Live data from Hacker News

Quebec Cracks Down on Airbnb

theglobeandmail.com

41–50 of 55 posts

Re: Quebec Cracks Down on Airbnb

#41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These new services simply make the regulation and taxation issues more and more obvious. You can't stop technology, you can't stop innovation. Once you acknowledge that, you realize that laws have to adapt to new realities.

Um, why exactly can't Airbnb help its hosts abide by the laws? It's a $250 tax. It does not exactly seem onerous to have them provide a reminder and a simple 1, 2, 3... list of how to make sure that they are legal in the area they are hosting in. Maybe even a way to pay directly as part of signing up. In this instance, it's really not the law that needs to adapt to reality, it's airbnb.

Exactly! Just because you have an idea for changing things doesn't mean that you operate in a vacuum where real-world rules don't apply anymore. This seems like something that's going to involve some negotiating, some real face-to-face time. They're going to have to get out from behind a few monitors to solve this problem.

Re: Quebec Cracks Down on Airbnb

#42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really, it's about a company choosing to ignore the law. Craigslist did the same thing for years with respect to advertising for "erotic services". If the company's strategy for this issue is to declare that "users must be aware of local regulation" while providing thousands of listings in heavily regulated cities like New York City, they're probably going to hit some speedbumps.

Do you seriously think it's the responsibility of the service provider to make sure its users don't engage in any potentially illegal activities? These services are simply glorified communication tools, and limiting what people can communicate with them is limiting free speech.

So the Silk Road is doing nothing illegal in your mind?

Re: Quebec Cracks Down on Airbnb

#43
post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you seriously think it's the responsibility of the service provider to make sure its users don't engage in any potentially illegal activities? These services are simply glorified communication tools, and limiting what people can communicate with them is limiting free speech.

So the Silk Road is doing nothing illegal in your mind?

What is illegal is objectively-defined by looking at the law. That doesn't mean that you agree with said laws, or mind them being ignored. This is where things like civil disobedience come into play, though I am not going to make such an argument for AirBnb because it isn't really my fight. It may be for others, though.

Re: Quebec Cracks Down on Airbnb

#44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you seriously think it's the responsibility of the service provider to make sure its users don't engage in any potentially illegal activities? These services are simply glorified communication tools, and limiting what people can communicate with them is limiting free speech.

>Do you seriously think it's the responsibility of the service provider to make sure its users don't engage in any potentially illegal activities? If the illegal activity is "using their system as it was intended" then they have a degree of responsibility, yes. They should at the very least provide a warning to users in quebec that they need to pay the $250 or they will be in violation of the law by using the airbnb…

10 lines of code for every city, county, state, etc? And keeping it up to date will be easy too right?

Re: Quebec Cracks Down on Airbnb

#45

I wonder what will happen when someone declines to leave the rented space. Do they have any law protecting them? Do the property owners have a law that protects them from this? It would be interesting to see how a magistrate would interpret a property owner renting out the place on airbnb. They are not hotels and are not licensed as such.

Quebec laws are very generous to renters, so this is indeed an interesting question to ponder. As much as one can argue that AirBnb renters are "getting away" with not paying certain taxes, they also may be getting lucky that they don't face non-paying tenants, or ones that simply won't leave.

Re: Quebec Cracks Down on Airbnb

#46
post #23
post #2

Considering the outrageous prices charged by motels in every city I've been (up to Chicoutimi) and even by road side motels near nowhere, I'm not surprised :-/ >Business groups like Montreal’s Bed and Breakfast Association have been pushing for the government to crackdown on home rentals for years. Yeah. I sure wonder why.

There are regulatory mechanisms to make hotels and B+Bs pay their share of externalities. These are things like property tax, room tax, and insurance. Suppliers of airbnb units avoid a lot of these payments because they're paying taxes at normal residential rates. If the cost of a room is $100/night, and the cost of that extra stuff is $50/night, then there is no way that hotels can compete on an even playing field w…

Too bad. :)

Re: Quebec Cracks Down on Airbnb

#47
post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are regulatory mechanisms to make hotels and B+Bs pay their share of externalities. These are things like property tax, room tax, and insurance. Suppliers of airbnb units avoid a lot of these payments because they're paying taxes at normal residential rates. If the cost of a room is $100/night, and the cost of that extra stuff is $50/night, then there is no way that hotels can compete on an even playing field w…

Too bad. :)

Just wait for the accidents to happen and you shall see how insurance skyrockets...

"My son died at .... because there was a defective socket."

Too bad, indeed.

Re: Quebec Cracks Down on Airbnb

#48
post #5

Competitive disruption considered harmful. If it really was to protect the turism economy and the people of Quebec, they should evaluate how many more people can visit Quebec now that there are options like $25-40/night rooms. I know AirBnB was a big reason I visited NYC since it made the trip significantly more affordable.

Competitive disruption with substantial negative externalities considered harmful. Yours is a convenient, feel-good, but ultimately incorrect and intellectually insufficient narrative. As is any narrative where one side is the altruistic freedom fighter and the other side might as well have vampire fangs on. The world isn't this simple. This isn't directed strictly at you - it's a general attitude in the Silicon Vall…

The incorrect and intellectually insufficient narrative is:

The goal, she said, is to ensure the safety of visitors to the province.

That's not the primary goal, or I would say even the secondary goal. The primary goal is obviously taxes, and the secondary goal is satisfying lobbying pressure from those that don't like the competition.

But let's not pretend that there are no problems with it, and that there are no legitimate reasons to object to it.

Let's not pretend that these regulators are actually honest in their arguments.

Re: Quebec Cracks Down on Airbnb

#49
post #14

I may be downvoted to oblivion for this but I really don't think my neighbors in Boston would like it if I rented my room out on a nightly basis to people they don't know. There are 20 units in my building so seeing many random people coming and going would trigger great unease and I cannot say that I would blame them for that. I've used AirBnB and I love it but I think the biggest issue is not the commercial propert…

It's disturbing to see a comment prefixed with a concern about downvotes, which suggests a gropthink environment. This is a hackers community. Please speak up without fear of lost karma or reprimand from the local celebrities.

Re: Quebec Cracks Down on Airbnb

#50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really, it's about a company choosing to ignore the law. Craigslist did the same thing for years with respect to advertising for "erotic services". If the company's strategy for this issue is to declare that "users must be aware of local regulation" while providing thousands of listings in heavily regulated cities like New York City, they're probably going to hit some speedbumps.

Do you seriously think it's the responsibility of the service provider to make sure its users don't engage in any potentially illegal activities? These services are simply glorified communication tools, and limiting what people can communicate with them is limiting free speech.

When it's not incidental, yes.
Post reply on HN