3 ms·

Could you please clarify which of those circumstances do not apply today? Especially the basic one that most housing space is intended for residency which, by

by Argorak 13y ago

Could you please clarify which of those circumstances do not apply today? Especially the basic one that most housing space is intended for residency which, by its nature, is less lucrative then short-term renting? Quite on the contrary, in this case I think that the circumstances here are even pointing towards more regulation and AirBNB is accellerating that.

greghinch 13y ago
The measures were put in place to prevent building owners from turning their apartment complexes into unregulated hotels to avoid paying additional taxes. Because those hotels were unregulated anyway, they often were in a lax state, and so health and safety also became an issue. Conversely, per Airbnb's quote, 87% of the rooms listed on the site are people's own homes of which they rent out a portion, or the whole thing for a limited time they rent out. So these are not people trying to circumvent the tax law (and by all means tax their Airbnb income as a hotel would be), they are just trying to make additional income to live in one of the most expensive cities in the world. Those 87% were not the target of the law, because this model did not exist at the time.
tomjen3 13y ago
Well for one, Uber has had all kinds of problems being allowed to run taxies for hire in NY, and one of the complaints has been that they don't have a city certified taxi-meter installed. That regulation might have made sense before GPS enabled smartphones -- especially when said GPS enabled smartphones are the only way to hail an Uber car. I don't know the reason for banning unlicened hotels, but I imagine that at least one of the examples used were the safety of the cusomers -- that is kinda pointless given that the customer can check out the reviews on AirBNB before he decides to engage in business.
- Argorak 13y ago
  We're talking housing, not cars here. The reason for banning unlicensed hotels is to ensure that there is enough space for actual rent.

by Argorak 13y ago

greghinch 13y ago

The measures were put in place to prevent building owners from turning their apartment complexes into unregulated hotels to avoid paying additional taxes. Because those hotels were unregulated anyway, they often were in a lax state, and so health and safety also became an issue. Conversely, per Airbnb's quote, 87% of the rooms listed on the site are people's own homes of which they rent out a portion, or the whole thing for a limited time they rent out. So these are not people trying to circumvent the tax law (and by all means tax their Airbnb income as a hotel would be), they are just trying to make additional income to live in one of the most expensive cities in the world. Those 87% were not the target of the law, because this model did not exist at the time.

tomjen3 13y ago

Well for one, Uber has had all kinds of problems being allowed to run taxies for hire in NY, and one of the complaints has been that they don't have a city certified taxi-meter installed. That regulation might have made sense before GPS enabled smartphones -- especially when said GPS enabled smartphones are the only way to hail an Uber car. I don't know the reason for banning unlicened hotels, but I imagine that at least one of the examples used were the safety of the cusomers -- that is kinda pointless given that the customer can check out the reviews on AirBNB before he decides to engage in business.

Argorak 13y ago
We're talking housing, not cars here. The reason for banning unlicensed hotels is to ensure that there is enough space for actual rent.