As the United States faces a mounting housing affordability crisis, a debate is intensifying between home builders and code officials over how best to balance costs, safety, and long-term efficiency in new construction.
This year, the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) renewed calls for Congress to roll back what it calls “excessive government regulations,” arguing that regulatory costs — including compliance with evolving building codes — are now a major barrier to building new homes and apartments.
According to a NAHB member survey, these costs account for nearly a quarter of the price of a single-family home and more than 40% of a typical apartment. However, these numbers include other aspects of the construction process, including surveying; code-specific costs amount to 6% for residential and 11% for multifamily. The group is urging lawmakers to prevent federal agencies from enforcing what it sees as costly energy standards — specifically requirements that federally backed new homes comply with the 2021 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) or ASHRAE 90.1-2019 — claiming these threaten to price out American families.
“Increased regulations, especially energy building code requirements such as the Biden administration’s mandate that new homes meet the 2021 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC), are making it much harder for home builders and multifamily developers to build housing that is attainable and affordable,” said NAHB Chairman Buddy Hughes in testimony before the House Small Business Committee. NAHB claims that compliance with the latest IECC can add anywhere from $22,000 to $31,000 to the price of a new home, with payback periods stretching as long as 90 years. While acknowledging the heightened initial costs of meeting code requirements, an analysis by Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and USDA found homeowners would still net $25,000 in energy cost savings over the span of a 30-year mortgage.
But leaders at the International Code Council (ICC), which develops the I-Codes through a consensus-driven process, say that these standards are designed to balance cost, safety, and long-term savings. They note builders provided significant input for the 2024 IECC, which NAHB itself declared “offers more energy savings and lower building costs.” NAHB’s IECC committee members unanimously supported the 2024 IECC, which has greater efficiency than the 2021 IECC.
“The I-Codes are developed through a consensus-based process where everyone with a variety of different interests participate,” said Ryan Colker, ICC’s Vice President of Innovation. “That really allows for conversations around what is the appropriate level of safety, efficiency, and cost.”
Jim Cika, ICC’s Director of PMG Technical Resources, emphasized that every proposed code change must include a cost estimate and undergo committee review, weighing both safety risks and affordability.
“It requires that every code change have a cost estimate with what the cost would be to implement,” Cika said. “The committee reviews that and balances the risks against the costs.”
Colker and Cika both pointed to the flexibility built into the codes, noting that model codes are designed to accommodate innovation and regional differences. Contractors and local officials can exceed minimum code requirements or propose alternative compliance paths, particularly when new technologies or local conditions warrant different solutions.
“The code is very flexible in what it accepts,” Cika said.
They also stressed the importance of industry involvement. “Our code development process is collaborative and open,” Cika said. “The more voices from the contractor side in support of or against a certain proposal based on their experiences, the better the process is, the better the code changes will be. It’s not just for code officials.”
HVAC Deregulation
For HVAC contractors navigating the complexities of code compliance, ICC officials highlighted a range of practical resources and alternative pathways aimed directly at the trades. The organization’s PMG Resource Center (iccsafe.org/PMG) provides “code notes” documents and plain-language guides on topics such as fire and smoke dampers, mechanical installation best practices, and refrigerant transition requirements — tools designed to clarify code language and prevent costly misinterpretations on the job.
Misinterpretations, Cika noted, can happen on both sides of the counter. “Sometimes it’s not just contractors who are unsure about a requirement — a code official may interpret a section differently, too,” he said. For example, a contractor installing smoke dampers might be told by an inspector to redo an installation based on a specific reading of the code. In these cases, ICC’s “code notes” can provide clarity for both parties, helping resolve disagreements quickly and saving time and money on the jobsite.
Additionally, Cika noted that performance-based compliance paths exist for contractors and designers who have proven, cost-effective solutions that may not align exactly with prescriptive code language. “If you’ve got contractors that have certain ways of doing things that are better than code minimums, and they’re having difficulty getting them approved because they’re performance-based, this would be an alternative path for compliance that they could use,” he said. The process typically involves working directly with local code officials to demonstrate that an alternative method fulfills the code’s intent — something ICC says is easier than many contractors realize.
Both Cika and Colker emphasized that innovation and field experience from the HVAC community not only improve individual projects, but can also influence future code updates. “If folks see an issue with the code, or know a better way to do it, submit a code change proposal and participate in the process,” Colker said, noting that while contractors have not been as involved in this process as engineers, the door is open. “Having correct contractor engagement is only going to make the codes better and more useful for the folks in the field that actually have to make them work,” he added.
The ICC has recently sought proposals to identify ways to achieve the same performance outcomes in residential codes more cost-effectively, and has worked with several states to develop consistent offsite construction standards — efforts the group says will help address both affordability and workforce shortages. Modular and offsite construction, in particular, present unique opportunities. “Offsite construction can provide efficiency, address some workforce challenges, and improve job site safety,” Colker said. “We’ve seen states like Virginia, Utah, Colorado, Rhode Island, and Montana update their standards around off-site construction, and we’re in talks with others. Consistency in regulating these methods opens up opportunities for greater investment and use, which can ultimately bring costs down.”
Still, home builders maintain that regulatory burdens remain too high. NAHB’s Hughes pointed specifically to recent federal requirements that new homes meet the 2021 IECC or ASHRAE 90.1-2019 standards as a tipping point. “The significant undersupply in housing coupled with rapidly increasing home prices clearly indicate the need to reduce the regulatory burden on the housing industry,” Hughes said.
Building Code Legislation
House Resolution 8624 and Senate Bill 4958, both introduced in 2024, would require HUD and the USDA to withdraw the requirement for new federally backed homes to comply with the 2021 IECC or ASHRAE 90.1-2019. As of May 2025, neither bill has become law. The House of Representatives did pass NAHB-supported regulatory reform legislation in late 2024 to increase small business input in the federal regulatory process, but its impact on building codes is still unclear.
NAHB has also submitted deregulatory recommendations to the White House Office of Management and Budget. Municipalities like St. Louis are going the opposite direction by enacting new code. For example, SMART Local 36 successfully lobbied for amendments to the St. Louis fire code last year, requiring ANSI-certified inspectors for fire and smoke dampers.
At the state level, building codes are increasingly in the limelight. In California, Assembly Bill 306 proposes a freeze on new state and local building code updates until 2031, aiming to rein in housing costs. While Gov. Gavin Newsom has signaled reluctance to halt code updates entirely — stating, “California leads the nation in environmental stewardship. I’m not going to give that up” — he has signed executive orders temporarily suspending certain permitting and review requirements after disasters to accelerate rebuilding.
While both sides agree that more housing is urgently needed, the path to affordability remains contested. Code officials argue that rolling back standards is a false economy — trading long-term safety and efficiency for lower upfront costs. Builders counter that ever-stricter codes, no matter how well-intentioned, are pushing homeownership out of reach for many Americans.
With Congress weighing deregulation proposals and the ICC committed to its collaborative process, the landscape for America’s housing standards is poised for change — change that will shape how homes are built, and who can afford them, for years to come.