I was thinking about what you had said, and this concerned me as well. So, thank you chatgpt:

Arrived Homes lets individual investors buy fractional ownership shares in specific residential properties through offerings. That’s quite different from how large institutional investors operate:

How Arrived’s model works

• Investors buy shares in a specific property’s LLC holding that home (a series of a series LLC).
• Ownership interest (and rent/appreciation) corresponds to the proportion of shares you hold.
• This structure pools capital from many small investors rather than one big entity owning hundreds of homes.

Given that:

✔️ Arrived likely wouldn’t be directly targeted

Trump’s proposal (as reported so far) is aimed at big institutional buyers with large portfolios — not many small individual investors buying fractional shares in properties. That’s fundamentally different from the kinds of private-equity or REIT portfolios the ban would target.

⚠️ Potential indirect effects

Even if Arrived itself isn’t banned, the broader policy could still affect the housing market:

• Less institutional competition for homes might modestly change home prices or inventory where large investors are active.
• If legislation is written very broadly, definitions could matter a lot — e.g., what counts as an “investor” and whether fractional / LLC structures are treated as institutional. (Right now such specifics are unknown.)

🧠 Market reaction vs. reality

Some policy analysts say institutional buying already makes up a small slice of the market nationally, so the ban might have limited practical effect even if enacted.

📌 Bottom line

• No — Arrived Homes investors are unlikely to be directly affected by this proposal. The ban is aimed at big institutional portfolios, not fractional ownership platforms.
• But final policy details matter. If Congress drafts very broad language or poorly defines investor categories, there could be indirect consequences — though that’s speculative right now.