
On one hand, a large increase in the older adult population can raise demand for housing units. Older adults typically need more housing units per person than younger adults, because they are more likely to live alone or with just one other person (think: empty nesters, widowed spouses).
However, population aging also leads to higher rates of mortality and disability, both of which have a decidedly negative impact on household headship. These negative impacts grow with age, eventually overpowering the positive, and it appears that the baby boom generation has now reached the point where its net influence on household growth is negative. Indeed, Census data show the number of households headed by baby boomers declined by fully 3.5 million between 2015 and 2025…
Going forward, as the number of older adult households surges, household losses are projected to accelerate even further. Our main-series household projections call for the average annual loss of households 55 and over to increase to 1.6 million in 2025–2035 (fully 300,000 more than in 2014–2024) and then to 1.9 million per year from 2035–2045. Meanwhile, the level of new household formations of younger households is projected to decline, which would add to the decreases in net household growth and new housing demand. Under our main projection scenario, net formations of households under 35 will dip to 2.4 million per year in 2025–2035 and then to 2.3 million in 2035–2045…
Rising losses of older households will likely mean that less new construction will be needed to accommodate new households than in years past, but only if the units given up by older households are smoothly returned to the stock, rather than lost to obsolescence or in need of significant rehabilitation. As such, managing the growing number of vacated units will be a concern for both the public and private sectors in the decades ahead, with major implications for neighborhoods and markets, home prices, rents, and housing affordability more broadly.
The projections here suggest more property and housing could be available in the coming decades. Having more housing available would be good news in many places where construction is limited, little land is available, and real estate prices are high.
But the last paragraph cited above notes two significant issues of this possibly available housing: it could be out of date and it will need repairing. Who might have the resources to update the housing or make it livable? Are we talking decades of fixer-uppers that some might see as opportunity or years of bulldozing and rebuilding done on a larger scale or the houses sitting empty and slowly fading away because they are not seen as desirable?
Another potential confounding factor is who might inherit or own the property after the older Americans are no longer there. Will homes need to be sold to pay debts or to benefit from the sale? Will younger family members want to live in such homes? Some houses will go straight to the market but others will stay within families and among relatives.
I have heard adults describe time periods where they remember neighborhoods seeming to suddenly be home to younger households as an older set of homeowners left. There might be a lot more stories like this coming up but how exactly it will play out remains to be seen.








