Senate committee hears proposal for $5-per-day rental-car fee; industry split on who would pay

Senate sponsor Drew Echols introduced Senate Bill 522 and told the Finance Committee the proposal would add a $5-per-day fee to rental cars, exempting repairs, maintenance and replacement rentals, with at least 20% of revenue designated for tourism marketing subject to future appropriations. "This bill ... is just a step in the right direction," Echols said, noting a fiscal estimate ranging from about $59 million to $121 million annually.

Supporters from the tourism industry said targeted marketing could increase visitation and deliver strong returns. "If you spend, you receive something in return," said Chris Hardman, president of the Georgia Hotel and Lodging Association, endorsing the measure and its stated purpose to direct regulatory fees back to the sector that generated them. Jennings Hughes of the Georgia Association of Convention & Visitors Bureaus said tourism is the state’s No. 2 industry and expressed support for a fee that could fund state-level marketing.

Industry witnesses and some committee members warned the fee could land disproportionately on Georgians. Dan Newton, controller for Enterprise Rent‑A‑Car in Georgia, said much of the company’s business is neighborhood-based and that "91% of our business today at these 110 locations are to individuals for the Georgia driver's licenses." He said the flat fee would be regressive and estimated the proposal would cost the state roughly $750,000 annually for agency rentals, shifting money out of agency budgets without operational benefit.

Committee members pressed the sponsor on how much of the money would actually reach tourism. Senator Hodges and others asked why only 20% would be dedicated; Echols said that figure is a starting point and the language is subject to appropriations, not a constitutional dedication. Senator Dolezal noted that without a constitutional amendment the bill cannot legally bind future legislatures to set aside the 20%.

Members also queried scope and legal limits. One witness pointed to recent Federal Aviation Administration reauthorization language that can limit adding fees on airport rental days that receive certain federal Airport Improvement Program funds; the committee said it would verify how the federal rules and airport funding sources affect the revenue base. Members asked whether peer‑to‑peer platforms such as Turo would be captured; the sponsor said the substitute was intended to provide clarity on applicability.

The committee treated the item as a hearing only and did not vote. The chair said staff would re-check the fiscal estimate and the language around airports and that members should submit questions and suggested amendments before the bill returns for further consideration.

The committee heard the bill and testimony but took no formal action; the matter will return to committee after fiscal and legal follow-up.