AB 1482 Explained for California Property Owners
AB 1482 (the Tenant Protection Act of 2019) is California's statewide framework for rent caps and just-cause eviction. Coverage is broad but not universal. The exemption analysis is unit-by-unit, with specific notice and ownership-structure requirements. Misapplication — issuing a rent increase above the cap, terminating without proper cause notice, or treating a covered unit as exempt — creates owner exposure that doesn't go away with a manager change. The exposure attaches to the unit and follows the owner.
See city-level rent control overlays →
The two operative parts of AB 1482
1. The rent cap
Annual rent increases on covered units are limited to 5% plus regional CPI, with an absolute ceiling of 10% in any 12-month period. The CPI component is the local Consumer Price Index figure for the metropolitan statistical area the unit sits in — not statewide CPI. Different metros have different prints, so a unit in Riverside metro is calculated against a different CPI than a unit in San Francisco metro.
The figure changes annually as new CPI prints come out. The cap percentage applicable to a renewal you're issuing in May 2026 may differ from the cap percentage applied to that same unit a year earlier. Always verify the current figure before issuing the notice. The official guidance is published by California, but verifying via the underlying CPI data prevents misapplication.
The cap applies per 12-month period, not per calendar year. Two increases in a 12-month window are allowed only if the combined increase is at or below the cap.
2. The just-cause framework
For tenants in continuous occupancy of 12 months or more (or 24 months if other adult tenants joined later in some configurations), AB 1482 limits terminations to statutory just-cause categories. The categories split into at-fault and no-fault.
- At-fault just cause: nonpayment of rent, breach of material lease term, nuisance, illegal use, refusal to sign a similar renewal lease, refusal to provide access, criminal activity on the premises.
- No-fault just cause: owner or qualifying-relative move-in, withdrawal of the property from the rental market, substantial remodel necessitating vacancy, government order requiring vacancy.
No-fault terminations require payment of relocation assistance — typically the equivalent of one month's rent — delivered before the termination effective date.
Who's covered and who's exempt
Coverage is the default; exemptions are specific and require proper documentation. The main exemption categories:
- Single-family rentals not owned by a corporate entity or REIT. Requires (a) the ownership structure to qualify and (b) an exemption notice in the lease meeting the statutory language requirements. Without the notice language, the unit is treated as covered.
- Condominium units with the same conditions.
- Newer construction — units built within the most recent 15 years on a rolling basis. The "15 years" is calculated from each rent increase or termination notice, so a unit that was exempt last year may become covered next year as the 15-year window rolls forward. Verify the specific year cutoff against the current notice date.
- Owner-occupied properties with limited rental units (the duplex exemption with specific conditions about owner occupancy and shared facilities).
- Affordable housing and government-administered units with their own regulatory frameworks.
The exemption analysis is fact-specific. Common misclassifications: assuming a single-family rental is exempt without the proper lease notice, treating a 14-year-old building as still exempt when the rolling window has caught up to it, treating LLC-owned single-family as exempt without checking whether the LLC structure qualifies.
What SB 567 changed
SB 567 (effective 2024) tightened several of the no-fault categories that had been the most frequently abused:
- Owner move-in now requires the owner or qualifying relative to actually move in within 90 days of the tenant vacating, and to live in the unit as a primary residence for at least 12 consecutive months. Documentation requirements apply. Failure to comply triggers tenant remedies including the right to return at the prior rent.
- Substantial remodel now requires permitted work that genuinely necessitates vacancy for at least 30 days. Cosmetic work, paint, flooring, or minor renovations no longer qualify. The notice must specifically identify the permitted work and the permit number.
- Bad-faith remedies — tenants who can show a no-fault termination was issued in bad faith (no genuine intent to move in, no real substantial remodel) can recover actual damages plus statutory damages.
For owners, the practical implication is that no-fault terminations under AB 1482 now require more documentation and follow-through than they used to. The lower-effort path of issuing a no-fault notice and re-renting at a higher rate no longer works without exposure.
Local rent stabilization overlays
Several California cities layer their own rent stabilization ordinances on top of AB 1482, with stricter caps and additional just-cause categories. When a local ordinance exists, both frameworks apply and the stricter rule controls.
Cities with material rent control overlays include:
- Santa Ana — RSO with 3% or 80% of CPI cap, additional just-cause categories
- Long Beach — Rental Housing Ordinance with relocation requirements
- Los Angeles — longstanding RSO on units built before October 1978
- San Francisco — RSO on units built before June 1979
- Oakland, Berkeley, Santa Monica, West Hollywood, Beverly Hills — established ordinances
- San Diego — Tenant Protection Ordinance layered on AB 1482
See the rent control cities list for the current overlay map. Owners in these cities must verify each rent increase and termination action against both AB 1482 and the local ordinance.
The owner exposure from misapplication
The specific risks from getting AB 1482 wrong on a unit:
- Excess rent recovery. A tenant overcharged above the cap can recover the excess amounts plus interest, often as offset against current rent.
- Statutory damages. Bad-faith violations (knowingly issuing over-cap increases, fabricating no-fault grounds) trigger statutory damages of up to three times the excess.
- Voided eviction. An unlawful detainer based on improper just-cause framing typically fails at trial. The owner pays attorney fees on the tenant side and starts over on the termination process.
- Code enforcement and DRE risk. Pattern misclassification by a property manager can become a DRE complaint and a B&P §10145 trust-fund inquiry if the rent collection structure is at issue.
None of these go away when you change managers. The exposure attaches to the unit and to the owner of record at the time of the violation.
What this means during a property manager switch
AB 1482 coverage status and rent-increase history travel with the property, not with the manager. NGC's records-audit phase during a switch confirms unit-by-unit:
- Coverage status under AB 1482 and any local overlay
- Tenancy start date and continuous-occupancy length
- Rent-increase history vs the applicable cap at each notice date
- Just-cause notices issued during the prior firm's tenure and whether they met statutory requirements
- Exemption notice language in the lease, if exemption is being claimed
If anything is misclassified or improperly noticed, you see it in writing before cutover. You can decide whether to absorb the exposure, attempt to remedy with the tenant, or restructure on renewal.
Switching managers? We audit AB 1482 compliance unit-by-unit during onboarding.
Send us your PMA and a current rent roll. We confirm coverage status on each unit, verify the cap was applied correctly on each prior increase, and flag any just-cause notices that don't meet statutory requirements — before the switch closes.
Schedule the call → Or generate the termination letter