Rental Tenancy Omnibus Survey

Residential Tenancy Laws: Omnibus Survey, July 2025

Background

The Residential Tenancy Act was first floated by former Minister of Housing and Local Government (KPKT, Kementerian Perumahan dan Kerajaan Tempatan), Datuk Zuraida Kamaruddin in January 2019 as part of the National Housing Policy 2018-2025 then during the Pakatan Harapan administration. The National Housing Policy Strategy 2.3 aims to establish a regulated rental market to protect both landlords and tenants, as well as to improve accessibility and affordability of home ownership. In 2022, KPKT initiated public consultations sessions with various bodies and agencies across industries. However, the bill was not tabled in Parliament. In March 2023, then Deputy Minister of KPKT, YB Akmal Nasir, announced the intention to table the bill by 2024. In November 2024, KPKT Minister YB Nga Kor Ming announced renewed engagement sessions with state governments and stakeholders had begun and were expected to conclude by the end of the first quarter of 2025. In March 2025, YB Nga announced that the ministry is still drafting the bill.

The Residential Tenancy Act is long-awaited due to significant gaps in current laws. The current landlord-tenant relationship is governed by a patchwork of general laws, including the Contracts Act 1950, Specific Relief Act 1950 Distress Act 1953 and Civil Law Act 1956, among others. Among various residential tenancy issues highlighted in a joint report by Architects of Diversity and Social Democracy Malaysia include the need for an improved dispute resolution process in the form of a rental tribunal, fair and defined conditions of eviction, non-discrimination clauses and clarification of landlord-tenant responsibilities.

This short survey is intended to provide a measurement of public sentiment on residential tenancy issues and policies, as well as identify differentiated opinions of various communities.

Executive Summary

A nationally representative survey was run as part of YouGov’s Omnibus Survey on 3 July 2025 with 1,104 respondents comprising of residents of Malaysia using a national online panel. Respondents were able to answer the survey in English or Bahasa Melayu. Reported figures are unweighted.
- The majority of respondents (56.9%) support having a national law that sets clear rules in the rental housing market, with only a small minority (10.0%) in opposition.
- Older respondents (45-54, 64.8%; 55+, 68.8%), respondents from the Central region (61.9%) and higher income respondents (RM6,000-RM9,999, 66.9%; RM10,000 and above, 76.9%) had statistically significantly higher net support for a national law compared to other comparative demographic groups.
In the same vein, the majority of respondents (50.3%) also support a residential tenancy tribunal, with only a small minority (10.3%) in opposition.
- Older respondents (45-54, 69.6%; 55+, 67.7%), Chinese respondents (57.7%), Central region respondents (57.6%), higher income respondents (RM6,000-RM9,999, 64.3%; RM10,000 and above, 71.1%), degree holders and above (degree, 62.9%; higher degree, 63.4%) as well as retired respondents (65.0%) had statistically significantly higher net support for a residential tenancy tribunal compared to other comparative demographic groups.
Respondents were split on banning rental racial discrimination, with the majority (49.9%) believing landlords should be allowed to choose on race, a significant minority believing it should be illegal (31.6%), as well as fence sitters (18.4%).
- Across various demographic breaks, Indian Malaysians (63.8%), young respondents (18-24, 39.0%) and full-time students (42.3%) are among groups that had majority support for making race-based tenant rejection illegal.
- Among groups that significantly believed more than the overall average that landlords should be able to discriminate include Gen X respondents (45-54, 59.6%), Malay respondents (57.5%), degree holders (54.5%) and middle-income respondents (RM4,000-RM5,999, 60.4%; RM6,000-RM9,999, 58.0%).
- Meanwhile, respondents with lower levels of education were more unsure than the average (SPM-equivalent, 25.2%; PT3-equivalent, 34.8%; UPSR, 35.9%).