The real issue isn't tourism — it's trust · Two tools, two very different weights · The real fix: less bureaucracy, real bargaining power for owners · Our position hasn't changed

The European Commission has unveiled the Affordable Housing Act, the latest piece of the broader European Affordable Housing Plan launched on December 16, 2025, which has already mobilised more than €43 billion in EU funding for housing. The Act has two parts: a proposed EU Regulation, which gives local authorities a common framework for demonstrating when an area is under "housing stress" and for justifying any measures in a proportionate, transparent way; and a Commission Recommendation, focused instead on accelerating housing supply through faster permitting, better use of existing buildings, and more social housing. 

And here's the line that matters most — straight from the Commission itself, the kind of statement we at Tuscanhouses have been making for years:

Restrictions alone cannot solve housing shortages.

That's not our spin. It's written directly on the Act's official page. Local authorities remain free to regulate short-term rentals, secondary homes or vacant dwellings — but only if the measures are evidence-based, necessary and targeted, not blanket restrictions imposed because short-term rentals make an easy scapegoat.

Even the European Parliament, in the housing crisis report adopted by its Housing Committee on February 9, 2026, didn't call for a ban. It called for short-term rental legislation that balances tourism with housing affordability — an explicit acknowledgment that this is more complex than a simple "tourists vs. residents" fight.

The real issue isn't tourism — it's trust

The EU text acknowledges that housing pressure is concentrated in cities, metropolitan areas, islands and tourist destinations, and that some non-primary uses of housing can make it harder to find a stable long-term home. True. But the question too few people are asking is: why do property owners choose short-term rentals over long-term leases in the first place?

For anyone who manages properties day to day, the answer is simple: risk. A landlord who signs a long-term lease and ends up with a tenant who stops paying can spend years and thousands of euros trying to reclaim their own property. With short-term rentals, that risk almost disappears entirely. This isn't an ideological rejection of long-term rentals — it's a rational response to a system that, in practice, protects non-paying tenants more than it protects owners who've invested their savings in a property.

Until institutions rebalance that relationship, restricting short-term rentals won't move a single home into the stable residential market. It will simply push those properties out of the market altogether — or into unregulated, undeclared renting.

This problem weighs more heavily in Italy than in most of the EU. Italy is among the countries where eviction for non-payment takes comparatively longer: even in straightforward cases it's a matter of months, and if the tenant contests or requests extensions, the process can drag on for years. This is why, when we talk about "trust in institutions," the Italian — and Tuscan — case isn't a footnote. It's the heart of the problem.

Two tools, two very different weights

It's worth clarifying a technical point that often gets lost: the proposed Regulation and the Recommendation don't carry the same legal force. The Regulation sets a common methodological standard — how to measure "housing stress," how to justify measures — and once adopted, it will be binding on Member States. The Recommendation, on the other hand — the part dedicated to streamlining permits and cutting red tape on the supply side — is not binding: it's sound advice the EU is offering to States and municipalities, which remain free to apply it, or to ignore it.

In other words: Europe can suggest simplification, but it can't force anyone to actually simplify. It will be up to individual municipalities and regions to decide whether to genuinely follow that path — or to give in to the easier, more politically saleable temptation of punitive measures on short-term rentals, which the binding Regulation still allows, as long as they're "justified and proportionate."

The real fix: less bureaucracy, real bargaining power for owners

The Recommendation that accompanies the Regulation partly points in the right direction: faster permits, fewer administrative burdens, better use of the existing building stock. Those are exactly the right ingredients — simplification, not prohibition. But since it isn't binding, its fate depends entirely on local political will.

But to truly turn the housing emergency into an opportunity, one decisive piece is still missing: legal tools that give owners real certainty they can reclaim their property quickly when a tenant stops paying. This isn't about weakening protections for honest tenants — it's about no longer treating non-payment as a risk the owner must simply absorb indefinitely.

If authorities legislated in this direction — faster evictions for proven non-payment, less procedural red tape, predictable timelines — many owners who currently choose short-term rentals specifically to avoid this risk would start seriously considering long-term leases again. The housing problem would stop being a constraint and start becoming an opportunity.

Our position hasn't changed

The EU itself admits that restrictions alone aren't enough. We'd add one more step: the real lever isn't limiting short-term rentals — it's restoring trust for those who would consider renting long-term. Less bureaucracy, real protection for owners against non-payment: that's the reform that's actually needed, not another crackdown on tourism.

Own a property and want it to generate income without the non-payment risk?

Tuscanhouses handles every aspect of short-term rental management for you — from guest sourcing to maintenance — so you get a stable return without the headaches. Get in touch for a free consultation.