Goff needs to win the hide and seek game with Airbnb hosts

Monday, 8 October 2018

Auckland Council has found only a third of the 3800 properties it believes are being rented out for more than 29 days a year.

OPINION: In the game of hide and seek, the 'hiders' invariably give up when it gets cold, dark, or just boring not being found.

Auckland Council will be hoping the same applies to those renting out private dwellings online to visitors, making them possibly liable to pay a new additional property rate.

Three months into the new rating year, the 'hiders' don't seem to have tired of the game.

The council has locked on to only a third of the 3800 properties it believes are being rented out for more than 29 days a year, making them liable to pay more on a rising scale depending on the number of days occupied.

* Council cannot find all online accommodation providers

* Airbnb calls for tourist bed tax, rejects council regulation**

A further 190 are in the top category and being billed significantly more - commercial and additional rates - because they haven't declared their level of letting, after being written to by council.

The hunt for online accommodation providers is moving slowly in Auckland

Only 46 property owners have fessed up to renting places out for more than 180 days in a year, with another 64 telling the council their places are let out for between four to six months.

The slim database of properties the council had on July 1 has grown by only about 100 since then, as one staffer and two short-term contractors spend part of their time 'seeking'.

The extra rates contribution was expected to be $822,000, but on the latest estimates is $515,000.

It's not a big hole, but it poses a risk to Auckland mayor Phil Goff, whose idea it was to sheet half of the city's tourism and event promotion costs ($13.7m) to accommodation providers.

Goff is already talking of imposing penalties on those who fail to own up to running visitor accommodation on the side.

'We start voluntary - will there be a need to say what are the sanctions against people who are taking the money, but bludging off other accommodation providers by not paying their share?' Goff said.

Goff needs to get the online contribution up, or his argument for the Accommodation Providers Targeted Rate (APTR) will be in trouble - and there's already a High Court challenge from traditional providers.

The argument went: $27.4 million of ratepayers money is spent annually promoting tourism, and staging major events to attract visitors.

Goff persuaded councillors that those benefiting from the visits should pay half the bill, and slugged traditional hotel and motel owners from July 2017.

That sector cried 'unfair' saying they got only 10 per cent of the tourism spend, but were the only ones getting a bigger rates bill.

The council responded this year, lowering the hotel and motel share of the bill by 6 per cent, but have found only about 4 per cent.

'We wont get every individual in the first time that the new more equitable system comes into play, but over time we will,' said Goff confidently.

Goff may need to adopt the battle cry he's using over the new red light safety camera network, where only half of the 12 cameras will be enforced by police at any one time.

'We expect the police in every case to follow up with a prosecution or the issuing of an infringement notice.'

He may need to reach for the big stick, to flush out those happy to keep paying normal residential rates in the belief they'll win the game of hide and seek.