comments3

2026-05-03 06:30:54 +02:00

Jabu

No I do not

All of the above

Economic Impact

2026-05-02 22:02:29 +02:00

Simon

No I do not

All of the above

Regulatory Overreach

Once again we have the usual self serving idiots, formerly ANC, now something else, but still the same. They are offended by everything. Ashamed of nothing. Believe they’re Entitled to everything. Without Contributing anything in return, like the proverbial plague of vermin, destroying everything that they come into contact with.

2026-05-02 15:58:26 +02:00

Tertius

No I do not

All of the above

Regulatory Overreach

2026-05-02 11:42:34 +02:00

Alistair

No I do not

All of the above

Economic Impact

I am concerned about the economic and social impact that such a regulation will have:

On guests/travellers looking for affordable accommodation options, and also to experience new places in a much more personal way. I would rather stay in someone's home (AirBnB/Lekkerslaap) than a hotel/resort, as it gives a better insight into the local culture, and supports small businesses and local economies.

On hosts: many of them don't exploit this - if you are prepared to move out of your home for a limited period of time in order to put it on AirBnB to make a suplemental income, that is a sacrifice. It is sometimes a last resort, and gives a much-needed boost to many households economically. Not every AirBnB host charges exhoribitant prices either.

On the economy - the effect on local economies would be detrimental - if more people were discouraged from renting out their homes due tohigh taxes, barriers and beaurocracy, the economy would be worse-off, not better. Our government should be encouraging the economy and small businesses so that we can grow as a nation.

2026-05-02 09:46:38 +02:00

Tim

No I do not

All of the above

Economic Impact

This would financially cripple many people in this industry, and removeant others from it.

2026-05-01 21:39:46 +02:00

Dave

No I do not

All of the above

Data Privacy

2026-05-01 14:35:34 +02:00

Joy

No I do not

All of the above

Regulatory Overreach

Most people only rent a room a few times a year so it is outrageous that their rates will increase if they do. Unemployment is so high so it is offensive that people who are struggling to make ends meet by having to allow strangers to rent part of their homes are penalized for it - a great invasion of human rights

2026-05-01 11:21:21 +02:00

Willem

No I do not

All of the above

Regulatory Overreach

Livelihood Threat: Many South Africans rely on STR income to pay their mortgages and survive the cost-of-living crisis; over-regulation kills this “side-hustle”.
Property Rights: A homeowner should have the right to use their private property as they see fit without government-mandated caps on occupancy. We have spend most of our working life to pay off this investment, now we are charged capital gains tax and with this proposal, a further mandatory share-holding by the government while adding no value to this business.

What has government done to validate bigger involvement in private sector: Policing in shambles, security being privatised, electricity privatised (rooftop), water and sanitation in an all-time low (being privatised), roads and transport risking your life.

2026-05-01 07:06:42 +02:00

Henricus

No I do not

All of the above

Regulatory Overreach

2026-04-30 23:40:41 +02:00

Kristy

No I do not

All of the above

Economic Impact

I am writing to you today to voice my strong opposition to the Draft Code of Good Practice for Short-Term Rentals that was gazetted on March 13.

While I understand the Department's goal is to bring some order to the industry, I am deeply concerned that the current proposal is a one-size-fits-all solution that will end up hurting regular South Africans more than it helps the tourism sector.

Although I can see the benefit of controlling large scale businesses that are buying up the housing market supply to implement a Short Term Rental model...
I would like to highlight a few specific areas where I believe the proposed policy misses the mark:

The proposal treads on basic property rights protected under Section 25 of our Constitution. We are protected against the arbitrary deprivation of property, and for many of us, our home is our only major asset. By introducing restrictive day caps or reclassifying our spare rooms as commercial, the government is effectively stripping away our right to use our property to stay afloat financially.
The maths simply does not add up for the little guy. Recent stats show that accommodation income in SA hit roughly R35.3 billion last year, largely because of the flexibility of short-term rentals. However, if you force a micro-host to pay for commercial-grade liability insurance and high-end safety certifications, you are going to wipe out their profit entirely. We are not hotels; we are families trying to pay a bond in a high-interest-rate environment. For some people it is their main source or a significant source of their retirement income.

The policy seeks to encourage platforms to share host and guests information which is again treating us like hotels and raising significant privacy concerns.

The policy also creates a legal grey area. The Tourism Act (Act 3 of 2014) does not actually give the Minister the clear power to micromanage how a private citizen runs a short-term rental. Pushing this Code of Conduct through before the Tourism Amendment Bill is even passed creates a lot of regulatory fog. It makes it very hard for us to plan for the future when the rules of the game keep shifting.

Another cause for concern is the “Good neighbour Burden” - the onus that is created for both: the guest to be conversant with the cultural norms and values of the host community, and the owner to impose these on their guest... Most platforms have a rating system, which is likely to keep the parties respectable. If this does not happen then trying to be heavy handed is going to be an unpleasant extra burden for hosts/guests (beyond their normal house rules)... and not complied with in any case, by a guest who is not concerned with their ratings they receive on the platform.

There is also the threat of unfair tax and rates hikes. There is a real fear that this code will lead municipalities to charge us commercial rates, which can be more than double residential rates. With guest house occupancy sitting at only about 61%, adding a massive tax bill to a property that is not even full half the time is a recipe for bankruptcy.

Finally, the code ignores existing building rules. We already have the Sectional Titles Schemes Management Act, which allows our own Body Corporate's to decide what works for our specific buildings. Having the national government step in creates a messy layer of red tape that clashes with decisions we have already made as neighbours and owners.

Minister de Lille has often spoken about the importance of geographic spread in tourism, getting travellers out of the big hubs and into our suburbs and small towns. Short-term rentals are the only reason that is happening. If you make it too expensive and difficult for us to host, that progress will disappear.

I really hope the Department takes these concerns to heart and acts on them. We want to be part of a successful tourism industry, but we should not have to lose our livelihoods to do it. Don’t take something that is working well for South Africa and strangle the life from it.

2026-04-30 23:38:58 +02:00

Tim

No I do not

All of the above

Economic Impact

I am writing to you today to voice my strong opposition to the Draft Code of Good Practice for Short-Term Rentals that was gazetted on March 13.

While I understand the Department's goal is to bring some order to the industry, I am deeply concerned that the current proposal is a one-size-fits-all solution that will end up hurting regular South Africans more than it helps the tourism sector.

Although I can see the benefit of controlling large scale businesses that are buying up the housing market supply to implement a Short Term Rental model...
I would like to highlight a few specific areas where I believe the proposed policy misses the mark:

The proposal treads on basic property rights protected under Section 25 of our Constitution. We are protected against the arbitrary deprivation of property, and for many of us, our home is our only major asset. By introducing restrictive day caps or reclassifying our spare rooms as commercial, the government is effectively stripping away our right to use our property to stay afloat financially.
The maths simply does not add up for the little guy. Recent stats show that accommodation income in SA hit roughly R35.3 billion last year, largely because of the flexibility of short-term rentals. However, if you force a micro-host to pay for commercial-grade liability insurance and high-end safety certifications, you are going to wipe out their profit entirely. We are not hotels; we are families trying to pay a bond in a high-interest-rate environment. For some people it is their main source or a significant source of their retirement income.

The policy seeks to encourage platforms to share host and guests information which is again treating us like hotels and raising significant privacy concerns.

The policy also creates a legal grey area. The Tourism Act (Act 3 of 2014) does not actually give the Minister the clear power to micromanage how a private citizen runs a short-term rental. Pushing this Code of Conduct through before the Tourism Amendment Bill is even passed creates a lot of regulatory fog. It makes it very hard for us to plan for the future when the rules of the game keep shifting.

Another cause for concern is the “Good neighbour Burden” - the onus that is created for both: the guest to be conversant with the cultural norms and values of the host community, and the owner to impose these on their guest... Most platforms have a rating system, which is likely to keep the parties respectable. If this does not happen then trying to be heavy handed is going to be an unpleasant extra burden for hosts/guests (beyond their normal house rules)... and not complied with in any case, by a guest who is not concerned with their ratings they receive on the platform.

There is also the threat of unfair tax and rates hikes. There is a real fear that this code will lead municipalities to charge us commercial rates, which can be more than double residential rates. With guest house occupancy sitting at only about 61%, adding a massive tax bill to a property that is not even full half the time is a recipe for bankruptcy.

Finally, the code ignores existing building rules. We already have the Sectional Titles Schemes Management Act, which allows our own Body Corporate's to decide what works for our specific buildings. Having the national government step in creates a messy layer of red tape that clashes with decisions we have already made as neighbours and owners.

Minister de Lille has often spoken about the importance of geographic spread in tourism, getting travellers out of the big hubs and into our suburbs and small towns. Short-term rentals are the only reason that is happening. If you make it too expensive and difficult for us to host, that progress will disappear.

I really hope the Department takes these concerns to heart and acts on them. We want to be part of a successful tourism industry, but we should not have to lose our livelihoods to do it. Let's not take something that is working well for South Africa and strangle the life from it.

2026-04-30 12:00:56 +02:00

Cebo

Yes I do

No concern, I Support the Gazette

Over-tourism is a real thing. Places such as Bali, Indonesia, Hawai'i, USA or Venice, Italy have faced problems with mismanaged tourism growth, destroying fragile ecosystmes, resulting in increased living expenses for local communities due to rising housing prices. The satisfaction of visitors can certainly not be at the expense of the quality of life afforded to locals and there is a very real need for government to take control of short-term rentals and other spheres of tourism before it reaches mind-boggling levels. The code is also important so that we as a nation are able to keep tabs on exactly who is in the country and where, thereby fortifying national security. These are important considerations which cannot simply be ignored.

2026-04-30 08:49:22 +02:00

Louise

No I do not

All of the above

Data Privacy

2026-04-29 16:59:03 +02:00

Antony

No I do not

Economic Impact

There has been and still are a huge anti 'Airbnb" voices that have not taken the time and energy to even understand what they themselves mean when they use the term AirBnB.

The Airbnb of today is NOT the entity it was in the past. In truth it is now no different than any other short term letting platform such as Booking.com, Lekkerslap, Rooms for Africa, Safari Now and many many other booking platforms.

I thus think that a blanket legislation will have devastating and confusing economic impact on small legitimate accommodations.

I believe what people are actually objecting to when they "blame Airbnb' are free standing residential units (of any kind) that do not have a resident but are used exclusively for short term rentals by tourists.

Those properties 100% should be rate banded 'Commercial' and municipal services charged at the Commercial rate.

However, the over reach of the legislation invites municipalities to also included the home owner who LIVES IN THE PROPERTY to be wrongly branded as 'Commercial".

I think any guidelines or rules should first clearly identify what they mean by Airbnb' and focus ONLY on those properties that should be re-banded as commercial.

2026-04-29 06:37:14 +02:00

Jean

No I do not

All of the above

Regulatory Overreach

2026-04-28 17:20:15 +02:00

Barbara

No I do not

Data Privacy

Forcing guests to submit to government-tracked data sharing is a violation of privacy that will drive tourists to other destinations.

2026-04-28 15:07:37 +02:00

Sven

No I do not

Economic Impact

Dear Sir/Madam,
I write to formally object to the proposed amendment to the City of Cape Town’s Rates Policy, specifically the reclassification of premises used for commercial short-term letting as liable for commercial property rates.
While I understand the City’s need to ensure a fair and sustainable revenue base, I am concerned that the proposed change may have unintended and disproportionate consequences for property owners and the broader local economy.
Firstly, many property owners who engage in short-term letting do so on a small scale and are not operating large commercial enterprises. Reclassifying such properties as commercial risks imposing a significantly higher rates burden that may not reflect the actual scale or profitability of these activities.
Secondly, the proposal may discourage tourism-related accommodation supply, particularly in areas where short-term letting contributes meaningfully to visitor capacity. This could negatively impact local businesses that rely on tourism, including restaurants, transport services, and retail establishments.
Thirdly, there appears to be insufficient differentiation between occasional short-term letting and full-scale commercial operations. A blanket approach may unfairly penalize homeowners who only intermittently let their properties to supplement their income.
Thank you for considering this submission. I trust that the City will take into account the concerns raised and pursue a consultative and equitable outcome.

2026-04-28 15:07:35 +02:00

Sven

No I do not

Economic Impact

Dear Sir/Madam,
I write to formally object to the proposed amendment to the City of Cape Town’s Rates Policy, specifically the reclassification of premises used for commercial short-term letting as liable for commercial property rates.
While I understand the City’s need to ensure a fair and sustainable revenue base, I am concerned that the proposed change may have unintended and disproportionate consequences for property owners and the broader local economy.
Firstly, many property owners who engage in short-term letting do so on a small scale and are not operating large commercial enterprises. Reclassifying such properties as commercial risks imposing a significantly higher rates burden that may not reflect the actual scale or profitability of these activities.
Secondly, the proposal may discourage tourism-related accommodation supply, particularly in areas where short-term letting contributes meaningfully to visitor capacity. This could negatively impact local businesses that rely on tourism, including restaurants, transport services, and retail establishments.
Thirdly, there appears to be insufficient differentiation between occasional short-term letting and full-scale commercial operations. A blanket approach may unfairly penalize homeowners who only intermittently let their properties to supplement their income.
Thank you for considering this submission. I trust that the City will take into account the concerns raised and pursue a consultative and equitable outcome.

2026-04-28 14:22:40 +02:00

Dewald

No I do not

Regulatory Overreach

2026-04-28 13:36:05 +02:00

Esther

No I do not

All of the above

Regulatory Overreach

I am unemployed at the moment. I have a bachelor room on my property that is my only source of income at this stage. I have long-term rentals of 6 months to 11 months at a time. If the government takes a greater chunk of it by re-classifying it to a "commercial" business, I have less to live on! And with the rising cost of living, petrol increases and extra taxations, how are people like me going to survive? We already have a massive unemployment problem in SA. People are desperate and having to find ways of earning an income or extra income. Guests privacy is also a huge concern. More investigation needs to be done first!

2026-04-28 09:30:18 +02:00

E

No I do not

All of the above

Regulatory Overreach

2026-04-27 17:32:49 +02:00

Ann

Not fully

All of the above

Regulatory Overreach

2026-04-27 16:32:03 +02:00

Charl

No I do not

All of the above

Regulatory Overreach

Over reach on a massive scale. What is returned for such influx in taxes?
In the event such by-law is passed what does COCT provide in return for such higher rates and taxes to the residences other than simply taking more incomes in without doing anything other than signing a by-law document? What value add is COCT providing in return?

Commercial tax = commercial zoning and commercial use rights:
If property is considered commercial then the property should have commercial rights for more commercial activities to run a restaurant, bar and so forth from the same residence considering the higher rates/tax applied?
The commercial residence now should more easily get re-zoning permission without resistance as it no longer is considered residential.

Massive Violation of privacy and more:
Locals and foreigners do not wish the government to know whom they are on vacation with.

Personal Property:
Violation of personal property rights is being infringed upon. Whether temporary, longer term accommodation or a hybrid. All homeowner should have the right to use their private property without interference as long as its for residing as a residence. Caps on occupancy and more is over reach.

Livelihood Threat:
Add small incomes for households as a side hustle to pay excessive rates/water and more.

Administrative Overkill: The requirements are too “corporate” for a simple room-sharing arrangement and will discourage new entrants.

Privacy Risk: The platforms we share with have no right to share with government. Forcing platforms to share personal data with the state is an overreach that risks the security of both hosts and guests.

2026-04-26 14:11:09 +02:00

Ruth

No I do not

All of the above

Regulatory Overreach

2026-04-25 18:28:02 +02:00

S

No I do not

All of the above

Economic Impact

2026-04-25 18:28:00 +02:00

S

No I do not

All of the above

Economic Impact

2026-04-25 18:27:58 +02:00

S

No I do not

All of the above

Economic Impact

2026-04-25 07:35:49 +02:00

Annelee

No I do not

All of the above

Data Privacy

What does government want to do with the fact that I travel on an regular basis, that information is my business.

2026-04-25 02:23:55 +02:00

Bruce

No I do not

All of the above

Regulatory Overreach

Government interference in our lives is over the top. The minister must rather focus on reducing crime, corruption, and enacting policies that PROMOTE tourism.

2026-04-24 22:28:19 +02:00

Rehana

No I do not

All of the above

Liability