HB993 addresses local regulation of short-term rentals in Maryland. The bill defines “operator” broadly to include owners, lessees, sublessees, mortgagees in possession, licensees, and other possessory interests, and defines “short-term rental” as a residential dwelling unit or portion of a unit, including an accessory dwelling, used for housing for fewer than 31 consecutive days. It excludes hotels, motels, boarding houses, student group housing, and similar facilities.
The bill prohibits a county or municipality from adopting a local law or ordinance that bars a short-term rental solely because the operator is a lessee or sublessee of the property. At the same time, it preserves local authority to limit a lessee or sublessee operator to no more than one short-term rental within the county or municipality. It also makes clear that property owners may still restrict or prohibit their tenants’ use of the property as a short-term rental, and that local governments may still require registration of short-term rentals.
Impact
HB993 would amend the Real Property Article by adding new Section 14-126.1, creating a statewide limit on local governments’ ability to exclude tenant-operated short-term rentals. The practical effect is to preempt county and municipal rules that would categorically prohibit short-term rentals operated by lessees or sublessees, while leaving room for local registration requirements and a one-property cap for tenant operators. The bill takes effect October 1, 2026, and affects landlords, tenants, short-term rental hosts, and local zoning or licensing authorities.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have received generally favorable treatment in the House. It was reported favorably by committee and passed third reading by a substantial margin, 98 yeas to 30 nays. The voting pattern suggests broad support, though not unanimity, for expanding access to short-term rental participation by tenants and subtenants while preserving some local control.
Contention
The main point of contention is the balance between statewide uniformity and local control. Supporters likely view the bill as preventing blanket bans on tenant-operated short-term rentals and expanding economic opportunity for renters and sublessees. Opponents or skeptics may be concerned that the bill limits county and municipal authority to regulate neighborhood impacts, housing availability, nuisance complaints, and enforcement of local land-use rules. The bill attempts to address some of those concerns by preserving owner restrictions, registration requirements, and a local limit on the number of short-term rentals a tenant operator may run.