SHARE
COPY LINK

TOURISM

How Italy is planning to limit Airbnb rentals

Italy's government has unveiled plans to restrict short-term lets to address overtourism and the country's housing crisis. What would the new rules entail - and how much difference will they really make?

Can new regulations save Italy's most popular traveller destinations from overtourism?
Can new regulations save Italy's most popular travel destinations from overtourism? Photo by Miguel MEDINA / AFP.

After months of discussion with mayors, hotel owners and tenants’ associations, Italy’s tourism ministry last week released the first draft of a new law which it says will curb short-term tourist rentals, including Airbnb lets, around the country.

The draft bill is essentially the government’s response to growing concerns about how Italy’s booming tourist rental market is thought to be worsening a shortage of affordable housing in major Italian cities.

The bill is also reportedly intended as a partial answer to chronic overcrowding in many tourist destinations around the country.

At this point, it’s a long way from becoming law, with at least one round of future amendments very likely.

But the decree looks set to bring in significant changes to the tourist rental market, with consequences for both property owners and renters, and has provoked a widespread debate in Italy.

READ ALSO: Why are long-term apartment rentals ‘disappearing’ in Italy?

While some welcome the introduction of a nationwide legislation – since Italy’s short-term rental market is currently regulated by local ordinances only – the bill has also faced criticism, with campaigners for affordable housing in particular saying the regulations don’t go far enough.

Which types of rentals are affected?

The planned decreto affitti brevi (short-term rentals decree) will, as the name suggests, clamp down on short-term lets. Under Italian law, this is defined as any rental period of 30 days or less.

That means it looks set to impact any type of tourism rental business – from Airbnb to villa rentals.

READ ALSO: The tourism restrictions Italy is planning this summer

The new legislation is set to have a wide-ranging impact in Italy, which has the third-biggest market for short-term lets in the world after the US and France.

Rome and Milan have the most available short-term lets, with 19,777 and 17,319 respectively, according to the latest data from the holiday rental analytics site AirDNA.

Rome is the city with the highest number of tourist lets in Italy, according to recent data.

Rome has the highest number of tourist lets of any Italian city. Photo by MIGUEL MEDINA / AFP.

What will change?

In its current form, the decree includes two main measures: a two-night minimum stay requirement and a new type of identification code for property listings.

The minimum stay of two nights would apply to short-term rentals in all of Italy’s 14 metropolitan cities (Bari, Bologna, Cagliari, Catania, Florence, Genoa, Messina, Milan, Naples, Palermo, Reggio Calabria, Rome, Turin and Venice).

The draft states that this limit will also apply in any comune with a high or very high ‘tourist density index’ (indice di densità turistica) according to national statistics bureau Istat.

The two-night minimum stay seems to be aimed at promoting longer visits and making so-called ‘hit and run’ tourism, or very short stays, less common as Italian authorities believe this contributes to overcrowding in the most popular areas.

READ ALSO: OPINION: Why more of Italy’s top destinations must limit tourist numbers

This change means that people visiting for one night would be limited to staying in a hotel, assuming they can find one with availability.

Curiously, “large families” would be exempt from this restriction, according to the decree – defined as those with at least one parent and three children. However, it was unclear how the composition of a family could be checked or the rule enforced.

Rentals in towns with less than 5,000 residents would however be exempt from the restriction.

The decree would also make it mandatory for all short-term accommodation facilities (B&Bs, holiday homes, short-term lets, etc.) to have a national identification code (codice identificativo nazionale, or CIN), as opposed to the regional identification code (codice identificativo regionale, or CIR) currently required.

The decree states that this new “uniform regulation at national level” is aimed at “tackling the danger of oversized tourism … and safeguarding the residential status of historical centres, preventing their depopulation”.

Owners or property managers are already supposed to include their property’s CIR code on the accommodation website and in all online listings, including on platforms such as Airbnb.

High rents in central Milan are driving out locals.

High rents in central Milan are driving out locals. Photo by MIGUEL MEDINA / AFP.

Under the new decree, the regional code would be replaced by the national one, with the rules largely remaining the same.

The enforcement of the rules so far, however, has been loose and inconsistent.

“Platforms are already obliged to display the identification code, which is currently regional,” Marco Celani, president of Italian property owners’ association Aigab, tells Idealista. “But in the absence of checks and automatic blocks it is impossible for portals to block listings without having an agreement with the regions on the format of codes.”

“In other words, an illegal operator can invent a code, and enter it in the portal which today there’s no way of checking.”

READ ALSO: What are Italy’s rules and taxes for Airbnb rentals?

The hope is that a standardised, national version of this code would enable platforms to block invalid codes, Celani says, “as happened in Greece at the beginning of the year, giving incredible results in terms of fighting illegal and undeclared work.”

The decree also forsees fines of up to 5,000 euros for property owners who don’t follow the rules and 3,000 euros for sites which don’t ensure codes are displayed on listings, though the job of enforcing these fines would reportedly be left up to each town or city’s local authority.

Tighter local restrictions?

Separately from the planned national regulations, some of the Italian cities and regions most loved by visitors are planning to further restrict tourist lets.

Several cities say they plan to restrict the number of short-term lets available in a bid to free up housing and make renting more affordable for residents – notably including Venice and Milan,, where possible limits have long been under discussion. However, neither city seems ready to make these changes a reality just yet.

READ ALSO: How to find a longer-term apartment rental in Italy

In Florence, the wheels of enhanced regulation already appear to be turning. Mayor Dario Nardella announced in a press conference last Thursday that the municipality intends to pass a resolution that would limit new tourist accommodation in the city’s historic centre.

Holiday rentals in the Tuscan capital are so profitable that many homeowners have moved out in order to turn their apartment into a short-term let, draining the city of its permanent inhabitants.

The problem has become “structural”, Nardella told reporters: “We realise it is a bold regulation, but we know that we can defend it legally.”

Will a cap on tourist accommodation save Florence from depopulation?

Will a cap on tourist accommodation save Florence from depopulation? Photo by Miguel MEDINA / AFP.

Providing a template for these tourist hotspots is the northern Italian city and autonomous province of Bolzano, a gateway to the Dolomites mountain range popular among hikers and skiers, where authorities introduced a cap on tourist accommodation in September 2022.

Provincial Councillor for Tourism Arnold Schuler confirmed in April that the maximum limit would be set at 239,088 posti letto (beds) made commercially available to visitors in the area.

This amounts to 34 million tourists annually – the same number the province received in 2019, before Covid hit.

“We realised that our territory, our community and our resources such as water and energy had reached a level of exploitation that should not and could no longer be exceeded,” Schuler told La Repubblica when the figure was announced.

“We have now reached more than 34 million overnight stays, and that’s enough.”

Member comments

Log in here to leave a comment.
Become a Member to leave a comment.

VENICE

‘It’s not Disneyland’: What Venice residents really think of new ‘tourist tax’

As Venice prepares to trial a charge for day trippers aimed at tackling overcrowding, residents of the floating city are questioning how helpful the measure will be.

‘It’s not Disneyland’: What Venice residents really think of new ‘tourist tax’

If you type Venice into any news site, you will more than likely find pages upon pages of reports about the day tripper fee or ‘tourist tax’ being introduced from April 25th. 

News of the upcoming test run of a five-euro sum for day tourists who enter Venice between 8.30am and 4pm has reached practically every corner of the globe.

Even James Liotta, an Australia-based comedian, asked his followers on Facebook recently what they thought about Venice’s new charge and whether they’d pay it, and got a big reaction.

One commenter wrote: “No I would not, it is totally exploitation. They can charge for use of amenities, heritage but not for entrance.”

But with most articles and discussions aimed at visitors, they don’t necessarily reflect the thoughts of Venice’s residents.

For Eleanora Smith, the toll couldn’t come soon enough. She’s one of the 49,000 people who live in the historic centre of Venice – a number far smaller than the city’s tourist intake.

At peak times, some 100,000 tourists spend the night in the city, with tens of thousands more visiting just for the day.

Eleanora, who has lived on and off in Venice for the past 13 years, says getting day trippers to pay isn’t necessarily a bad thing; it can also be a boost for Venice’s economy.

READ ALSO: Venice promises ‘very soft’ measures to cut down tourist crowds

“I’m all for this test run,” she tells The Local. “Nothing is set in stone yet, and it’s only for 29 days of the year, so I’m failing to understand what the uproar is about.”

“I’m tired of people coming in, sitting in the streets and eating a cheap slice of pizza. They clog up our walkways, whilst bringing nothing to the city at all.”

She tells the story of a time when she missed three water buses to get to work because there were lines of tourists.

“My only criticism is I don’t think this is enough,” she continues. “It’s going to be a cat-and-mouse game of police officers doing random checks as opposed to checks being done when the tourists enter.”

READ MORE: Explained: How to use Venice’s new ‘tourist tax’ website.

Jill Goodman, a Venice resident originally from New York City, says: “This is long overdue. Venice is a world heritage site and the fee should be higher. 

“Day trippers add nothing to the economy and they leave their garbage everywhere and swim in the canals.”

Several residents said the fee should be higher and should be in place all year round.

Venetian Gioia Tiozzo, on the other hand, says no fee would be discouraging enough.

I’m 100-percent Venetian from a Venetian family. I have spent all my life in Venice and I live the problem of over-tourism every single day,” she writes.

She stresses that, whilst she is not a supporter of Venice’s mayor, Luigi Brugnaro, she does think he is trying to find a solution.

“The upcoming fee is just the first step, not the solution to all of Venice’s problems,” she continues. “Will the fee work? No. The fee is too low and irrelevant. Too many tourists will avoid it as they could be residents in the Veneto region.

“But it could be an important first step for the future. For me, the fee is a weapon against the illegal B&Bs in Venice. Tourists will not stay in illegal B&Bs if the hosts cannot provide them a pass like legal hotels. This is a crucial point.”

OPINION: Why more of Italy’s top destinations must limit tourist numbers

Laura Pritchard, a UK national and the Vice President of the American International Women’s Association has mixed feelings about the charge. She’s been living in Venice for five years now and was anxious when the news was first announced, but felt calmer when she knew she could apply for an exemption. 

But she says even that has its issues.

“As always seems to be the case with Italian websites, the procedure to obtain an exemption code for visitors in the city based on being a resident proved to be extremely torturous,” she writes. 

“This is very off-putting. I would be interested to know how difficult it is for someone to just pay the fee.” 

She believes the requirement to have a smartphone on you to show your exemption code is unfair, especially if your phone dies.

READ MORE: What are the new rules for tourist groups visiting Venice?

As it stands, Veneto region residents like Laura, together with those born or working, and studying in Venice among those who are exempt from paying the tourist charge. 

Other categories include visitors staying overnight, children under 14, those with disabilities, those taking part in sports competitions, those who need medical care, relatives of residents, and police officers on duty. 

Venice Carnival Art

Carnival masks in the salon of a mask workshop. (Photo by Adnan Beci / AFP)

“I cannot imagine living in a city where people have to pay to visit, although I am sympathetic to the idea of how to solve the challenge of excessive numbers of visitors at certain times and in certain places,” Laura adds. 

“My biggest concern is where the money raised will go.”

At the time of writing, nothing has been announced by the local government about how the money raised from the new charge will be used.

READ ALSO: The Italian tourist destinations bringing in restrictions this summer

Julia Curtis, a resident from California, says the local community should have more of a say.

They should charge more and we residents should have a democratic say in how these taxes are actually spent. It should not just be for a few days a year but almost all the time,” she writes. 

“We need less day trippers and more tourists who are seriously interested in the city and its many gems and not sure about checking off their list of top attractions in Europe—it’s not Disneyland.”

Antoine Scicluna however comments: “Cities are there for the world to see and not to be used for profit, just because Italy manages its taxes badly.”

For Gillian Longworth McGuire, the fee doesn’t address bigger issues affecting residents such as sky-high rents and the rules surrounding it are not clear enough.

“Firstly, Venice needs tourism and day trippers do not need to be a net negative,” she says. “Venice needs people, but not those who sit on the sidewalk eating lunch. I doubt they’d do that in their hometowns.

“What happens to all this money? Will it be spent on improving Venice’s public transportation? Will it remain on the mainland? There has been no mention of what will happen.

“I’m afraid this fee has got me asking more and more questions.”

SHOW COMMENTS