9 ms·

Here in Amsterdam I find that the rates of short-term tourist rent to long-term citizen rent is about 3:1. i.e., an apartment which costs $1000 a month, could

Here in Amsterdam I find that the rates of short-term tourist rent to long-term citizen rent is about 3:1. i.e., an apartment which costs $1000 a month, could be rented out for about $100 a day, or $3000 a month. That does mean you need to be there managing the thing, handling listing and bookings, doing a hand-over of the keys and a brief tour, and cleaning up after. I know a friend of a friend of a friend has been providing a service for 2 years now where he does all that for 20% of the profit on other people's properties. Amsterdam has set up rules that limit Airbnb to 60 days a year. I think that's sensible. It allows people to make some money while traveling two months of the year, lowers costs of housing because in the up to 60 days the home owner is gone, the space is not wasted but instead utilised. But it prevents investors from arbitraging the 3:1 ratio between short-term subletting income vs costs of holding the property long-term, which turns your city into a tourist paradise at the expense of raises prices for actual citizens too much (because all the investors push up prices) for my taste. This 60d rule is a good balance. (it's just yet to be enforced)

ikeboy 10y ago
So have six friends buy an apartment and split airbnb? Each one sells it to the next after 60 days.
- Retric 10y ago
  Trivial to verify addresses on Airbnb side.
  - chimeracoder 10y ago
    > Trivial to verify addresses on Airbnb side. Not trivial at all. Without even pausing to think, I could offhand list at least four different ways of writing my home address that would be impossible for AirBNB to automatically disambiguate from other (potentially) different residences, without actually visiting the building... but which would be perfectly unambiguous for a guest who actually visits. Address verification is hard. Not impossible, but when you're operating in many cities and countries that have wildly different ways of organizing their addresses, it's not trivial at all.
    - jackgolding 10y ago
      I think it sounds like a good idea and I agree address verification is hard but is it worth the risk? I imagine this would throw out all insurance liability if things go wrong.
      - chimeracoder 10y ago
        > I imagine this would throw out all insurance liability if things go wrong. AirBNB doesn't offer insurance - it offers a "guarantee", which is legally different in an important sense. In any case, if you're looking to rent out your place full-time, you probably don't really care about AirBNB's guarantee anyway.
    - _delirium 10y ago
      Some countries (like the UK) have a widely used address registry rather than freeform addresses. And most online shopping services have figured this out (even multinational ones that ship to many countries), so I doubt a company as large as AirBnB would have technical trouble doing so if it really wanted to. The way it works when I order online: I first enter my postal code, then it shows me a drop-down box with the valid addresses in that postal code (there are exactly 16 of them), then I choose one of those. Online merchants like it because it reduces chances of fraud/misdeliveries/etc. (their contracts with parcel delivery services might also require it).
      - peterjmag 10y ago
        Agreed. The USPS also provides address verification / normalization services. [1] Though I'm honestly not sure those are as comprehensive as certain other countries, as you mentioned. Germany has the Meldepflicht[2] for instance, which requires all residents to register their address with an Einwohnermeldeamt, and I'm pretty sure that's validated against a nationwide database. Granted, it's not granular enough pinpoint exact apartments (since apartments aren't generally numbered here), but still, I imagine that kind of thing would make it pretty difficult to bypass a law like Amsterdam's 60 day rule. [1] https://www.usps.com/nationalpremieraccounts/manageprocessandaddress.htm https://www.usps.com/nationalpremieraccounts/manageprocessan... [2] https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meldepflicht https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meldepflicht
  - hibikir 10y ago
    Airbnb already has a whole lot of listings out there lying about the address because the people that put the apartment for rent don't want the building association to know that they are renting. They often just claim that the apartments for rent is in an office building in the same block. Therefore, Airbnb doesn't really verify addresses at all, and lets people bypass any system that relies on this. This happens in major markets where Airbnb has people on site too: A good chunk of listings in San Francisco's SoMa are doing this. Thus, I have little faith that any system to prevent breaking local laws based on addresses will go anywhere unless Airbnb does a lot more work to verify the accuracy of listings.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- idiot_stick 10y ago
  >So have six friends buy an apartment and split airbnb? I love how you make sound like it's no big deal to have six people split on an expensive capital asset like real estate, all to get around an AirBnB law.
- radicalbyte 10y ago
  Doesn't work: 1. 6% house sales tax. 2. BAG registry contains all address registrations in incredible details. Public data. More available for a price.
  - ikeboy 10y ago
    6% is insignificant compared to the 200% returns here. Anyway they could sell for a nominal amount maybe? I don't see why it being public would matter: the whole point is that this should be legal since the owner is only airbnbing it for 60 days.
    - StavrosK 10y ago
      That's 6% every two months, so you're going to be paying 36% of the value of the apartment every year. For an apartment that costs, say, half a million, that's 180,000 euros a year in taxes. I mean, if you're renting the flat for 15,000 euros a month (instead of the 1000 it would actually fetch), it might work.
golergka 10y ago
Why do you think that artificially influencing market to influence one group of people (citizens) at expense of another (tourists) is justifiable?
- tacostakohashi 10y ago
  These groups of people aren't playing on a fair field in the first place. The citizens, who live and work in attractive city, pay hefty taxes to make the whole thing possible - running the public transport, collecting the garbage, keeping the running water and sewage operating. Obviously taxation policies and city budgets vary a lot from place to place, but it's very common for these things to be funded by income taxes on the citizens salaries - which is fine with the citizens, but then why should to tourists get to come in and freeload off all the nice things paid for by those taxes? In a parallel universe where all these services were paid for by taxes on property values or rents, I would agree with you - whoever wants to pay the most per night can have it, but in the real world the market is already skewed to start with.
  - JoeAltmaier 10y ago
    Tourists spend out of proportion to local citizens? Most towns welcome tourism, even advertise for it. I'm guessing its because businesses thrive, tax revenues rise, and the community prospers.
  - yummyfajitas 10y ago
    ...why should to tourists get to come in and freeload off all the nice things paid for by those taxes? For the same reason retirees should not be permitted to move into a city funded by income taxes. In the US, far more cities are funded by property taxes than income taxes. NYC and Yonkers are the only cities I can think of with an income tax.
  - golergka 10y ago
    Wait, it seems I don't know something here. Do people in US or wherever pay income taxes to local authorities and not to central federal government?
yummyfajitas 10y ago
If the highest value use of apartments is short term rentals, why is it "sensible" to limit that use? I understand why rent seeking locals would favor this. But how is this any different from, e.g., Austin cabbies ripping off the tourists and getting Uber banned?
- charlesdm 10y ago
  I have a friend who rents out apartments on Airbnb in London, and the other people in the building _HATE_ that there are constantly new people around.
  - yummyfajitas 10y ago
    I once rented a flat in a conservative housing society in Pune (for those unfamiliar, India has extremely Victorian attitudes to sex), and some other people living there _HATED_ the fact that I quietly enjoy the company of lady guests that I'm not married to. In the US I'm sure you can find people who _HATE_ when their neighbors enjoy the company of guests that they found on Grindr. Does that mean we should shut down Grindr (or prevent Grindr from giving 1 person more than 1 match/month) or pass laws against these activities?
- jon-wood 10y ago
  Its sensible to limit that use because otherwise you'll end up with entire cities in which no one can afford to live, which you need both to provide services to the tourists and to provide tax income to keep the city running.
  - yummyfajitas 10y ago
    Well no, you'll have cities with higher prices in the touristic core, and it'll just be people with lower incomes who get pushed out. That will also help with your second problem. You can pay for services by charging property taxes. since the value of land will go up (thanks to it being used for it's most productive use) and lower income people getting pushed out (such people are more likely to be a net drain on resources), you'll actually have more money to pay for services.

ikeboy 10y ago

So have six friends buy an apartment and split airbnb? Each one sells it to the next after 60 days.

Retric 10y ago
Trivial to verify addresses on Airbnb side.
- chimeracoder 10y ago
  > Trivial to verify addresses on Airbnb side. Not trivial at all. Without even pausing to think, I could offhand list at least four different ways of writing my home address that would be impossible for AirBNB to automatically disambiguate from other (potentially) different residences, without actually visiting the building... but which would be perfectly unambiguous for a guest who actually visits. Address verification is hard. Not impossible, but when you're operating in many cities and countries that have wildly different ways of organizing their addresses, it's not trivial at all.
  - jackgolding 10y ago
    I think it sounds like a good idea and I agree address verification is hard but is it worth the risk? I imagine this would throw out all insurance liability if things go wrong.
    - chimeracoder 10y ago
      > I imagine this would throw out all insurance liability if things go wrong. AirBNB doesn't offer insurance - it offers a "guarantee", which is legally different in an important sense. In any case, if you're looking to rent out your place full-time, you probably don't really care about AirBNB's guarantee anyway.
  - _delirium 10y ago
    Some countries (like the UK) have a widely used address registry rather than freeform addresses. And most online shopping services have figured this out (even multinational ones that ship to many countries), so I doubt a company as large as AirBnB would have technical trouble doing so if it really wanted to. The way it works when I order online: I first enter my postal code, then it shows me a drop-down box with the valid addresses in that postal code (there are exactly 16 of them), then I choose one of those. Online merchants like it because it reduces chances of fraud/misdeliveries/etc. (their contracts with parcel delivery services might also require it).
    - peterjmag 10y ago
      Agreed. The USPS also provides address verification / normalization services. [1] Though I'm honestly not sure those are as comprehensive as certain other countries, as you mentioned. Germany has the Meldepflicht[2] for instance, which requires all residents to register their address with an Einwohnermeldeamt, and I'm pretty sure that's validated against a nationwide database. Granted, it's not granular enough pinpoint exact apartments (since apartments aren't generally numbered here), but still, I imagine that kind of thing would make it pretty difficult to bypass a law like Amsterdam's 60 day rule. [1] https://www.usps.com/nationalpremieraccounts/manageprocessandaddress.htm https://www.usps.com/nationalpremieraccounts/manageprocessan... [2] https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meldepflicht https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meldepflicht
- hibikir 10y ago
  Airbnb already has a whole lot of listings out there lying about the address because the people that put the apartment for rent don't want the building association to know that they are renting. They often just claim that the apartments for rent is in an office building in the same block. Therefore, Airbnb doesn't really verify addresses at all, and lets people bypass any system that relies on this. This happens in major markets where Airbnb has people on site too: A good chunk of listings in San Francisco's SoMa are doing this. Thus, I have little faith that any system to prevent breaking local laws based on addresses will go anywhere unless Airbnb does a lot more work to verify the accuracy of listings.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
idiot_stick 10y ago
>So have six friends buy an apartment and split airbnb? I love how you make sound like it's no big deal to have six people split on an expensive capital asset like real estate, all to get around an AirBnB law.
radicalbyte 10y ago
Doesn't work: 1. 6% house sales tax. 2. BAG registry contains all address registrations in incredible details. Public data. More available for a price.
- ikeboy 10y ago
  6% is insignificant compared to the 200% returns here. Anyway they could sell for a nominal amount maybe? I don't see why it being public would matter: the whole point is that this should be legal since the owner is only airbnbing it for 60 days.
  - StavrosK 10y ago
    That's 6% every two months, so you're going to be paying 36% of the value of the apartment every year. For an apartment that costs, say, half a million, that's 180,000 euros a year in taxes. I mean, if you're renting the flat for 15,000 euros a month (instead of the 1000 it would actually fetch), it might work.

golergka 10y ago

Why do you think that artificially influencing market to influence one group of people (citizens) at expense of another (tourists) is justifiable?

tacostakohashi 10y ago
These groups of people aren't playing on a fair field in the first place. The citizens, who live and work in attractive city, pay hefty taxes to make the whole thing possible - running the public transport, collecting the garbage, keeping the running water and sewage operating. Obviously taxation policies and city budgets vary a lot from place to place, but it's very common for these things to be funded by income taxes on the citizens salaries - which is fine with the citizens, but then why should to tourists get to come in and freeload off all the nice things paid for by those taxes? In a parallel universe where all these services were paid for by taxes on property values or rents, I would agree with you - whoever wants to pay the most per night can have it, but in the real world the market is already skewed to start with.
- JoeAltmaier 10y ago
  Tourists spend out of proportion to local citizens? Most towns welcome tourism, even advertise for it. I'm guessing its because businesses thrive, tax revenues rise, and the community prospers.
- yummyfajitas 10y ago
  ...why should to tourists get to come in and freeload off all the nice things paid for by those taxes? For the same reason retirees should not be permitted to move into a city funded by income taxes. In the US, far more cities are funded by property taxes than income taxes. NYC and Yonkers are the only cities I can think of with an income tax.
- golergka 10y ago
  Wait, it seems I don't know something here. Do people in US or wherever pay income taxes to local authorities and not to central federal government?

yummyfajitas 10y ago

If the highest value use of apartments is short term rentals, why is it "sensible" to limit that use? I understand why rent seeking locals would favor this. But how is this any different from, e.g., Austin cabbies ripping off the tourists and getting Uber banned?

charlesdm 10y ago
I have a friend who rents out apartments on Airbnb in London, and the other people in the building _HATE_ that there are constantly new people around.
- yummyfajitas 10y ago
  I once rented a flat in a conservative housing society in Pune (for those unfamiliar, India has extremely Victorian attitudes to sex), and some other people living there _HATED_ the fact that I quietly enjoy the company of lady guests that I'm not married to. In the US I'm sure you can find people who _HATE_ when their neighbors enjoy the company of guests that they found on Grindr. Does that mean we should shut down Grindr (or prevent Grindr from giving 1 person more than 1 match/month) or pass laws against these activities?
jon-wood 10y ago
Its sensible to limit that use because otherwise you'll end up with entire cities in which no one can afford to live, which you need both to provide services to the tourists and to provide tax income to keep the city running.
- yummyfajitas 10y ago
  Well no, you'll have cities with higher prices in the touristic core, and it'll just be people with lower incomes who get pushed out. That will also help with your second problem. You can pay for services by charging property taxes. since the value of land will go up (thanks to it being used for it's most productive use) and lower income people getting pushed out (such people are more likely to be a net drain on resources), you'll actually have more money to pay for services.