A tenant may pay the rent on time, take good care of the property, and still receive notice that the landlord intends to end the tenancy when the lease expires. Under a recent change in New Hampshire law, the expiration of a qualifying lease can now supply the legal basis for that termination.

For landlords and tenants alike, this changes an important assumption about the rental relationship.

For years, the expiration of a lease, standing alone, was insufficient grounds to evict a tenant from what New Hampshire law calls “restricted property.” A landlord needed another recognized basis for termination. Those grounds were not limited to tenant misconduct; legitimate business or economic reasons could also qualify. But the date printed at the end of the lease did not, by itself, settle the matter. The New Hampshire Supreme Court explained that distinction under the prior law.

“Restricted property” is a statutory classification covering residential rentals outside specified exceptions. Certain single-family rentals and units in smaller, owner-occupied buildings are classified differently and were already subject to different termination rules. Identifying which category a property falls into remains an essential starting point. RSA 540:1-a.

Effective July 1, 2026, House Bill 60 added lease expiration to the grounds for terminating a tenancy in restricted property. To rely on the new provision:

  • The lease must have an original term of at least 12 months, or a shorter term that has been renewed for a total period of at least 12 months.
  • The landlord must provide written notice at least 60 days before the lease term ends, stating that the lease will not be renewed and that the tenant must vacate at the end of the term.
  • If a court action to recover possession is necessary, the landlord must file it within six months after the lease expires.

These requirements appear in RSA 540:2, II(i).

For landlords, the change creates more flexibility in deciding whether to continue a qualifying rental relationship. Making use of that flexibility requires advance planning. The actual lease term, renewal provisions, and history of the agreement matter. Simply knowing that someone has lived in the property for a year does not answer every question the statute presents.

The notice also deserves careful attention. New Hampshire’s existing requirements concerning eviction notices and their service remain relevant. A notice must contain the required information and be properly served; an informal message communicating the landlord’s intentions may leave those requirements unsatisfied. Reviewing the paperwork before it is delivered can help avoid a dispute over whether the process was properly begun. RSA 540:5.

For tenants, the practical consequence is a reduction in the assurance of continued occupancy after a qualifying lease ends. Paying rent and complying with the agreement remain essential, but they do not necessarily prevent a termination under this provision. Discussing renewal well before the expiration date may therefore become more important to planning for the coming year.

There are, however, continuing protections. The law expressly preserves the defense of retaliatory eviction and protections against discrimination. A landlord’s response to a protected housing complaint, for example, may still be relevant to whether a termination is lawful. The availability of a retaliation defense depends on the statutory requirements and the circumstances; describing a termination as “no-fault” does not resolve that inquiry. RSA 540:13-a.

A notice is also not a court order. If the tenant remains, the landlord must use the judicial process to recover possession. Changing the locks or shutting off utilities to force a departure remains prohibited. A tenant who disputes the termination should respond promptly to court papers so that the dispute can be heard. RSA 540-A:3; RSA 540:13.

The law also addresses what follows the tenant into the next rental application. A termination under this new provision is not to be treated as an eviction for purposes of rental applications and tenant screening reports, and the court must record that the termination was at no fault of the tenant. That protection should not be understood as a promise that the proceeding will be sealed or erased. The statute expressly preserves a prospective landlord’s ability to make due diligence inquiries. RSA 540:2, VIII.

This is an area where a focused conversation with an attorney, early in the process, can be useful. For a landlord, reviewing the lease and proposed notice can help determine whether this ground is available and how to proceed. For a tenant, reviewing the same documents can clarify whether the requirements have been met and whether grounds exist to challenge the termination. Understanding those questions early can also give both sides a better opportunity to reach a workable agreement.