I understand what you are saying. I look back, my first year hosting the same could’ve been said about my listings. It has taken me a long time to populate all the information. I’m hoping their listing text will mature over time.
I always interpreted that to mean the exact opposite. That you aren’t allowed to discriminate based on age unless it is prohibited by law for someone, say under the age of 25, to rent there.
Their assistance animal policy is written in exactly the sane way.
Here is all I currently know: https://www.counton2.com/news/local-news/state-legislators-looking-to-change-way-short-term-rentals-are-regulated-in-south-carolina/
However, future changes would not affect that ADU rental of allowing 4 guests vs 3 guests, because that is in the zoning permit to be allowed to build an ADU.
Here is what it says exactly:
- Airbnb hosts may not:
- Impose any different terms or conditions or decline a reservation based on the guest’s age or familial status, where prohibited by law.
It means you can’t decline based on a guest’s age where it is prohibited by law, i.e. if it’s illegal in your location then you can’t decline based on a guest’s age.
The assistance animal policy says the opposite, here is what says exactly regarding laws:
If you’re traveling outside of the United States, please be aware that requirements may differ. We know that some jurisdictions have prohibitions on all animals, including assistance animals, and we don’t want Hosts to break local laws or take actions that may subject them to legal liability.
It means that you have to accept assistance animals unless it’s against the law for you to have animals in your listing because some places in the world have laws against animals and dont’ recognize assistance animals an exception to their laws.
Ultimately both policies explicitly tell you: follow the laws in your location.
I don’t think it’s fair or that it makes any sense to decline guests 18-25 or even up to 30 on some listings, but 18-30 are not afforded protection from age discrimination generally and especially not in transient accommodations, except in MA. It’s possible that there is another state but I have researched through most of the states that have their own anti-discrimination laws that specifically protect age and cross-referencing those with their STR laws and categorization and I haven’t found it. The deeper I dig, the more I learn, I think it’s highly unlikely.
These three things must all exist together at the same time in the same place for it to be prohibited by law to decline a guest based on their age (in the US, this is all US info):
-
A state must have their own state anti-discrimination laws, because federal laws don’t include age as a protected class (other than for employment and then only ages 40+ and that’s because historically people have been fired or let go because they are getting older not because they were 24).
-
The state’s anti-discrimination laws must include age as a protected class. Most do not. For it to be relevant to this discussion their laws must include 18+ as the protected age because most (maybe all, but I’d have to check) that do treat age as a protected class specify it as 40+, 55+ or 62+, effectively only protecting older people from discrimination, not 18-39 year olds.
-
The state’s laws must either categorize STRs as housing and/or explicitly apply their anti-discrimination laws to STR specifically.
It is possible that there’s another state other than MA but it’s a pretty complex set of at least 3 things that have to come together for it to be prohibited by law to decline an STR guest based on age, especially if they are under age 40.
For example, because it’s interesting to me:
MA has an anti-discrimination law as well as public accommodations law that also addresses discrimination. Their anti-discrimination law applies to housing and employment as well as related things like mortgage lending and labor halls, but it all falls under housing and employment. And their law does include age as a protected class and it does include all adults as it speficies the protected class of age as 18+.
But their Public Accommodations laws apply to businesses and other stuff open to the public, have their own set of anti-discrimination statutes integrated into them but those anti-discrimination statutes do not treat age as a protected class, there is no law against discriminating based on age in a MA in businesses, etc only housing and employment.
Hotels, Inns, B&Bs, RV Parks, etc (as well other types of businesses) are all included under these public accommodation laws in MA. In most places, STRs are categorized in the same part of the laws that include at least the same ones that include B&Bs. It would be expected for STRs to be included in the public accommodations laws, but that’s not what MA did and it’s really interesting.
There is a statute, just added to the laws in 2019 (0r 2018) regarding STRs in MA. It’s all fairly new as far laws go and it was a really public battle between Airbnb and the hotels and also Airbnb and Boston. In those STR statutes there is a line that specifically says that STRs must adhere to the policies in the anti-discrimination law (the one for housing and employment not the public accommodations), which is an unusual move (but does indeed make it prohibited by law for a host in MA to decline a guest based on age).
I kind of wonder if the hotels had anything to do with it. Not because of age discrimination but because of something I don’t understand or can’t surmise that may benefit them somehow because it’s really odd that hotels (and B&Bs) and STRs fall under 2 totally disparate parts of the law.
TL;DR: Age discrimination is basically an urban myth if you’re between the ages of 18-39, especially in an Airbnb. But if someone wanted to stir things up in a MA Airbnb 
This looks like what Texas did, liberalizing the law in the name of “private property rights.” It’s really fascinating to see how the arguments get turned on their heads depending on the issue. I’d hate to see the charm of Charleston disrupted. How was it before regulation? Were the STRs in town a problem?
Good old MA - a leader in making detailed rules, lol.
1 Like
I can’t speak for Charleston. I’m 2 hours north.
In my area the HOAs & city zoning are keeping STRs out of the highest priced/exclusive areas & historic areas. If the state gets involved, those areas are afraid they will lose their protected status.
STRs provide jobs & tax revenue. The state wants those.
The other side of the coin is just as concerning for me. The state could just as easily regulate small STRs out to help address the housing shortage. Local government is unlikely to do that, because they want the local 2% hospitality tax revenue.