From City of Boston media release:
"In addition to classifying and registering the short-term rental units, the regulations include provisions that restrict the number of nights a unit can be booked per year, and require that each unit register with the City of Boston and pay an annual license fee."
Ordinance creates 3 classes of short-term rental units:
- Limited Share Unit: shared bedroom or space in the operator's private residence, operator present during rental - $25 annual fee, can rent 365 days/year
- Home Share Unit: a "whole unit" at the primary residence of the operator - $100 annual fee, can rent 365 days/year but limited to 90 days/year when operator is not present
- Investor Unit: "entire unit" in a "whole dwelling" that is "non-owner and non-tenant occupied" - $500 annual fee, can rent 90 days/year
Properties with outstanding housing, sanitary, building, fire or zoning violations aren't eligible for operation under this program.
Rental income is subject to Room Occupancy Excise tax.
Here is the full ordinance.
Senior Member
Usergroup: Administrator
Joined: 30 January 2012
Location: New England USA Web: DavidHBoggs.com
Total Articles: 2769
Total Comments: 498
Investing in a property in Boston in order to operate it as a full-time landlord sounds like a losing proposition when occupancy is limited to 90 days/year.
Maybe that's the intent - to discourage this kind of operation.
But what will happen if owners of properties ineligible for registration - because of code violations - and owners who simply choose not to register - continue to rent their properties?
Fine for offering an ineligible (code-violating) unit for rent is $300/day, for offering an eligible but unregistered unit $100/day.
Apparently (per language in the ordinance) enforcement will occur only in response to a complaint.
Are those fines sufficient, and will the complaint/resolution process work smoothly?
We'll be watching this.