Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

VermontArmyBrat t1_iy1xmf2 wrote

Air BnB is taxed, or should be.

Meals and Rooms Tax

You may view your venture as small scale compared to a larger bed and breakfast or inn. However, Vermont tax law requires that you collect and remit tax, just like any other business operating in Vermont.

Vermont law states that sleeping accommodations offered to the public for a consideration on premises operated by a private person, entity, institution, or organization are subject to the Vermont Meals and Rooms Tax if those rentals total 15 or more days in any one calendar year. Note: If you rent your room or other type of lodging to the same person for 30 or more consecutive days, the person is then considered to be a permanent resident, and different rules apply.

The following is a noninclusive list of types of lodging rented or owned by the host which fall under the provisions of the law:

A house or room(s) in a house Cabin, cottage, condominium, ski lodge Barn, bunkhouse, tree house, camper, tent

source

44

Vtguy802812 t1_iy23z0k wrote

Well the meals and rooms tax is a sales tax imposed on the end user. The Airbnb is collecting tax from the customer and remitting it to the state. It doesn’t affect the Airbnb owner’s wallet.

What I believe the person posting means is that the property owners themselves should incur more tax to make purchasing a house for use as a short-term rental less profitable and therefore less desirable.

What that fails to take into consideration is that even if the owners had to increase price to maintain a profit margin, the demand would likely still be there - meaning people would still pay more money to rent an Airbnb in Vermont.

I think the only true answer is to increase housing supply. Then there’s the whole issue of how to actually increase housing supply in VT, but that’s a whole different conversation.

16

popquizmf t1_iy33onm wrote

You lack imagination. If you only double the tax, sure, demand won't really be impacted. You need to go all in and realize that for many rich folk, the tax won't matter, but for anyone who isn't loaded, it will be prohibitive. Use all those extra tax funds to create actual high density, lower income housing.

We are approaching 25% of all sales being investment properties. Do you know why that is? Outside of the investment that's happening around the country, VT is going to be one of the best places for climate change in the US. We need to make property available to lower income folks now, because a real wave of rich people are coming, and it will be like nothing seen before.

By 2050 sea level rise is anticipated to be a 1'+. The amount of people soon to be displaced in unimaginable. We need to act now if we want this state to survive with it's current look/feel. Otherwise, the money will start to flow, and once it gets going this state will change faster that a pit crew changes tires.

36

Room07 t1_iy34hgp wrote

This isn't talked about enough.

11

jsudarskyvt t1_iy40365 wrote

If it takes until 2050 for 1' rise we'll be lucky. As for trying to prevent the changes that will ensue, if we fail to kick our fossil fuel addiction, they will not be able to be prevented.

1

thisoneisnotasbad t1_iy3sh3i wrote

>We need to act now if we want this state to survive with it's current look/feel.

Why should VT get to survive a global catosphroe with it's current look and feel? For real, on the face of global climate change, expect social norms to change.

0

bobsizzle t1_iy45qhg wrote

Because, fuck everyone else. they can stay in California. Plenty of people live in deserts. Build nuclear power plants and desalinization plants. Pump water inland, make large inland lakes and fill aquifers. I don't care if they suffer hotter summers. Same with Texas

4

thisoneisnotasbad t1_iy4lrey wrote

I love the honesty in this answer.

1

bobsizzle t1_iy4wm2e wrote

It is definitely an honest answer. I like the way Vermont is. If I wanted to live by a bunch of jag offs, I'd move to San Diego. I'm not changing what I love about Vermont so some rich assholes can move here to escape hotter summers and drought. and crowd me out. lm not the one with private planes and 3 houses and 6 cars. Last time I even flew, you were still allowed to carry pocket knives on planes.

7

thisoneisnotasbad t1_iy51mfw wrote

I'm with you. I wish most of the recent COVID refugees would leave. I would go back to no cell service at home ans slow internet to get rid of the people who moved here. Not gonna happen, but I understand your sentiment.

4

Northwoods01 t1_iybc7ze wrote

Me and my freinds spoke about the vast difference between the back to the lander hippie types who came previously and the HipsterKarens who came after Covid. The hippies made good neighbors but we don't see these new people being as amicable. The other migration didn't fight their towns as soon as they moved in, attempt to shut down their neighbor's farms, pepper spray bear hunters on public land and all the other surreal crap we've seen recently.

1

PeacefulWay t1_iy33kgz wrote

To be clear, if a rental property, including a short-term rental, is a second home or otherwise not a primary residence to the owner in Vermont, property tax IS levied at a higher rate.

11

Cyber_Punk_87 t1_iy8hlia wrote

Not necessarily. There are two tax rates: homestead and non-homestead. Homestead is primary residence, non-homestead is everything else. Zoning, building type, etc. may effect the valuation of the property, but the tax rate is the same whether it's a second home, Airbnb, hotel, factory, retail space, etc. And in many places, businesses have lobbied to have the non-homestead tax rate be lower than the homestead rate. So second homes and rentals are often taxed at a lower rate...

1

Twombls t1_iy2dti4 wrote

Honestly we need to do both. Simply increasing housing supply wont do much. If its all gettinv turned into airbnbs anyway.

9