Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Businesses United States

Gizmodo Reports Airbnb 'Agrees to Rat Out Its Hosts Like NYC Wants It To' (gizmodo.com) 90

In New York City, Airbnb "has agreed to hand over personal data about its hosts — like their phone numbers and email addresses, along with a full list of every home they're putting on the platform — in order to help city authorities track down those that flout the city's regulations," reports Gizmodo.

The city is Airbnb's largest market in the U.S. -- but city officials have estimated that up to 35,000 listings were violating a law preventing short-term rentals of apartments that don't have tenants. The heat between Airbnb and New York heated up roughly two years ago, when officials passed another local law forcing home-rental companies like Airbnb to disclose data about their hosts on a regular basis, which would shine a spotlight on any that were, say, caught renting out more space than they legally ought to. In return, Airbnb and Homeaway, another short-stay platform, fired back with a lawsuit of their own, which gleaned the favor of local judges last summer.

According to Bloomberg, the battle has since simmered down in the form of a private settlement between the two companies and the city of New York. Both agreed to share information on a quarterly basis, rather than the month-by-month arrangements first pushed by the regulators in question. Information shared includes the host's full name and address, along with their contact information and income generated on either platform — not to mention information about every listing they're putting up at any given time.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Gizmodo Reports Airbnb 'Agrees to Rat Out Its Hosts Like NYC Wants It To'

Comments Filter:
  • by quonset ( 4839537 ) on Sunday June 14, 2020 @05:58AM (#60181438)

    When you are operating a business which serves as a rooming location for people, you are bound by the same rules and regulations as hotels. If you don't like those rules and regulations, have them changed.

    This is no different than the Uber and Lyft cab companies whining they have to abide by the same rules as other cab companies.

    Also, when people buy property with the intent to charge other people money to stay for a limited time in that property rather than themselves living in the property, that's pretty much the definition of a hotel.

    • Re: (Score:1, Insightful)

      At the same time, it exposes the government as protecting entrenched interests, which is what new disruptive technologies are disrupting.

      Here, the article mentions a law that forbids short term renting rooms if you have no tenants.

      Notice the bait and switch. The defenders of government regulation drum up fears of rats and broken beds, then in practice allow shutdowns for centralized planning and government picking winners and losers, especially for big business hotels, something they would rage against in

      • by Nidi62 ( 1525137 ) on Sunday June 14, 2020 @06:24AM (#60181474)

        Right. The government has no interest in making sure lodgings available to rent to the public meet minimum standards of cleanliness, fire safety, structural integrity, and proper insurance coverage. Its just the eevil gubmint getting its autboritarian on on some innocent, freedom loving American small business owners.

        • by Solandri ( 704621 ) on Sunday June 14, 2020 @10:02AM (#60181784)

          Right. The government has no interest in making sure lodgings available to rent to the public meet minimum standards of cleanliness, fire safety, structural integrity, and proper insurance coverage. Its just the eevil gubmint getting its autboritarian on on some innocent, freedom loving American small business owners.

          I don't disagree with the government doing those things, but how does that justify a 10% occupancy tax (as is common in most places)? The owner of the home/apartment/hotel is already paying property taxes to pay for government services like streets, police, fire dept, etc. And AFAIK (I used to manage a hotel), there are no such thing as cleanliness inspections, and the inspections a hotel are subject to like fire and safety are the same as any other business and presumably paid for out of business taxes (corporate tax, sales tax, property tax in a business zone). We even had to pay some government inspectors a fee for the mandated inspections..

          As best as I can tell, occupancy taxes exist for one simple reason - the people you're taxing are travelers who don't live in your jurisdiction, so can't vote to get rid of them. And the hotel owner doesn't have enough clout to get rid of them because even though thousands of guests each year have to pay the tax, the owner only gets one vote in a local election. They're a violation of the concept of no taxation without representation.

          • Consider it a business tax.

          • by MrL0G1C ( 867445 )

            And the hotel owner doesn't have enough clout to get rid of them because even though thousands of guests each year have to pay the tax, the owner only gets one vote in a local election. They're a violation of the concept of no taxation without representation.

            Cry me a river, should Bezos get more votes because he owns a big company? In your view hotel staff do not count, why is that. And you say that statement as if there was only 1 hotel owner in New York.

          • "how does that justify a 10% occupancy tax (as is common in most places)? The owner of the home/apartment/hotel is already paying property taxes to pay for government services like streets, police, fire dept, etc."

            Yes, on the assumption that they are living there, not operating a hotel. If they were in a commercial zone then they'd be paying more taxes. Hotels provably increase demand on those services.

          • "They're a violation of the concept of no taxation without representation."

            What if I own a 2nd lake house in another state. I have to pay property tax for it but can only vote in one jurisdiction. Therefore, I am being taxes without representation. Or if I vacation in Disney World and am not a FL resident. Are the taxes I'm paying a violation?

          • by jonTu ( 839883 )

            the inspections a hotel are subject to like fire and safety are the same as any other business

            This is true, but only for short-term rentals that are being operated in occupancies zoned commercial. In my small town, all of our AirBnB and similar STR's are in residential occupancies, meaning they have never been subject to commercial fire code before the owner started renting them, and have flown totally under the state Fire Marshall's radar. So while you are quite right that the requirements are the same, the onus is 100% on the property owner to meet these requirements, unless the municipality has

          • by thomn8r ( 635504 )

            The owner of the home/apartment/hotel is already paying property taxes to pay for government services like streets, police, fire dept, etc.

            I shouldn't have to pay sales or property taxes because I'm already paying income taxes, right?

        • by drnb ( 2434720 )

          Right. The government has no interest in making sure lodgings available to rent to the public meet minimum standards of cleanliness, fire safety, structural integrity, and proper insurance coverage. Its just the eevil gubmint getting its autboritarian on on some innocent, freedom loving American small business owners.

          And perhaps a background check of the owner/operator. The right to inspect, hey look cameras.

        • by dfghjk ( 711126 )

          Or making sure zoning laws are followed. The only way the OP can defend that post is to be totally ignorant of the overwhelming number of issues that justify government regulation that airbnb flouts.

          Furthermore, airbnb's business plan isn't about "disruption" of "entrenched interests", it's about the gamification of property ownership and the exploitation of the capital of the naive.

          It is unsurprising that governments enact new laws to address abuses of unscrupulous corporations. It is not a "bait and swi

      • ...government picking winners and losers...

        The government's job is to pick winners and losers. Literally that's what they do day in and day out.

        • by drnb ( 2434720 )

          ...government picking winners and losers...

          The government's job is to pick winners and losers. Literally that's what they do day in and day out.

          No, their job is supposed to be to define a fair and safe playing field.

          • And someone said it :
            "their job is supposed to be to define a fair and safe playing field."

            the one thing that defines the USA over many other nations, the sense of fairness in business, sports and other items in daily living is huge and a benefit.

            Pete Rose ( baseball reference ) will never make it into the Baseball hall of fame due to gambling on his own games.
            Some of the more famous NASCAR cheat's and fines https://www.thethings.com/nasc... [thethings.com]
            Lance Armstrong https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]

            then we have paten

          • by TXG1112 ( 456055 )

            No, their job is supposed to be to define a fair and safe playing field.

            Not exactly. They are supposed to create laws and a regulatory structure in accordance with the best interest of the people so governed. There are many competing interests at stake, and a "level playing field" can have a lot of meanings.
            It is a legitimate use of municipal authority to regulate the availability and type of housing stock, and to not allow disruptive business practices that negatively impacts constituents by reducing the s

      • by Anonymous Coward

        Actually I'd say that exactly what it is best at preventing are things like Chinese and other foreign investors from buying up scarce real estate in major cities and then using AirBnb to rent them out.

        Which if it were up to me, no non-resident would be allowed to own property here, but you know how money greases wheels.

        That being said, let's face it, the tourism industry is going to drastically change over the next couple of years, hotels are probably going to end up having a race to the bottom on prices an

        • by PPH ( 736903 )

          Actually I'd say that exactly what it is best at preventing are things like Chinese and other foreign investors from buying up scarce real estate in major cities and then using AirBnb to rent them out.
          Which if it were up to me, no non-resident would be allowed to own property here

          You've just shoved a dagger in the heart of the apartment rental business. Investors (often Chinese or other foreigners) buy up buildings or individual condo units and put them up for rent. Not AirBnB weekly rentals, but for 6 months or a few years. In fact, most property owners would rather have longer term renters than glorified hotel guests.

          • "In fact, most property owners would rather have longer term renters than glorified hotel guests."

            disclosure : I am a realtor 2003 and investor since 1985

            Property owners: they want the best rate of return for the least work that they do.

            Property owners usually fall into : income yield base or asset appreciation base. they always like when they can get both.

            Property owners love airbnb because they can increase the yield/income of the property, which over time, accelerates the principal value of the asset ove

      • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

        by Anonymous Coward

        Here, the article mentions a law that forbids short term renting rooms if you have no tenants.

        Oh no! A law that says you can't run a hotel and skip over the other laws regulating hotels by listing it on Airbnb. Oh the humanity!

      • you want to eliminate local laws that were implemented by democratically elected local representatives in tens of thousands of cities and towns, and you want to replace it with an unregulated market which will obviously lead to an oligopoly run by a tiny handful of tech companies. meanwhile we have a drastic problem with overpriced housing in the US leading to massive levels of homelessness, a situation which those local laws were designed to prevent. if you take houses off the market for people who want
      • by msauve ( 701917 )
        "At the same time, it exposes the government as protecting entrenched interests,"

        Like its citizens - by trying to contain the cost of housing by making more units available, rather than let available space be used as transient hotels. The (classical) liberal in me says that's wrong, and so is all the rent control/stabilization which is also in effect. But at least they're being consistent. It's not to somehow protect the hotel industry, which is what you seem to be implying.

        "the article mentions a law tha
        • Like its citizens - by trying to contain the cost of housing by making more units available, ...

          Hmm, that doesn't quite square up with reality in lot of places in the US. Plenty of towns and cities make it damn near impossible to build any multifamily housing and mandate that lot sizes be at least a half acre or more. A few places allow tiny homes, most will not. They price their young people, hourly workers, and general civil servants out of their town. Yes, I do understand that there are infrastructure is

          • That's a zoning issue and NIMBY issue. Vote for the right people and you'll get things built

            Airbnb removes usable inventory from the market.

          • by msauve ( 701917 )
            " that doesn't quite square up with reality in lot of places in the US."

            NYC isn't a "lot of places in the US."
      • by dskoll ( 99328 )

        A disruptive technology is fine. But disrupting an industry by ignoring regulations and breaking the law? Not so much.

    • by Midnight Thunder ( 17205 ) on Sunday June 14, 2020 @08:03AM (#60181556) Homepage Journal

      There is also the element of taxation and city planning.

      For the latter, a larger amount of property for extremely short term rent drains the market of residential property and risks increasing costs of the property the area, without necessarily benefiting anyone locally. This changes they way a city prioritises construction of new buildings.

    • "When you are operating a business which serves as a rooming location for people, you are bound by the same rules and regulations as hotels. If you don't like those rules and regulations, have them changed."

      No. You're bound by the same regulations that regulate rooms that old grannies with a small pension rent out to people by posting a sign on the curb.

      • > No. You're bound by the same regulations that regulate rooms that old grannies with a small pension rent out to people by posting a sign on the curb.

        Correct. Many cities only recently created laws to make short term rentals harder than they have been for centuries in the US. They also play both sides REQUIRING added fees for private short term rentals that hotels do not pay while also requiring hotel taxes.

        The Internet and Short term rental companies (like VRBO, AirBNB, etc.) only made it easier to do

        • " Most places with AirBNB's in them are better neighbors than the longer term renters that would otherwise be there as long as the owners are also in the building."

          biggest falsehood ever.
          I pay for the security of my building in my maintenance, we screen people, we know a few basic things because we all were screened. when people started doing airbnb in our building, we had noise levels that were uncommon and people being disrespectful of the rules. so we applied the hammer and told the owners they were gett

      • Those are long term rentals, it's a big difference.

    • Also, when people buy property with the intent to charge other people money to stay for a limited time in that property rather than themselves living in the property, that's pretty much the definition of a hotel.

      Its also the city administration being hostile to owners. Lets say an owner wants to take a building off the market, renovate, upgrade and bring it back on the market at much higher rental rates. Then he can rent to well paid high tech types that want to live in a history neighborhood, very trendy. Gentrification. Most of the current residents take a modest payout to leave. There are holdouts. The holdouts have power because the empty residences are not producing income. AirBnB reduces holdout power since t

      • Which serves to frustrate the intent of the anti-gentrification policies. Now I am not necessarily supportive of many of those policies (as they fly in the face of economic reality). But it's some pretty poor logic that would argue for the welcoming of short-term rentals because they undermine local government!
    • I have no sympathy for AirBnB "investors". I work in midtown Manhattan. The building next to my office, used to be several small, affordable studio apartments. New owner who doesn't even live in NY bought the building, evicted all the residents, did some basic renovations, and now all of the units are on AirBnB. Previous residents got screwed. People looking for affordable apartments in the city have fewer options. Landlord makes a LOT more money, and doesn't contribute his share to the city infrastruc
      • I agree, there is lot's of little places like that in NYC. I can just look at Lexington avenue and rattle off at least 1000 units where it was small 3 to 12 unit buildings. now gone to airbnb. I bet all those buildings from 84th to 96th are airbnb now, those cute brownstone 3 stories ( or 4 stories ) with sandstone entrances. loved those buildings, they were just 100% new york city, like bay windows and yellow/tan bricks in chicago.

      • Everyone wants affordable housing. That said, who would want to own property if they can't choose how to rent them out?

    • Comment removed based on user account deletion
      • While you might think that's right. I do recall in NYC that cab's were highly regulated in the safety aspects of the equipment. Also, most hotels were also well regulated for fire.

        In reference to supply and demand, that's a zoning issue and NIMBY issue. fix that and you'll see rental rates drop like hot potatoes.

    • by pbasch ( 1974106 )
      Right, and good. AirBnB is a blight in NYC, driving up rents. It's disrupting hotels? Who cares; I have no beef with hotels. It's part of what's ruining the city and it should be regulated until (pace Grover Norquist) it's small enough to drown in a tub.
  • They got the law suspended by filing suit and asking for a preliminary injunction, but their arguments weren't strong enough to get a permanent injunction.

    What usually happens next is negotiation, and making the best deal they can without actually spending cubic yards of dollars for a trial.

    • Or maybe a private settlement between the two companies and the city of New York where both agree to share information on a quarterly basis, rather than the month-by-month arrangements first pushed by the city?

      LIKE THE GODDAMN SUMMARY SAYS IF YOU'D BOTHERED READING IT?

  • Alternate headline (Score:5, Informative)

    by thegarbz ( 1787294 ) on Sunday June 14, 2020 @06:16AM (#60181460)

    "Airbnb agrees to ensure hosts obey city regulations, will share data with regulators."

    But no doubt Gizmodo has some other agenda they want to publicise. Evil evil airbnb not protecting people who break rules.

  • Rat out? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by jandoe ( 6400032 ) on Sunday June 14, 2020 @06:20AM (#60181470)

    Why so pro Airbnb? Personally, I've stopped using it years. I could be a good options if you're staying longer in some place and renting whole house for some summer vacations but for shorter trips I had much better experience with normal hotels. You just show up and check in. With Airbnb I usually had to plan my trip so that I can be at the place as some specific time, wait for the owners, call the owners when they don't show up or wait for the apartment to be prepared. I can usually find hotel in same price as Airbnb. Then there's the thing about how bad Airbnb is for people actually living next to the rented apartments. Suddenly your community turns into tourist destination with constant flow of drunk people and late nigh parties. And of course for everyone else this raises rent by taking apartments out of the market. So yes, rat them all out and let's hope this business will finally die.

    • Airbnb is a valid idea but as usual when corporations get involved, it's taken too far and there is not enough oversight. Airbnb deliberately avoids doing any, and lawmakers move too slowly, largely because they try to figure out if they can get a piece of the pie and only if they fail do they try to figure out if anyone should be eating it.

      When you use Airbnb to rent part of a house you live in, you're basically operating a boarding house. And you're not putting a big dent into the availability of homes fo

      • by dfghjk ( 711126 )

        "Airbnb exists primarily to facilitate illegal acts."

        Yes, that's true, and their business plan is to enable these illegal acts and skim profit off of every crime while otherwise doing nothing.

    • by dskoll ( 99328 )

      I hope Airbnb goes out of business. I live in Canada and Airbnb has had a hugely negative effect [theglobeandmail.com] on the rental market. Affordable housing should be a human right, and Airbnb is making it much harder to achieve affordable rentals.

      Not to mention devastating [globalnews.ca] effects [bbc.com] on neighborhoods from people abusing Airbnb's relaxed attitude towards regulation.

    • I love Airbnb. Since they started, many hotels and other accommodations got cheaper, and offer more availability.
      • by thomn8r ( 635504 )

        I love Airbnb. Since they started, many hotels and other accommodations got cheaper, and offer more availability.

        Citation needed

  • were violating a law preventing short-term rentals of apartments that don't have tenants.

    OK... No problem. Time to make the Tenant a corporation instead; A.K.A. A custom Time Share.

    The apartments will now have a tenant (the organization), And instead of making a short-term rental out to the AirBnB user.. the user will purchase this custom contract that expires after a few weeks providing a temporary permission to enter and enjoy the property;
    thus allowing their AirBnb guest to stay the

    • Yep! And that tenant (corporation) now is registered at the Federal (need an EIN), State (must be incorporated in a State, and if it's not the State of operations, it must register as a foreign corporation), and county/city (need those local business licenses), must report all income and expenses, pay sales tax on delivery of its services, have its own liability insurance, negotiate with the mortgage-holder regarding the ability to legally rent out itself, etc.

      In other words, it now behaves as a hotel. An

  • The onion, rarely funny anymore, nevertheless managed to nail it.

    https://youtu.be/w8c_m6U1f9o [youtu.be]

    Oh wait, they were making fun of it because it's happening all the time.

    • by PPH ( 736903 )

      New York City is taking the first step towards propiska [wikipedia.org].

      I'd also like to see how this will be applied to subletting of rent-controlled apartments for one thing. I think this will lead to a big squeeze of the low end of the rental market there.

      • (shrug) votes have consequences.
        The voters of NY have decided to vote hard left consistently now. They want the city to run everything.

        In my view, this is unsurprisingly at the point where the active voters likely don't PERSONALLY remember what a shithole it was in the 60s and 70s.

  • there is a reason why zoning laws prevent short term rentals, it's because if they're allowed housing rapidly becomes un-afordable and you end up with all sorts of social ills and unrest. One of the reasons we saw these riots (and why they were practically everywhere) was people are crushed by extremely high rent costs.

    AirBnB has been illegal in virtually every city for ages, but they did the Uber "It's an app!" trick and we somehow got away with it. I can't be the only person on this forum stuck in an
    • by sjames ( 1099 )

      Rent is what makes that gigantic economic sucking sound. It's why it seems no matter how high the GDP/capita gets, nobody seems to be getting ahead. It, coupled with bank policies is why we have malls with tumbleweeds inside.

    • there is a reason why zoning laws prevent short term rentals, it's because if they're allowed housing rapidly becomes un-afordable and you end up with all sorts of social ills and unrest.

      Sounds like that's a problem of not enough houses. Build more.

  • Will Airbnb also hand over the illegal in-house videos taken by hosts?
  • The original aims of Airbnb may have been lofty but let's face it, this is just a way for homeowners to become hoteliers without any of the red tape involved - eg health and safety, planning, taxes etc I still like the idea of people renting out spare rooms for cheap prices but it's very clear that big business has arrived.
  • Then you can do anything you want with deBlasio's blessing.

    Air BNB, Pack 'em in! We can take 50 people in this flat! Woo hoo!
    That'll be $50 a pop.

    Come back tomorrow, ya hear?

No spitting on the Bus! Thank you, The Mgt.

Working...