Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Home Sharing Lodging Tax topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Representative Pazuli seeks statewide collection of lodging tax from home‑sharing platforms in HB 109
Summary
Representative Pazuli told the Ohio House Development Committee that House Bill 109 would require platforms such as Airbnb and Vrbo to collect and remit local lodging taxes, prohibit blanket municipal bans on home sharing while preserving local safety and nuisance authority, and allow electronic issuance of real‑estate licenses.
Representative Pazuli told the Ohio House Development Committee that House Bill 109 would streamline lodging tax collection from short‑term rental platforms and protect home sharing as an economic tool for tourism‑dependent districts.
Pazuli said the bill is a companion to Senate Bill 104 and would require platforms like Airbnb and Vrbo to collect and remit local lodging taxes, giving local governments revenue they are currently unable to recover. She told the committee that in her largely rural Ninetieth District—home to Shawnee State Forest and Brush Creek State Forest—there are far fewer hotels and that short‑term rentals ‘‘are filling that gap.’’ Pazuli estimated short‑term rentals make up about 6% of Ohio’s housing stock (roughly 31,700 of more than 5,000,000 housing units), a figure she offered to argue the policy will not materially harm housing affordability.
The bill, as described by Pazuli, would prohibit blanket bans on home sharing but preserve local authority to enforce safety, nuisance, parking, fire and police regulations; it would also allow local licensing fees and could be designed with centralized collection and remittance mechanics to put enforcement resources in municipal hands. Pazuli said the measure also includes a smaller provision to allow electronic issuance of real estate licenses by the Ohio Real Estate Commission. She signaled that substitute language and amendments are expected as discussions with stakeholders continue.
Committee members asked operational questions: whether lodging tax is the same as hotel tax (the sponsor said yes and that allocations vary by region), whether the bill would include time‑limits on rentals or a proposed lottery system for scarce permits (Pazuli said those details remain to be worked out in substitute language), and whether municipalities that had imposed bans could still address disruptive behavior. Pazuli responded that the bill would still allow licensing fees and local enforcement powers to hold ‘‘bad actors’’ accountable.
No vote on House Bill 109 occurred at the meeting; the sponsor said she is meeting with stakeholders and expects further amendments to clarify centralized collection mechanics.
