Massachusetts has been considering legislation that would require home sellers to provide energy assessments and energy performance labels (or “scorecards”) when listing homes for sale. Although supporters argue it increases transparency and promotes energy efficiency, opponents raise concerns that it could have unintended negative consequences — especially for older homes, low-income homeowners, and real estate markets. In this post, we’ll take a deep dive into what the law would require, why people are divided, and what it might mean if it passes.

What Is the Proposed Energy Home Labeling Law?

Several bills have been floated in the Massachusetts legislature, including Senate Bill S.1983 and House Bill H.2887, that propose the following:

• Sellers of one- to four-unit residential dwellings (including condos) would need to obtain an energy assessment before listing the property for sale.

• Sellers must disclose the resulting energy performance label (or scorecard) to prospective buyers, usually before the purchase contract is signed.

• The assessment would consider components such as annual energy consumption/costs, insulation, heating/cooling systems, windows, envelope, and emissions.

• There are proposed exemptions, for example, homes recently assessed, new builds complying with current energy‐code standards, historic houses, low‐income rate households, or sales between family members.

The law has not yet been passed; as of now it remains under discussion, with public debate about whether the benefits outweigh the costs.

What Are the Arguments in Favor?

Those supporting mandatory energy labeling put forward several arguments:

1. Transparency for Buyers
   Homebuyers often lack reliable information about how much it will cost to heat, cool, and maintain a house’s energy systems. A label or score provides estimates of energy costs and performance.

2. Incentivizing Energy Efficiency
   By making energy performance visible, sellers and homeowners may be more motivated to make efficiency upgrades (insulation, windows, HVAC, etc.). This helps achieve state climate goals and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

3. Cost Savings Over Time
   While upgrades may require upfront investment, they can lead to lower energy bills, less energy waste, and possibly greater resale value for homes that perform well.

4. Aligning With Other Disclosure Laws
   As homebuyers are already accustomed to disclosures about lead paint, flood risk, radon, etc., energy disclosure can be seen as another piece of essential information. Itemlive+1

What Are the Arguments Against / Why It’s Controversial

There are also strong objections and concerns raised by realtors, homeowners, and other stakeholders. Among them:

1. Potential Depreciation of Older Homes & Unfair Stigma
   Massachusetts has some of the oldest housing stocks in the U.S. Many older homes are less energy‐efficient simply because of their age. Requiring a mandatory label could stigmatize those homes, potentially reducing their market value.

2. Cost & Burden on Sellers (Especially Low-Income Ones)
   Even with exemptions, some homeowners—particularly in moderate or lower income brackets—may struggle to afford improvements, or may feel pressured to fix things before selling, which adds cost.

3. Delays & Complications in Real Estate Transactions
   If energy assessments or labels are required before listing, that could delay the process of putting a house on the market. Given that home inventory in Massachusetts is already constrained, some argue this adds friction.

4. Definition, Standardization, and Accuracy Issues
   Questions arise: What energy model or protocol should be used? Who qualifies as an assessor? What metrics are most meaningful (cost, consumption, carbon emissions, etc.)? If labels are inconsistent or perceived as unreliable, their usefulness could be undercut.

5. Property Rights / Government Overreach Concerns
   Some see mandatory labeling as state interference with private property and housing markets, imposing obligations on sellers that they might believe should be voluntary.

Implications If It Becomes Law

If Massachusetts passes a mandatory energy labeling requirement, the impacts could be broad:

• Home Sellers will need to budget time & money for assessments; homes with poor energy performance may need retrofits to avoid negative perception.

• Real Estate Agents & Brokers will need to integrate energy labels into their listing workflows; it could become a differentiating factor in marketing homes.

• Homebuyers will have more data to assess total cost of ownership, not just purchase price—key for assessing utility bills and long-term maintenance.

• Housing Equity Concerns: Unless well-designed, the law could exacerbate inequality—owners who can’t afford upgrades may be disadvantaged in the market.

• Environmental Impact: Could help Massachusetts meet its climate and energy goals, reduce energy waste, and lower greenhouse gas emissions over time.

Key Design Questions that Could Make or Break It

To reduce controversy and unintended harms, these design details will matter a lot:

Design Element. What to Consider

Who pays for the assessment? Free or subsidized assessments (e.g., through Mass Save) help reduce

the burden.

Exemptions. Older homes, historic buildings, low-income ratepayers, and homes

already assessed recently. These lessen negative impacts.

Standard metrics & protocols. Ensuring consistency, accuracy, and clarity of the score or label so that

buyers understand what they’re getting.

Timing of disclosure. Before contract vs. before listing — if too late, it reduces the utility of

the label; if too early, it could delay the process.

Support & incentives Grants, rebates, or assistance for homeowners to make improvements;

training for assessors; public education.

The proposal for Mandatory Home Energy Labeling in Massachusetts is controversial because it pits the public good (energy transparency, environmental benefits, long-term consumer cost savings) against concerns about fairness, burden, and economic effects on sellers—especially of older and lower-valued homes.

If crafted carefully, with thoughtful exemptions, subsidies, and consistent standards, the law could deliver meaningful energy savings and help buyers make more informed decisions. But if the implementation is rigid or overly burdensome, it risks depressing home values in certain communities or slowing the real estate market without significantly improving energy outcomes.

Matt Witte strives to be the best realtor in North Andover MA.

Any questions about real estate, reach out to Matt Witte North Andover Realtor MA