There's reason to be skeptical of the claim that there are too few housing units to satisfy demand in the US.
You get articles like this that are very misleading: https://www.realtor.com/research/us-housing-supply-continues-to-lag-household-formations/
In it, the authors compare household formations with single-familystarts and conclude there's a shortage. But the data excludes multi-family housing units, so the conclusion is at least exaggerated, if not completely false.
If you look at Q2 2000 (first data available) total US housing units, it's 116,047,000. Around that time, there were 105,312,000 households, so 1.1019 housing units per household.
Looking at Q1 2022, total housing units are 142,711,000 and 127,410,000 households, a ratio of 1.1201. It's a small increase but there are still more housing units per household today than in 2000.
(BTW I used FRED using Census Bureau data for the above figures)
Looking at other data, in Q2 2000 there were .66 housing units per working age adult. That has grown to .69 today, so again, an increase in housing supply relative to demand, assuming working adults drive housing demand. (FRED using OECD and Census Bureau data).
I have yet to see a data set that looks at relevant figures and paints a convincing picture that there are just not enough housing units in the US. That there's a housing shortage is such a deeply held assumption that I don't spend a lot of time trying to convince people otherwise.
Using data that consolidates housing needs and housing availability across the entire United States is so meaningless that it is worthless. What is relevant is what exists in each regional/local market.
If there's 100,000 fewer units that needed in San Francisco, then there's a housing shortage in San Francisco, even if there's an excess of 100,000 units in Illinois. Sure, people can move, but only to a point.
I agree with that. But is there data that shows a housing shortage in SF? Or anywhere?
Would that data even be meaningful?
Suppose that dataset exsits - it would have to account for all residential properties nationwide, and then in order to make an assessment that there is or isn't a shortage, you'd have to factor in short term rentals (which are not all properly documented), dedicated vacation homes, and technically unoccupiable properties. It would have to factor in undocumented individuals and families who may not appear on the census but who are still occupying a home. Don't sleep on 55+ communities either - those are
terchnically occupiable residences in the statistic but are inaccessible to many of the most common homebuying demographics.
You also need to consider the availability of properties vs. income level and family size. Just because an efficiency apartment is open in NYC doesn't mean a single mom with 4 kids is going to fit. Similarly, if there are 10 vacant luxury homes, those aren't necessarily available to a working class couple. Just like a 2 bed, poorly maintained probably won't be considered occupiable by a wealthy couple (okay, that's not the best example).
Plus, it's important that there is a modest excess in housing units - without that, the housing market becomes gridlocked because just about everyone needs a vacant place to move to before the place they're moving from is ready for the new occupants.
The assessment we made last year when we were buying our house that our area is suffering from a housing shortage was based upon the availability of rentals in our region that were suitable for our family. We have 3 young kids, so at the very least we were looking at 3 bedroom rentals. Even ignoring some of the other things we considered important, in April of last year there were less than 10 rentals that would have been suitable for our needs, all of which were at least $500 more per month than our current rental. When we moved into our rental in 2016, there were over 60 properties that would have fit that same criteria.
Moreover, homes at that point (and still now) at all but the highest price points were going under contract in less than 5 days. There were, and still are, usually at least 8-10 offers for each one. We found out we were acquaintances with a family who had put in an offer for our house and they told us that after they lost out, they were backing out of the market.
But on paper, you could look at our area and see a modest surplus of homes and yet in practice, for many demographics there isn't. Just because there are a bunch of unoccupied 1-2bed apartments, or small 2 bed homes, or luxobarge mansions currently unoccupied again doesn't mean that everyone can utilize those as viable residences.
I'd contend/agree that there is probably no statistic that can truly assess the deficiency or surplus in US housing, mostly for the reasons listed above. But just because there isn't something that can accurately measure that doesn't mean that in many markets, as indicated by the number of properties available for sale or rent vs. time spent unoccupied, there aren't effectively shortages even if there are units available.
And I would like to reiterate nereo's point - say there are 30,000 excess units across rural Indiana, Illinois, and Iowa - that doesn't mean that 50,000 people in California or North Carolina or Oregon have their housing needs met. Such a statistic that all but completely ignores intent would be disingenuous to the housing market as a whole.