California SB 346: Short-Term Rental Reporting and Disclosure Rules

California SB 346, the Short-Term Rental Facilitator Act of 2025, gives cities and counties new authority to require platforms like Airbnb and VRBO to disclose property-level listing data so local governments can verify that transient occupancy taxes are being collected and remitted correctly. Senator María Elena Durazo authored the bill, Governor Gavin Newsom signed it on October 13, 2025, and it took effect on January 1, 2026.¹² It was co-sponsored by the League of California Cities and the California Association of County Treasurers and Tax Collectors.³

The Problem It Was Written to Fix

California cities and counties charge transient occupancy taxes on short-term rentals, the same hotel tax that applies to traditional lodging. Before SB 346, most local governments relied on Voluntary Collection Agreements with the platforms. Those agreements, according to the bill’s sponsors, typically kept the actual addresses of taxed properties hidden from the cities receiving the money.³

Without addresses, a city could not confirm whether a rental was properly licensed, whether the right tax rate was being applied, or whether the property was even permitted to operate as a short-term rental. Local governments were left hiring third-party data-mining firms, issuing subpoenas, or accepting whatever the platform sent as accurate. The California Association of County Treasurers and Tax Collectors called it “a gap in the law” and a “substantial obstacle” to enforcing local ordinances.⁴

It Only Applies Where a City or County Opts In

SB 346 is not a statewide mandate on rental platforms. A city or county must first adopt a local ordinance invoking the law before any of its tools become available in that jurisdiction. The law also does not displace existing local rules. It explicitly states that cities and counties can continue adopting their own short-term rental regulations and collecting transient occupancy taxes through mechanisms that differ from those in SB 346.¹

Once a jurisdiction opts in, the law gives it several specific powers over any short-term rental facilitator operating within its boundaries.

What Platforms Have to Report

A local agency can require a facilitator to disclose the physical address, including the nine-digit ZIP code, of every short-term rental listed during a reporting period. Where an address alone is not enough to identify the property, the agency can also ask for the assessor parcel number, the URL of the specific listing, and whether the unit is an accessory dwelling unit, guest house, or part of a multifamily property.⁵

Reports can be required no more than once every three months. Jurisdictions that require monthly tax remittance may request monthly reports.⁵

What Has to Appear on the Listing

In jurisdictions that adopt an ordinance under the law, facilitators must display any applicable local business license number and transient occupancy tax certification on each rental listing, so guests and enforcement staff can see at a glance whether the property has the required permits.³

Audits, Penalties, and Appeals

A local agency can audit a facilitator’s records to confirm that the correct amount of transient occupancy tax has been collected and sent. Audit authority applies only where the facilitator is the party responsible for collecting and remitting the tax under a local ordinance or agreement, and the local agency bears the cost of the audit.⁵

If a facilitator does not file the required reports, the agency may impose administrative fines or penalties. A facilitator has 20 days to appeal a penalty order in superior court. If a facilitator refuses to pay, the agency must go to civil court to collect.⁵

Where the Platforms Pushed Back

Airbnb, Expedia Group, Booking.com, TechNet, and the Travel Technology Association opposed the bill.⁶ Airbnb’s central objection was host privacy. The company argued the bill mandated an “overly broad collection of hosts’ private and sensitive information,” including home parcel numbers, without adequate due process, and said federal courts had recognized host addresses as private business records that platforms cannot be compelled to disclose without a valid legal request or subpoena.³ Airbnb also said the bill lacked limits on how jurisdictions could use the data beyond tax enforcement.

Expedia Group argued the reporting and audit obligations were onerous, especially in cities where the platform was not itself responsible for collecting the tax.⁵ Opponents more broadly argued the bill was redundant because cities could already subpoena records and audit platforms under existing law.³ Sponsors responded that voluntary tools were precisely the problem, because they depended on the platform’s cooperation.

The Ninth Circuit Precedent Behind It

The bill was drafted to line up with existing Ninth Circuit case law on local rental-platform ordinances. The key ruling is HomeAway.com, Inc. v. City of Santa Monica, decided in 2020, which upheld a Santa Monica ordinance requiring platforms to disclose booking data and held that such requirements did not violate the federal Communications Decency Act or the First Amendment.⁷ The court reasoned that ordinances regulating commercial booking transactions are distinct from ones regulating expressive activity, so heightened constitutional scrutiny does not apply. Similar local ordinances had previously been challenged under the Stored Communications Act, the Communications Decency Act, the First Amendment, and the Fourth Amendment.⁶ SB 346 puts the same kind of framework into state statute, which the bill’s authors said would give participating cities firmer legal footing.

1
CalMatters Digital Democracy. SB 346
2
Senator Durazo, Senate District 26. Senator Durazo’s SB 346 Passes Legislature, Heads to Governor’s Desk
3
California Senate Judiciary Committee. SB 346 Durazo – Senate Judiciary Analysis
4
Assembly Committee on Local Government. SB 346 Analysis – Assembly Local Government Committee
5
Assembly Committee on Local Government. SB 346 Durazo – Assembly Local Government Committee Analysis
6
Assembly Committee on Local Government. SB 346 Analysis
7
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. HomeAway.com, Inc. v. City of Santa Monica