Why State Laws Matter for Your Screening Process
The Fair Credit Reporting Act sets the federal floor for tenant screening compliance, but state and local laws often go further. Some states cap application fees. Others restrict how far back you can look at criminal history. A growing number of cities have enacted "ban the box" ordinances that change when and how you can consider criminal records in housing decisions.
If you're screening tenants without knowing your state's specific rules, you're exposed to fines, lawsuits, and Fair Housing complaints — even if your process would be perfectly legal in a neighboring state. The rules below cover the major areas where state law directly affects how you screen tenants.
Note: Laws change frequently. This page provides a general overview current as of early 2026, but you should verify the specific rules in your jurisdiction before finalizing your screening criteria. Many cities and counties have additional local ordinances that go beyond state law.
Application Fee Restrictions
Some states limit how much landlords can charge as an application fee, and a few require the fee to reflect actual screening costs. Others impose no limits at all.
| State | Fee Limit | Additional Rules |
|---|---|---|
| California | ~$60 (adjusted annually) | Must reflect actual screening costs; must provide itemized receipt |
| New York | $20 | Statewide cap; applies to all rental applications |
| Washington | Actual cost only | Cannot exceed actual cost of screening; must provide receipt |
| Minnesota | Actual cost only | Must give applicant a copy of the report at no extra charge |
| Wisconsin | $25 | Statutory maximum; must refund if unit is filled before processing |
| Texas | No state cap | Market-driven; typically $30–$75 |
| Florida | No state cap | No specific restrictions on amount |
In states without fee caps, best practice is to charge only what your screening actually costs — typically $25 to $50. Charging significantly more than your actual costs can create legal issues even where no cap exists, and it discourages qualified applicants from applying.
Criminal History Restrictions
How landlords can use criminal history in screening decisions is one of the fastest-changing areas of tenant law. At the federal level, HUD guidance requires individualized assessment rather than blanket rejection policies. At the state and local level, restrictions vary widely.
| State / City | Key Restriction |
|---|---|
| California | Seven-year lookback limit; cannot consider most convictions older than seven years |
| Colorado | Five-year lookback for most convictions under the Rental Application Fairness Act; cannot consider arrest records or sealed records |
| Illinois | Cannot discriminate based on arrest records; must evaluate convictions individually |
| New York City | Fair Chance for Housing Act prohibits criminal history inquiry until after conditional offer; requires written individualized assessment |
| Seattle | Cannot use most criminal records in screening; limited exceptions for sex offenses |
| Portland, OR | Cannot consider most criminal history in housing decisions; limited exceptions |
| San Francisco | Cannot inquire about criminal history on applications; conditional offer required first |
Even in states with no specific criminal history restrictions, the federal Fair Housing Act still applies. You cannot use criminal history as a proxy for racial discrimination, and blanket rejection policies carry significant legal risk. Evaluate each case individually, consider the nature and recency of the offense, and document your reasoning. See our background checks guide for detailed guidance on legally compliant criminal history evaluation.
Eviction Record Restrictions
Several states and cities have enacted laws limiting how landlords can use eviction records in screening, particularly eviction filings that didn't result in a judgment against the tenant.
Some jurisdictions seal eviction records after a certain period, prohibit landlords from considering filings that were dismissed or settled, or limit eviction record reporting to a specific number of years. The reasoning behind these laws is that a filed-but-dismissed eviction case may not indicate any fault by the tenant — it could have been filed in error, resolved through mediation, or dismissed for procedural reasons.
Your screening criteria should distinguish between eviction filings and eviction judgments, and you should know your state's rules about how each can be used. For more detail on interpreting eviction records, see our eviction history check page.
Source of Income Protections
A growing number of states and cities prohibit landlords from discriminating against tenants based on their source of income. This primarily affects landlords who might prefer not to accept tenants using housing vouchers (commonly called Section 8), disability income, child support, or other non-employment income sources.
States with source of income protections include California, Connecticut, Illinois, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Washington, and others. In these jurisdictions, you cannot refuse to rent to someone solely because their income comes from a housing voucher or public assistance rather than employment.
Even in states without explicit source of income protections, be cautious about policies that effectively exclude voucher holders or recipients of public benefits. These policies can trigger Fair Housing challenges based on disparate impact.
Security Deposit Limits
While not directly a screening law, security deposit limits affect how you can mitigate risk for borderline applicants. Many landlords offer conditional approval — a higher deposit in exchange for accepting an applicant who doesn't fully meet all criteria. But if your state limits deposits, this option may be restricted.
Some states cap security deposits at one month's rent, others at two months, and some have no cap at all. Know your state's limits before structuring conditional approval terms, and make sure any increased deposit requirement is based on legitimate screening criteria applied consistently to all applicants.
Building a Compliant Process
The safest approach is to build your screening process around the strictest rules that apply to you — which means considering both state law and any local ordinances in the cities where your properties are located. A landlord in San Francisco faces very different rules than one in rural Texas, and a landlord with properties in multiple jurisdictions needs to comply with the rules in each one.
Write your screening criteria down, apply them consistently, document every decision, and review your process at least annually to account for law changes. For a complete walkthrough of building a legally compliant process, see our application process guide and our Fair Housing compliance page.
State laws set the rules, but your process is what keeps you compliant. Use our tenant screening checklist to make sure you're hitting every step, and review your background check and credit report procedures against the laws in your specific state.