Two reputable sources give different answers to how many states prohibit source-of-income discrimination in housing. A 2022 compilation recorded 17 states with voucher nondiscrimination laws. HUD's Office of Inspector General, reporting on the position as at January 2025, counted 23 states and the District of Columbia with statewide laws designating source of income as a protected class, and then noted that only 16 of them explicitly prohibited discrimination against housing choice voucher holders.

None of those figures is wrong. They are counting different things, and that gap is the single most useful thing to understand about this area.

Because "is source of income protected?" is not one question. It is four, and they have different answers for the same property.

One: It Is Not A Federal Fair Housing Act Characteristic

Start here, because it is the only part that is simple.

Source of income is not among the characteristics protected by the Fair Housing Act. The federal list is race, colour, religion, sex, handicap, familial status and national origin. A voucher is not on it.

Bills to add it have been introduced. The Fair Housing Improvement Act was put forward in the 117th Congress to amend the Act to cover source of income and military or veteran status, but no such federal protection has been enacted.

And the federal guidance that did exist on this has been withdrawn. HUD's February 2024 memorandum on source-of-income testing activities under the Fair Housing Assistance Program was among the documents withdrawn effective 17 September 2025.

So under the Fair Housing Act itself, the answer is no. That does not mean federal law never creates voucher protections. Some federal housing programmes impose their own requirements, which is the next question.

Two: Federal Programme Rules May Say Otherwise

This is the part that catches operators who stop at question one.

Owners of Low-Income Housing Tax Credit properties, and owners or operators of certain other federally assisted housing, may face programme-specific restrictions on refusing housing to voucher holders.

For applicable LIHTC buildings, the requirement is tied to the extended low-income housing commitment under Section 42. 26 U.S.C. § 42(h)(6)(B)(iv) requires that commitment to prohibit an owner from refusing to lease to an applicant because the applicant holds a Section 8 voucher or certificate, and 26 CFR § 1.42-5(c)(1)(xi) makes that requirement part of the annual certification and agency monitoring.

It does not come from the Fair Housing Act.

Which produces a result that surprises people: a LIHTC property in a state with no source-of-income law may still be unable to decline a voucher holder who otherwise qualifies for the unit under the applicable programme rules and lawful screening criteria, while a conventional property across the street may be free to.

Note the qualification. Voucher status cannot be the reason for refusal. It does not make an applicant eligible under the programme's own income rules, or satisfy screening criteria applied without regard to the voucher.

The first question is therefore not "what state am I in." It is "what kind of property is this, and what programme requirements attach to it." For a portfolio mixing assisted and conventional properties, that status is a property-level fact worth recording once rather than researching per application. 

Three: State Law, Where The Counting Gets Complicated

Twenty-three states with a source-of-income law; sixteen where the law explicitly reaches vouchers. The gap between those numbers is where operators get caught.

Three things drive it.

1. Some laws protect source of income but expressly exclude housing choice vouchers:
   They cover wages, benefits, child support and pensions while carving vouchers out. A state can appear on a source-of-income list and provide no voucher protection at all.

2. Some laws use language that may not reach vouchers:
   Oklahoma's statute uses the term "public assistance," which commentators have noted may not be precise enough to protect voucher holders if challenged. General language may extend to locally funded tenant-based assistance, or may not, depending on how it is read.

3. And some laws are new or newly effective:
   Delaware is a current example: 2024 legislation repealed a prior exemption that had allowed nonparticipation in government-sponsored voucher systems to avoid a source-of-income proceeding, with the new protections taking effect 1 January 2026 once the statutory implementation condition was satisfied.

Where To Actually Find Your State's Statute

"Read the statute" is only useful if you know where it lives. Four places, in order.

Your state's fair housing act or human rights act. Most source-of-income provisions sit inside the general state anti-discrimination statute rather than in a standalone law. Search the statute for "source of income" and then for "section 8" or "housing choice voucher" separately, because voucher coverage may be stated separately, defined elsewhere, or expressly excluded.

Your state's civil rights or human rights commission. These agencies may publish plain-language summaries of what the statute covers and, where authorized, may investigate or process complaints.

The state attorney general's housing pages, which often carry current guidance and any enforcement positions.

And the municipal code for each city and county you operate in, searched the same way.

Read the definition section, not just the prohibition. That is where vouchers are usually included or carved out, and it is the part summaries most often omit.

And The Law Can Change Through Litigation

This is worth its own heading, because legislative tracking will not catch it.

In March 2026, New York's Appellate Division, Third Department affirmed a ruling declaring the state's source-of-income provision unconstitutional to the extent it prohibited refusal to rent because an applicant's income included Section 8 vouchers.

That decision is not necessarily the final word on the issue, so New York's current position should be verified before relying on it. But it demonstrates the point better than any list could: a state that appears on a source-of-income compilation may have a materially different position by the time you read the compilation.

Four: Local Law, Including In States That Prohibit It

The fourth layer is the one most often skipped.

Many cities and counties have their own source-of-income ordinances. That includes jurisdictions in states with no statewide protection.

And preemption cuts both ways. Several states, including Indiana, Texas, Idaho, Iowa and Kentucky, have enacted laws limiting or preempting local source-of-income protections. Even there, the position at city level is worth checking rather than assuming, because those statutes differ in scope and existing ordinances may have different histories.

Phoenix amended its ordinance to cover source of income, with the city's Equal Opportunity Department reporting enforcement beginning 6 April 2023 and expressly identifying housing choice vouchers among the protected sources. A useful reminder that the map changes at municipal level faster than at state level.

What You Can Still Do Where The Law Applies

A source-of-income law does not require you to abandon underwriting.

Statutes commonly allow minimum income requirements and creditworthiness checks, provided they are applied in a commercially reasonable manner and without regard to source of income.

That phrasing does real work, and it points at the two failure modes.

How the income ratio is calculated. Where a voucher covers most of the rent, applying a multiple of the full contract rent tests the household against an amount they will never be asked to pay. In some jurisdictions, applying a multiple of the full contract rent instead of the tenant's actual portion can create a source-of-income issue. HUD's voucher materials identify ignoring voucher payments when assessing whether an applicant has sufficient income as an example of source-of-income discrimination where applicable law provides that protection.

And a screening standard applied only to voucher applicants. Running a stricter check, or an additional check, on households presenting a voucher is applying the standard with regard to source of income, whatever the written policy says.

The control is consistency, documented. One standard, applied the same way, with the reasoning recorded.

How To Actually Answer The Question For Your Portfolio

Four steps, in this order.

1. Establish the property's programme status first. LIHTC or certain federally assisted properties may be subject to voucher requirements independent of any state or local law.

2. Then check the state statute, not a list of states, using the sources above. Read whether it names housing choice vouchers, uses general source-of-income language, or excludes vouchers expressly. The answer is in the text, not in whether the state appears on a map.

3. Then check the city and county, including in states that limit or preempt local protections.

4. And record the date you checked. This area moves, through legislation and through the courts. A compilation from 2022 was accurate in 2022, and is a poor basis for a decision in 2026.

For the state and local layer, the PRRAC compilation of state, local and federal source-of-income laws, updated March 2026, is the standard reference and is maintained rather than published once. Use it to find the statute, and then read the statute.

Why This Sits Differently From Other Fair Housing Topics

Most fair housing compliance runs off a federal floor with state and local additions on top.

There is no single federal Fair Housing Act rule that applies uniformly to source of income. The obligation, where it exists, comes from state law, local law or programme requirements attaching to the particular property.

Which means a single national policy may not reflect the legal requirements of every jurisdiction. A portfolio operating in twelve jurisdictions may have several genuinely different obligations. A policy written to the strictest of them is a business decision rather than a legal requirement, and it should be made knowingly.

FAQ

1. Is source of income a protected class under the Fair Housing Act?
No. The federal characteristics are race, colour, religion, sex, handicap, familial status and national origin. Legislation to add source of income has been introduced but not enacted.

2. Can a LIHTC property refuse a housing choice voucher?
For applicable LIHTC buildings, 26 U.S.C. § 42(h)(6)(B)(iv) requires the extended low-income housing commitment to prohibit refusing to lease to an applicant because the applicant holds a Section 8 voucher or certificate, and 26 CFR § 1.42-5(c)(1)(xi) makes that part of the annual certification and agency monitoring. Voucher status cannot be the reason for refusal, though the applicant must still qualify under the programme's own requirements and any screening criteria applied without regard to the voucher.

3. How many states have source-of-income laws?
Counts differ because the laws differ. HUD's Office of Inspector General reported that as of January 2025, 23 states and the District of Columbia had statewide laws designating source of income as a protected class, while only 16 explicitly prohibited discrimination against housing choice voucher holders.

4. Does every source-of-income law cover housing vouchers?
No. Some statutes protect source of income generally while expressly excluding housing choice vouchers, and some use language whose application to vouchers is unclear.

5. Where do I find my state's law?
Usually inside the state's fair housing act or human rights act rather than in a standalone statute. The state civil rights or human rights commission and the attorney general's housing pages are the next places to look, and the municipal code for each city and county. Read the definition section as well as the prohibition.

Sources: the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 3601–3619, which does not include source of income among the protected characteristics; the Fair Housing Improvement Act as introduced in the 117th Congress; 26 U.S.C. § 42(h)(6)(B)(iv) and 26 CFR § 1.42-5(c)(1)(xi), for the LIHTC extended use commitment requirement and its certification and monitoring; HUD Office of Inspector General, Public Housing Authorities and Source of Income Discrimination, for the January 2025 figures of 23 states and the District of Columbia with source-of-income protections and 16 explicitly covering housing choice voucher holders; PRRAC, State and Local Source-of-Income Nondiscrimination Laws, Appendix B, updated March 2026, and PRRAC's September 2022 voucher-protection compilation, for the comparative landscape and historical figures; the relevant state statutes and implementation materials, for the Delaware and Oklahoma examples; Matter of People of the State of New York v Commons West, LLC, 2026 NY Slip Op 01253, for the March 2026 appellate decision; the City of Phoenix Equal Opportunity Department, for the enforcement date and coverage of its source-of-income provisions; HUD's housing choice voucher tenant materials, for the treatment of voucher payments in assessing income; and HUD's Notification of Withdrawal of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity Guidance Documents, under which the February 2024 source-of-income testing memorandum was withdrawn effective 17 September 2025. State and local law in this area changes frequently, through legislation and litigation; verify the current position and record the date of verification before relying on it. This article describes general concepts and is not legal advice. Confirm your position with counsel before setting or applying a policy on housing assistance.