The recent controversy over rental preferences in Malaysia is not about racial discrimination. It is simply risk management — the same principle every smart investor and bank uses every day.
Just like a bank: if your credit score is low, the bank does not reject you outright, but it charges a higher interest rate because the risk of default is higher. As a property investor, why would you willingly expose your biggest asset to unnecessary problems? Landlords are not running a charity. They are protecting their investment.
Look at the actual data: 42.8% of rental advertisements rejected at least one ethnic group. That means 57.2% did not reject anyone — the majority of landlords are open to all races. More importantly, the 42.8% who do set preferences are not only Chinese landlords rejecting others. The data includes Malay landlords, Chinese landlords, and Indian landlords who also prefer not to rent to certain groups (including their own community).
When Indians themselves choose not to rent to fellow Indians, can we still call this racism? Clearly not. It shows the issue goes beyond race.
From the landlord’s point of view, the priority is simple: minimum problems, minimum risk. Most landlords just want tenants who will:
- Pay rent on time
- Take care of the property
- Not cause damage or disturbances
This preference is based on real past experiences, not blind prejudice. The tenant has every right to choose where they want to live. Likewise, the owner has every right to choose who they trust with their property.
In the law of contract, it is always about a willing buyer and a willing seller (or in this case, willing landlord and willing tenant). Isn’t it the landlord who ultimately chooses who they wish to rent to? Let the owner of the house decide who they want to rent the house to, as the risk associated with it will be borne by themselves. It is their house and their hard-earned money — not yours.
After all, if anything goes wrong with their property or investment, who is going to be responsible? Who deals with:
- Run-away tenants?
- Wrecking-property tenants?
- Leaving unpaid bills tenants?
- Smoky walls tenants?
- Broken wall and floor tiles tenants?
- Garbage-hoarding tenants?
Who pays the loan makes the rules. Most property owners today cannot even cover their bank loan with the rent they collect. Example: bank instalment RM1,900, rental income only RM1,500. The owner already has to top up RM400 every month from their own pocket. If the tenant stops paying or damages the house, who protects the owner?
This negative cash flow is the norm for many investors — rent often falls short of loan instalments plus maintenance, quit rent, and assessments. Owners aren’t profiting monthly; they’re subsidising the property from their salary, hoping for capital appreciation later. One missed rent payment or major repair can wipe out years of effort. In a market without strong eviction protections or advance rent laws, who bears that hit? The owner, not the tenant.”
Unlike many other countries, Malaysia has no law requiring tenants to pay one year’s rent in advance. The owner carries all the risk.
What many people label as “discrimination” is actually experience-based selection. It is not purely racial. The same pattern exists in Singapore as well. Certain tenants are statistically the least preferred group for tenancy — not because of skin colour, but because of a reputation built from repeated issues with payment, maintenance, and tenancy disputes. Landlords are simply reacting to trends they have seen with their own eyes.
I do not blame landlords who put these restrictions in their advertisements. Many of them have been burned before — late payments, destroyed furniture, or legal battles that cost them thousands. Why would they repeat the same mistake?
So before we rush to accuse landlords of racism, we must understand their side. Tenants and owners both have rights. Most landlords are not evil — they are simply trying to protect their livelihood and avoid sleepless nights.
Blaming owners alone will not solve the problem. Real solutions lie in better tenant screening, stronger tenancy laws (with balanced protections for both sides), and mutual respect.
