In 2019, a change in the law made it possible for communities (urbanisations) to ban tourist rentals in their association.

Since then, many associations have chosen to ban new tourist rentals with 60% of owners voting in favor of a ban.

A ban may be good for some, who want peace and quiet, but not so good for others.
Namely those who want to sell the property, because a ban can lower the property price by up to 15%.

So what happens in practice when an association bans tourist rentals?
First of all: The properties that already have rental licenses cannot be prohibited from continuing to rent.
All previous licenses continue to be valid. So many times those who caused problems (by not vetting their tenants) will continue to be able to rent.
But the association can vote to increase the monthly fee by up to 20% for properties used for tourist rentals, as it is considered to cause more wear and tear on the common areas.
In order for the ban to be legally binding,  the association must register the ban in the property register - this is done very rarely (it costs money) and creates problems.
For example. a customer who wants to invest in a residence for tourist rental is informed that the association has a ban in place.
But after checking the land registry, the ban is not registered. So the buyer can buy the property, get a license and rent it out!
But doing so would probably not be very popular with the neighbors...

In many cases, it is the administrator who has not properly informed the AGM of the correct process for making the ban binding, as well as the costs to the association.
Therefore, the bans are not registered properly and problems arise.

Another controversial issue is that renting to tourists was not previously considered an "economic activity".
A court ruling at the beginning of the year held that it should be considered an economic activity. Why is this important?
This is because many associations have written in their statutes that financial activities are prohibited.
The idea was that commercial activities such as offices, medical centers, massage parlors, telemarketing centers, dentists, etc. would not be allowed in a residential area.
However, this court decision has created a major controversy as some complexes now state that they have actually had a ban on tourist rentals in place since the complex was built.
They are using this to get rid of rentals that had licenses before they passed the ban based on the 2019 law.
But by actually allowing it in the past, it is now commonplace to say the least heated debates at annual meetings…

On the other hand, as the national government's new 2023 real estate law has failed miserably to increase the number of affordable permanent residences, they are now aiming on making tourist rentals more difficult throughout the country. During the spring, the housing minister started talking about making tourist rentals subject to VAT.
Depending on what level they put it at, it would take 10 or 21 percent out of the pocket of all owners.
However, it is unlikely that they will succeed in gaining support in Parliament for this, but it does create a concern.

It would probably be better to offer a bigger tax break for owners who rent out their properties on a long-term basis.
It would be an incentive for all parties and result in more available housing and lower rental prices.

Text: Christopher Fogelberg