A BILL TO AMEND THE SOUTH CAROLINA CODE OF LAWS BY ADDING SECTION 6-1-195 SO AS TO PROHIBIT A GOVERNING BODY OF A MUNICIPALITY, COUNTY, OR OTHER POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THE STATE FROM ENACTING OR ENFORCING AN ORDINANCE, RESOLUTION, OR REGULATION THAT PROHIBITS THE RENTAL OF A RESIDENTIAL DWELLING TO A SHORT-TERM GUEST, TO PROVIDE PENALTIES, AND TO DEFINE TERMS.
H3861 would add a new section to the South Carolina Code to prevent municipalities, counties, and other political subdivisions from banning the rental of residential dwellings to short-term guests. In practical terms, the bill bars local governments from adopting or enforcing ordinances, resolutions, or regulations that prohibit short-term rentals, defined as rentals of fewer than 29 consecutive days. It also expressly preempts any conflicting local rule.
The bill includes enforcement penalties for local governments that violate the prohibition. A local government that enacts or enforces a banned restriction would lose the ability to assess or collect the six percent property assessment ratio for qualifying real property under Section 12-43-220(e), and the State Treasurer would withhold its State Aid to Subdivisions Act distribution until the offending rule is repealed. The bill defines key terms such as "residential dwelling," "short-term rental," and "short-term guest," and would take effect upon the Governor’s approval.
H3861 would shift regulatory authority over short-term rentals away from local governments and to the state level by preempting local bans on renting homes to short-term guests. It would affect municipal, county, and other political subdivision ordinances that currently restrict or prohibit short-term rentals, and it would create financial consequences for local governments that continue such restrictions. The bill would also interact with existing property tax treatment for qualifying real property and state aid distributions administered by the State Treasurer.
Based on the available record, there is no committee transcript or vote history showing formal debate, amendments, or recorded opposition, so the overall sentiment cannot be measured from legislative discussion. The bill’s caption and structure suggest a policy choice favoring property owners and short-term rental operators by limiting local regulation. Because no votes or hearing comments are provided, there is no documented consensus or division in the available materials.
The main point of contention is likely the balance between state preemption and local control. Supporters would likely favor uniform statewide rules and protection for homeowners who want to use their property for short-term rentals, while opponents may argue that municipalities and counties should retain authority to regulate land use, neighborhood character, housing availability, noise, and tourism impacts. The bill’s penalty provisions, especially the loss of property assessment benefits and state aid, are likely to be the most controversial enforcement mechanisms.