House Bill 6026 would create a new statewide framework for short-term rentals in Michigan. It establishes a “Short-Term Rental Act” that defines short-term rentals, hosting platforms, owners, local units of government, and related terms, and directs the Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs to create and maintain a statewide short-term rental database. Owners would have to file annual certificates with detailed contact, location, insurance, emergency contact, and local compliance information before a registration number is issued for a rental.
The bill also imposes registration and reporting obligations on hosting platforms such as online booking services. Platforms could not facilitate bookings for Michigan short-term rentals unless registered with the state, paid an annual fee based on listings, agreed to remove noncompliant listings, and collected, remitted, and reported taxes and other charges tied to bookings. The bill creates a 6% statewide short-term rental excise tax, with exemptions for owners below a $3,000 annual occupancy-charge threshold, and requires platforms to collect and remit the tax on booking transactions. Revenue would be split between state administration, database development, tourism promotion, and local governments where the rentals are located.
The bill would significantly affect state tax administration and local enforcement by giving the state a centralized registry and by requiring data-sharing with local governments, law enforcement, and, in some cases, the public. It also ties compliance to local permits and authorizations, and allows the state to mark rentals as noncompliant if a local government revokes a permit or registration. The act would amend the practical operation of existing hotel-related taxes and tourism assessments by layering a new excise tax on short-term rental occupancy charges and coordinating collection with the use tax system.
Because no committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, there is no direct evidence of formal support or opposition in the available record. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears designed to standardize regulation and improve tax collection, which may appeal to state and local officials seeking enforcement tools and revenue. At the same time, the registration requirements, reporting mandates, platform obligations, and new excise tax could draw concern from short-term rental owners and hosting platforms over compliance costs, privacy, and administrative burden.
Notable points of contention likely include the breadth of state oversight, the requirement that platforms share detailed booking data, the mandatory collection of the new tax, and the interaction between the state tax and existing local tourism or convention assessments. The bill also raises potential debate over whether it favors local regulatory control or creates a more centralized system that could preempt or complicate local short-term rental rules. Its delayed effective date and contingent enactment clause suggest it may be part of a broader legislative package.
The bill would create a new chapter of state law governing short-term rentals, impose statewide registration and database requirements, and authorize civil fines for owners and hosting platforms that violate the act. It would also establish a 6% short-term rental excise tax, require platforms to collect and remit that tax on booking transactions, and direct the Department of Treasury and the Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs to administer reporting, auditing, and enforcement. Existing local permits, licenses, and tourism-related assessments would remain relevant, but the bill would add a statewide compliance layer and new revenue distribution rules.
No committee testimony or votes are available in the provided record, so there is no documented legislative sentiment from hearings or roll calls. From the bill’s structure, the measure appears generally pro-regulation and pro-revenue, aiming to improve oversight of short-term rentals and capture tax revenue for administration, tourism, and local governments. The absence of recorded opposition or support means any assessment of sentiment is limited to the bill’s policy design rather than legislative debate.
The main likely points of contention are the new statewide excise tax, the mandatory registration and reporting obligations for hosting platforms, and the requirement that owners provide extensive personal, insurance, and local compliance information to the state. Owners and platforms may object to the administrative burden, data-sharing requirements, and potential liability for noncompliance, while local governments may support the bill’s enforcement tools and revenue sharing. Another likely issue is the relationship between the new state tax and existing local tourism or convention assessments, especially where the bill exempts some properties based on preexisting assessment districts.