Short-term rentals, the government challenges the Emilia-Romagna law

On short rentals the government is not changing its line: the Council of Ministers has decided to challenge the Emilia-Romagna law adopted in mid-December to contain the phenomenon of overtourism. A regulation that introduced the urbanistic destination of use 'short lease', to which all property units used for tourist rentals will have to comply. Reserving to municipalities the power to limit percentages of short lets in sensitive areas and prohibiting fractioning or demolition for new short uses.

The executive's decision comes despite the fact that the Constitutional Court had already rejected a similar move by the government against the Tuscan regional law in December 2025, declaring the questions of legitimacy raised in March last year to be unfounded. According to that ruling, 'if a property is used in a stable and organised manner as a non-hotel accommodation facility, the provision of tourist accommodation cannot be considered unreasonable'.

In the absence of a national organic rule invoked by the regions and municipalities, the risk is that attempts by territories to give themselves rules will multiply: the next move could come from Apulia, which with governor Antonio Decaro has already indicated his intention to beat the path taken by Tuscany. And the mayors are also moving: the Municipality of Rome is studying a regulation to limit the phenomenon, especially in the historic centre.

More specifically, the key novelty of the Emilia-Romagna law requires units rented under the short-term rental formula to change their residential destination, with a potential impact on marketability and a strong barrier to entry in administrative terms. By changing their intended use, units will then have to comply with a long list of requirements (of safety, hygiene, energy efficiency and conformity of installations) but, above all, they will be placed under the lens of the municipalities, which will have the power to impose urban planning limits.

"The law goes on to say: 'Municipalities can identify, in their urban planning tools, specific areas of the municipal territory in which the establishment of short-term rental use is permitted or subject to the observance of specific conditions'. Hence, no longer free growth of the phenomenon, but the possibility for mayors to place limitations, even very strong ones, by monitoring the urbanistic destinations of the properties present on the territory. The administrations, thanks to this new mechanism, will be able to 'establish, for each area, the maximum percentage of residential property units that can be destined for short-term rental'. It is on these strong limitations on the usability of real estate that the executive's doubts focus.