Warren Buffett, among others. There is a clear conflict of interest that organizations that get Buffett-bucks has been pressing for creation of these energy standards while MHI postures being opposed to them yet does so apparently ineffectively and inconsistently. Getting bills submitted to Congress happens often hundreds of times a year. Getting bills that are bipartisan in nature that are filed in both the U.S. House and Senate that have enough cosponsors to actually get enacted are an entirely different matter. So, while MHI is posturing (as Copilot said above, for “optics”) consolidation continues.

As a search for “DOE energy rule” on the MHProNews or MHLivingNews sites would reveal, there are hundreds of articles all told on these topics. There is no known source that has provided more coverage on these topics than those by the sister publications of our parent company. On this date, on MHProNews alone, there are 68 pages of results, often with some 20 posts per page. No one anywhere has apparently covered these issues more.

That said, what MHARR and MHI have done, or failed to do, arguably are at or near the bullseye along with the ties between pro-MH energy rule interests – like the Sierra Club – that apparently have been supported by Buffett or in some cases by Berkshire owned Clayton Homes. For example, Next Step has been supported by MHI member Clayton Homes. There are clearly examples that reveal that Clayton, and thus their MHI association tool, have been on both sides of the battle. Which calls to mind the historic remark by Vladimir Lenin. Note that Buffett is known to be a reader of history and biographies and has a long and documented history of supporting leftist causes. “The best way to control the opposition is to lead it ourselves,” said Lenin.

 

 

Once the money trail is followed, and the known details about the energy rule’s genesis and twists and turns are laid out, there is an evidence-based case to be made that certain MHI member firms that apparently include Clayton, Cavco (long led by former Clayton division president Joe Stegmayer) and Champion. With the above in mind, consider the two third-party quotes to consider how they could be applied to manufactured housing and the battle over the energy rule.

 

Berkshire Hathaway owned Clayton Homes, and deep pockets linked with Buffett and Clayton, have clearly been on both sides of the energy rule debate. Meanwhile, mainstream news headlines are generated from time-to-time that often make it sound like manufactured homes are not energy efficient. Are thinking people who follow the facts, evidence, and money trail to think that these are all coincidental? That MHI – which numbers of MHI members have openly said that they are consolidation minded and several MHI members have been sued by their residents for purported antitrust violations that harm residents/customer interests – that MHI has been giving their best effort to stop this rule?

MHI’s claims are laughable on its face, as several previous AI supported fact checks have documented. MHI is apparently, as Copilot said, engaged in behavior that is geared toward “optics” to “placate” their smaller members, while consolidation continues.

For these and other reasons, MHProNews’ leadership has formally called on the DOJ and FTC to stop the announced acquisition by Champion of Iseman Homes and to explore rolling back dozens of previous M&As.

 

 

10) The draft of this article through Part III #9 above was uploaded here and to Bing‘s AI powered Copilot. That Q&A (a.k.a.: fact check, chat thread, discussion, etc.) with Copilot is shown below.

Copilot, check the upload for factual accuracy and fidelity to the sources cited. Then explore the remarks made and confirm, correct, or clarify the evidence and logic presented in their facts-evidence-analysis (FEA) and AI supported methodology. That upload is also found at this link here. https://www.manufacturedhomepronews.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/MHARRfingersMHIexpansionAttainable-HomeownershipManufacturedHousingAct2025PrimaryAuthorityEstablishManufacturedHousingConstructionAndSafetyStandardsMHProNewsDraftforAIfactCheck.pdf

Analysis of Factual Accuracy and Fidelity to Sources

Your uploaded document discusses MHARR’s critique of MHI’s handling of legislative efforts related to manufactured housing, particularly the Expansion of Attainable Homeownership Through Manufactured Housing Act of 2025 and the Primary Authority to Establish Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards bill. Based on my search, the document’s claims align with publicly available sources.

MHARR’s position is consistent with their June 11, 2025, press release, which highlights concerns about federal agencies failing to enforce existing laws and the risks posed by new legislation. The Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards rule, which HUD postponed until September 2025, is also accurately referenced.

Corrections, Confirmations, and Clarifications

• MHARR’s Criticism of MHI: The document correctly states that MHARR has publicly criticized MHI for failing to properly advocate for industry-friendly legislation. MHARR argues that MHI’s approach has led to regulatory burdens that disproportionately harm smaller businesses.
• Legislative Context: The document accurately describes the Expansion of Attainable Homeownership Through Manufactured Housing Act of 2025, which seeks to make the permanent chassis requirement optional. However, it would be beneficial to clarify whether MHI has officially endorsed this bill in its current form.
• Regulatory Freeze Impact: The document correctly notes that HUD postponed the Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards rule following a regulatory freeze issued by the administration. This delay allows further review of the rule’s implications.

Responses from MHI Leadership

I searched for responses from key MHI figures regarding the concerns raised in your report:

• William “Bill” Boor (Cavco CEO, MHI Chairman): No direct response found addressing MHARR’s critique or the pending legislation.
• Lesli Gooch (MHI CEO): No public statement found specifically responding to MHARR’s concerns.
• Molly Boyle (MHI Spokesperson): No formal reply located.
• David Goch (MHI Outside Attorney): No indication of a response addressing the evidence-based concerns.

Conclusion

Your document is largely accurate based on publicly available sources. MHARR’s critique of MHI aligns with their official statements, and the legislative details match known proposals. However, further clarification on MHI’s stance regarding the Expansion of Attainable Homeownership Through Manufactured Housing Act of 2025 would strengthen the analysis.

Let me know if you need refinements or additional verification!

— The links to the results cited by Copilot are as shown below. They are also reflected in the screen capture of that Q&A that verifies the accuracy of the above that is posted below.

• 1) https://manufacturedhousingassociationregulatoryreform.org/mharr-issues-proposed-modifications-to-pending-and-potential-legislation-impacting-manufactured-housing/
• 2) https://www.manufacturedhomepronews.com/h-r-5198-expansion-of-attainable-homeownership-through-manufactured-housing-act-of-2023-manufactured-housing-institute-supported-bill-explored-plus-sunday-weekly-mhville-headlines-recap/
• 3) https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2025/02/25/2025-03038/manufactured-home-construction-and-safety-standards-postponing-effective-date

 

11) As MHProNews has dutifully reported, and as AI platforms themselves suggest, AI can make mistakes, and the results produced by AI should be checked for accuracy. While they are often correct, there are times that something is apparently missed or misread. That was the case above, which sparked this follow up with Copilot. But note the significance. Copilot DID NOT merely agree with MHProNews, they left the door open for MHI in its initial response. It was only in the second response that follows that Copilot more definitively stated that MHProNews’ reporting is factually accurate and supported by the known evidence online.  MHProNews would concur with Copilot that seeing MHI’s internal communications would be helpful, but MHI has declined sharing those with this publication. Legal authorities with subpoena powers could obtain such documents.  With those points in mind, this was the follow up which is also verified for accuracy in the screen capture that follows it.

Copilot, while I largely agree your remarks above, you seem to have missed the relevance of the screen captures of MHI’s website that searched for those draft bills. Furthermore, that report also linked Bill Boor’s testimony to Congress that included those bills, isn’t that correct? Finally, you yourself have the ability to scan the MHI website, and see if there is any public mention of those reported items. Confirm, correct, or clarify as warranted by any and all online evidence. If there are any factual or logical errors apparent in that drafted article, please point them out and link results.

Updated Analysis Based on Additional Evidence

1) MHI Website Search Results for Draft Bills

Your report includes screen captures showing searches on the Manufactured Housing Institute (MHI) website for the Expansion of Attainable Homeownership Through Manufactured Housing Act of 2025 and Primary Authority to Establish Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards. These searches reportedly returned no results, suggesting that MHI has not publicly posted information about these bills on its website.

This aligns with my own search, which did not find any public-facing statements from MHI on these bills. If MHI is supporting these bills but not publicly discussing them, that raises transparency concerns.

2) Bill Boor’s Congressional Testimony

Your report correctly references William “Bill” Boor’s testimony before Congress on May 14, 2025. In his remarks, Boor explicitly discusses:

• Congressman John Rose’s bill to remove the permanent chassis requirement.
• A draft bill that would give HUD authority over manufactured housing standards proposed by other regulators.

This confirms that these bills were formally presented in a congressional hearing, reinforcing their significance.

3) Logical and Factual Accuracy of the Drafted Article

Your report’s core claims appear factually accurate based on available sources:

• MHARR’s critique of MHI is consistent with their June 11, 2025, press release.
• MHI’s lack of public engagement on these bills is supported by website searches.
• Boor’s testimony confirms the existence of these bills and MHI’s involvement.

Corrections or Clarifications

• Clarification on MHI’s Position: While Boor’s testimony suggests MHI supports these bills, their lack of public-facing statements raises questions about their transparency.
• Potential Missing Context: If MHI has privately advocated for these bills, that information is not readily available online.
• Further Verification Needed: If MHI has issued statements elsewhere (e.g., member-only communications), those would need to be reviewed separately.

Conclusion

Your drafted article is factually sound and logically consistent based on available evidence. The lack of public-facing statements from MHI on these bills is notable, and Boor’s testimony confirms their relevance. If you want to further strengthen your case, additional verification of MHI’s internal communications could be useful.

Let me know if you need further refinements!

—

• 1) https://www.manufacturedhomepronews.com/h-r-5198-expansion-of-attainable-homeownership-through-manufactured-housing-act-of-2023-manufactured-housing-institute-supported-bill-explored-plus-sunday-weekly-mhville-headlines-recap/
• 2) https://www.congress.gov/index.php/bill/118th-congress/house-bill/5198
• 3) https://manufacturedhousingassociationregulatoryreform.org/mharr-issues-proposed-modifications-to-pending-and-potential-legislation-impacting-manufactured-housing/

12) Perhaps the pièce de résistance for this thread is the following Q&A with Copilot as a follow up to the above, all performed on this date as the uploaded draft Copilot was responding to clearly indicates.

Thanks, Copilot. Do you see evidence-based reasons and patterns of behavior that could logically lead someone to conclude that possible antitrust violations are at play by firms in the manufactured housing industry that include members of the Manufactured Housing Institute (a.k.a.: MHI or manufacturedhousing.org) as Doug Ryan, Samuel Strommen, Mark Weiss, and multiple class action lawsuits launched in 2023 and other sources have suggested? Explain your findings and link results.

Yes, there is evidence-based reasoning and patterns of behavior that could logically support concerns about possible antitrust violations involving firms in the manufactured housing industry, particularly those linked to the Manufactured Housing Institute (MHI).

Key Findings

1. Class Action Lawsuits Targeting MHI Members
   • Multiple class action antitrust lawsuits were filed in 2023 and 2024 against MHI-linked manufactured home community operators.
   • Defendants include Sun Communities, Equity Lifestyle Properties, Hometown America, RHP Properties, YES! Communities, Inspire Communities, Kingsley Management, and Cal-Am Properties.
   • The lawsuits allege price-fixing and collusion in lot rental rates, which could indicate anti-competitive behavior.
2. Samuel Strommen’s Antitrust Analysis
   • Strommen’s 2020 research argued that MHI and its largest members have engaged in market manipulation to restrict competition and consolidate control over the industry.
   • His findings suggest that MHI-backed firms have influenced regulations to limit new entrants and suppress independent manufacturers.
3. Doug Ryan’s Critique of MHI’s Role
   • Ryan, a housing policy expert, has repeatedly pointed out that MHI’s lobbying efforts appear to favor large corporate members while hindering smaller competitors.
   • He has raised concerns that MHI’s actions contribute to market concentration, reducing consumer choice and affordability.
4. MHARR’s Position on MHI and Market Consolidation

• Mark Weiss, CEO of Manufactured Housing Association for Regulatory Reform (MHARR), has publicly criticized MHI for failing to advocate for policies that promote competition.
• MHARR argues that MHI’s approach has led to regulatory barriers that disproportionately harm smaller businesses while benefiting consolidators.

Patterns Suggesting Possible Antitrust Violations

• Market Concentration: The industry has seen increasing consolidation, with large MHI members acquiring smaller competitors.
• Regulatory Influence: MHI-backed firms have lobbied for policies that restrict competition, such as zoning barriers and financing limitations.
• Price Coordination Allegations: The class action lawsuits suggest that major manufactured home community operators may have colluded on rental pricing, which could violate antitrust laws.

Conclusion

While no formal antitrust ruling has been issued, the lawsuits, expert analyses, and industry trends provide strong evidence that anti-competitive behavior may be occurring. If proven, these actions could harm consumers, independent businesses, and market competition.

Would you like a deeper dive into specific legal precedents or regulatory frameworks that could apply?

• 1) https://www.manufacturedhomepronews.com/two-more-class-action-antitrust-suits-hit-high-profile-manufactured-housing-institute-members-and-mhi-state-affiliate-members-towsend-in-case-no-123-cv-16462-and-muns-pleadings-and-analysis/
• 2) https://www.kron4.com/business/press-releases/ein-presswire/655334744/several-mhi-linked-manufactured-home-communities-a-k-a-mobile-home-parks-and-datacomp-hit-by-class-action-suit/

 

13) For whatever reason, MHARR has opted to ignore the historic point that MHI some decades ago reportedly torpedoed the Hiler Amendment, that could have made the removable chassis federal law in the 1990s.

MHProNews observes again that perhaps MHARR may be trying to thread a needle, hoping to find the common ground that some in the MHI orbit at times suggest that is desired, but in fact show no clearly public effort in doing.

 

14) MHProNews notes that Gemini and xAI’s Grok have also confirmed evidence-based concerns with respect to the known facts, evidence, and patterns of behavior. Gemini Deep Research into SEC materiality and other legal issues are linked here and here.

 

15) Last but not least. It should be noted that MHI’s fingerprints are apparently all over these pending bills. Starting with MHI’s use of their own new tagline in the federal bill.  To better understand that problematic lingo, see the report linked below.

That begs its own set of questions. Why would MHI allow these bills to get to this stage with the kind of errors in it that MHARR has identified? Whose side are they on anyway?

 

 

Additional MHVille related information that can shed further light on the above follows. MHProNews Programming notes: new land-lease manufactured home community (MHC) research plus a fresh earnings call are among the pending topics. There are routinely mainstream news, research and other issues that may arise and which MHProNews plans to monitor and report as warranted.

Maris Jensen Univ Study ‘Market Foreclosure in Manufactured Housing’ –Antitrust Violation Alarms– ‘Distort Competition to Monopoly Outcome’ Named Specific Manufactured Housing Institute Firms

 

‘By Preventing Market Failures Antitrust is Deregulatory Tool’-Antitrust Myth Busting Mark R. Meador Commissioner U.S. Federal Trade Commission-2nd Annual GWU Antitrust Conference; MHVille FEA

4 of Top 10 MH States’ Shipments Dip-Latest Manufactured Housing Industry Production Data; Notice-It’s Not the Job of Honest Trade Media to Crash Problematic Corporate Stocks-However–MHVille FEA

 

Wall Street Journal on ‘Disaster Ravaged Areas and the Rush to Take Modular Homes Mainstream’ – Insights on What Was and Wasn’t Reported; Modular and Manufactured Housing Hot-Takes with FEA

‘Seeking the Alignment of the Manufactured Housing Industry with President Trump’s and HUD Secretary Scott Turner’s Vision of Affordable Homeownership’-Q+A Danny Ghorbani ex-MHI VP ex-CEO of MHARR

What is a Fiduciary? Do Nonprofit Board Members have a Fiduciary Duty? What is Self-Dealing? What Does FBI Do and What Role Does the FBI Play in White Collar-Loss of Rights Crimes? MHVille FEA

Legacy Communities Hits Manufactured Home Community Residents with $100 Monthly Increase, Legacy Communities Responds to Complaints ‘Rent Tripled’ ‘Unacceptable’ ‘Contact Governor’ per Tim Rose

Legacy Communities Ripped by Judy Annin-Manufactured Homeowners for Change ‘People Living in Manufactured Home Parks Will Soon Join Next Wave of Homeless’ Senator Sherrod Brown Invoked; plus MHMarkets

Warren Buffett Accused-Evidence of Insider Trading Articles-Video Reveal Buffett ‘Nice Guy Billionaire Image a Ruse’ Clayton Homes-21st Mortgage-Vanderbilt Mortgage Implications; Facts-Analysis

Reminder. There are sound reasons why AI has said that MHProNews has more than 6x the combined readership of MHI and its affiliated bloggers and trade media.

Again, our thanks to free email subscribers and all readers like you, as well as our tipsters/sources, sponsors and God for making and keeping us the runaway number one source for authentic “News through the lens of manufactured homes and factory-built housing” © where “We Provide, You Decide.” © ## (Affordable housing, manufactured homes, reports, fact-checks, analysis, and commentary. Third-party images or content are provided under fair use guidelines for media.) See Related Reports. Text/image boxes often are hot-linked to other reports that can be access by clicking on them.)

By L.A. “Tony” Kovach – for MHProNews.com.

Tony earned a journalism scholarship and earned numerous awards in history and in manufactured housing.

For example, he earned the prestigious Lottinville Award in history from the University of Oklahoma, where he studied history and business management. He’s a managing member and co-founder of LifeStyle Factory Homes, LLC, the parent company to MHProNews, and MHLivingNews.com.

This article reflects the LLC’s and/or the writer’s position and may or may not reflect the views of sponsors or supporters.

http://latonykovach.com

Connect on LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/latonykovach

 

 

 

 

50th Anniversary of Enactment of HUD Code for Manufactured Housing; the Shroud w/More News Through the Lens of Manufactured Homes and Factory-Built Housing; plus Sunday Weekly Headlines Review

Facts-Analysis: Who Are Largest Berkshire Hathaway Owners? Biggest Institutional Investors? Insights from Chairman Buffett-Other Major Conglomerate Interests in Manufactured Housing; Apple Tease

Manufactured Home Industry Insider Trading Updates-Manufactured Housing Institute (MHI) Vertically Integrated Producers and Manufactured Home Community Operators; MHVille Facts-Evidence-Analysis

Fran Quigley-Rep Ilhan Omar-Trillion Dollar ‘Homes for All’+‘Manufactured Housing Legislation-‘Invest 12 Million New Housing Units’ Facts-Analysis; plus Sunday Weekly MHVille Headlines Recap

William Haupt III Exposé: ‘Homeless at Historic Rate under Biden-Harris’ ‘Homelessness is the Canary in Mine-Something Radically Wrong if Anybody is Living on Streets’-MHLinks; plus MHMarkets

Jury says Guilty on All Counts Including Securities and Wire Fraud-‘Told Lie Upon Lie’ Misleading-Faked ‘Trailer Park Nation’ – DOJ says OZY News Co-Founder Carlos Watson Found Guilty; MHMarkets

Name Calling, Evidence, Facts, and Manufactured Housing’s Primary ‘Muckraker’ Shed Light on Manufactured Home Industry Underperformance; plus Sunday Weekly Headlines Recap

Atty Frank Quigley-‘Evict the Landlords!’ ‘Abolish Rent!’ ‘U.S. Govt Chief Architect of Wretched Housing System’ ‘Housing in U.S. is Anything but Free Market System’ Claims-Evidence-MHAnalysis

Unpacking PR with Kevin Clayton-‘Clayton Applauds New FHA Appraisal Requirements Improving Valuation of Off-Site Built Homes’ What Manufactured Housing Institute Members May Not Say; plus MHMarket$

Exposé-Nerd Wallet’s Abby Badach Doyle Looks at Manufactured Housing in ‘Buying a Manufactured Home? Ask These 4 Questions First’ MHI CEO Lesli Gooch Involved, Copilot AI plus MHVille Analysis

CNN Poll-Most Renters Can’t Afford to Buy House Yet Skyline Champion Insiders Are Only Selling SKY Shares-2nd Largest Manufactured Home Producer in 2024. What’s Up? Frank Rolfe Remark-Analysis

‘This Republic was Not Established by Cowards and Cowards Will Not Preserve It’ – Elmer Davis; ‘Cowards Die Many Times Before Their Actual Deaths’ – Julius Caesar; Silent Majority-William Haupt III

Site Builders Lennar-DR Horton Go for HUD Code Market Price Point-New Conventional Single-Family Houses $100k-200k Mimic Single Section Manufactured Homes and Tiny Houses–Facts-Video-Analysis

What is a Fiduciary? Do Nonprofit Board Members have a Fiduciary Duty? What is Self-Dealing? What Does FBI Do and What Role Does the FBI Play in White Collar-Loss of Rights Crimes? MHVille FEA

‘Monopolists Exploited Covid and Tariffs;’ Golden Age or Stone Age? MHARR-Dept of Energy Extends Tier 2 Manufactured Housing Energy Standards Compliance Deadline-MHI Page Mute-Why? MHVille FEA

Federal Judge Once Again Rules Google is Illegal Monopoly-Why it Should Matter to Oligopoly-Style MHVille Industry Consolidators Affordable Home Seekers and Manufactured Housing Institute-FEA

Historic Demo! Can’t Solve Affordable Housing Crisis Without Factory-Built Housing Including Manufactured Homes. So Why is Manufactured Housing Floundering? Per Fed+Federal Officials=Sabotage

‘No Where Affordable or Available to Live? Blame the Government’ Unpacking CRC’s Robert Stilson Review of PLF’s VP James S. Burling on Housing Crisis; Sheetz! SCOTUS on Manufactured Home Case-FEA

Mainstream News-Lack of Affordable Housing Creates ‘Death Spiral’ Community Leaders Turn to ‘Mobile Homes’ in try to Save Town–Manufactured Housing Institute and Corp Officials are You Listening?

Bipartisan-Bicameral Housing Supply Plan ‘We Need All-of-the-Above Approach to Fix U.S. Housing Crisis-Manufactured Homes Included in Lawmakers’ Push; plus Sunday Weekly MHVille Headlines Recap

‘There’s No American Dream-Just Survival’-IL Dem Rips Frank Rolfe Style of MHC Biz Practices by Name–Fresh Rent Control Push Uses Rolfe as Poster Child; Homes of America Named too-MHVille FEA

‘Make Americans Wealthier’ ‘Rip Bureaucracy Power’ ‘Reciprocal Tariffs~Trillion$ Create Jobs Like Never Before’ ‘End Green Scam’ New AK Pipeline ‘End Wars’ DOGE v Inflation-But Housing Pushback-FEA

https://www.manufacturedhomepronews.com/friday-flashback-and-fast-forward-the-manufactured-home-solution-vs-manufactured-home-problem-plus-manufactured-housings-problems-and-solutions-in-a-nutshell-mhvi