Massachusetts is Home the Worst City to Own a Vacation Rental

Massachusetts is a fantastic place to live and visit. From picturesque Cape Cod beaches to the iconic Boston skyline and west to the beautiful mountains of the Berkshires, Massachusetts truly has something for everyone.

While Massachusetts is one of the most populated states in the U.S. it also sees a significant amount of tourists and visitors annually. According to visitma.com, Massachusetts sees around 26.2 million domestic visitors, and 2.4 million international visitors annually. Direct spending from these visitors totaled over $10 BILLION in 2020, making it a huge driving force in the Massachusetts economy and generating $879.9 million in state and local tax revenue.

Given the number of visitors that flock to Massachusetts annually, tourism is an extremely viable industry. Expedia reports that there are almost 16,000 hotels in Massachusetts to accommodate its almost 30 million visitors. Like the rest of the country in the past decade, the Bay State has seen an explosion of short-term and vacation rentals. But not every city and town in Massachusetts is receptive to, or a good location to own a short-term rental. In fact, one Massachusetts city was recently named one of the worst places in the country to own a vacation rental.

A new study from LawnStarter took a look at the best and worst cities in the U.S. to own a vacation rental and compared over 180 of the biggest U.S. cities based on six categories. The factors they considered were legal restrictions on short-term rentals, occupancy rates, and revenue potential. They also looked at operating expenses like housekeeping services and utilities, among a total of 18 metrics.

This Massachusetts City Was Named of the Worst Cities to Own a

Vacation Rental In

Springfield, Massachusetts has been named the sixth worst city in the United States for folks to own a vacation rental. Springfield, MA was one of only two cities outside of California to make the top ten. Check out the entire list below: