Environment
No direct effect
Neutral — no direct effect identified.
Benefits
- No material direct effect identified.
Risks
- No material direct effect identified.
StateNorth CarolinaIntroduced
HB 169: Haywood/Cherokee/Leland Occupancy Tax Modifications.
Unknown Sponsor
HB 169 status: Introduced — Withdrawn From Cal (updated Jul 2, 2026).
Source
OpenStates
Confidence
Low
Analysis basis
OpenStates summary
01
What this bill does
Official summary alongside an AI-generated read on where it stands and why.
Overall Score
50OUT OF 100
Score:50/100 civic fit — mixed
Risk:Low Risk
Impact:Moderate Impact 40/100
Constitutionality90%
Bipartisan50%
Public opinion50%
Bill summary
What changes
The bill proposes modifications to existing occupancy tax frameworks applicable to lodging and vacation rentals within Haywood, Cherokee, and Leland.
Who is affected
Property owners, short-term rental hosts, hotel operators, tourists, and local municipal governments in the specified regions.
Requirements and enforcement
The bill likely establishes or adjusts local tax collection and reporting mandates.
Costs and funding
Direct costs to tourists through increased fees; potential compliance costs for local business operators.
When it takes effect
Introduced in 2025; currently under consideration.
Potential benefits
Provides additional revenue for tourism development and municipal infrastructure support.
Risks and tradeoffs
Potential for reduced competitiveness for local tourism and limited public oversight of funds.
What is still unknown
Exact tax rates, intended use of funds by local authorities, and administrative impact on local tax offices.
02
Impact analysis
✦ AI analysisModeled effects across six domains, estimated from bill text and comparable legislation.
Economy
Mixed / Neutral
50%
Benefits
- Increases municipal tax revenue streams
- Provides funding for local tourism projects
- Standardizes tax compliance for local entities
Risks
- Increased cost burden for visiting tourists
- Potential reduction in lodging booking volume
- Higher compliance costs for small rental operators
Society
No direct effect
Neutral — no direct effect identified.
Benefits
- No material direct effect identified.
Risks
- No material direct effect identified.
Technology Industry
No direct effect
Neutral — no direct effect identified.
Benefits
- No material direct effect identified.
Risks
- No material direct effect identified.
Civic Accountability
Mixed / Neutral
50%
Benefits
- Clarifies authority of local Tourism Development Authorities
- Formalizes local revenue collection mechanisms
- Ensures alignment with state taxation policies
Risks
- Limited transparency in fund allocation decisions
- Potential for board appointment lack of oversight
- Difficulty for public tracking of tax outcomes
Public Health & Safety
No direct effect
Neutral — no direct effect identified.
Benefits
- No material direct effect identified.
Risks
- No material direct effect identified.
03
How trustworthy & consequential it is
Sourcing already shown above, this is what the analysis found worth flagging.
Source
OpenStates
Official bill text or data from OpenStates.
Confidence
Low
Information is limited or incomplete.
Analysis basis
OpenStates summary
Source used for this bill's analysis.
Source note
Implementation risks include administrative costs that may exceed revenue gains for smaller municipalities.
Analysis scope
Source provided is an abstract; full text of tax modifications is not available.
04
Where it stands
Official record- IntroducedCurrent
- CommitteeUpcoming
- Chamber votesUpcoming
- Final agreementUpcoming
- GovernorUpcoming
- EnactedUpcoming
05
How it affects your district
✦ Personalized
Set your location
Add your district to see how this bill may affect your community and who to contact.
Your Representatives
Your representatives appear here once you add your location.
06
Take action
Contact your representatives
Let them know how you feel about this bill.
Share your view
Join the discussion and see what others are saying.
Track this bill
Stay updated on progress and changes.