Top Ten Scams Report: Phishing and Spoofing Scams Nearly Double in 2025 as AI-Powered Fraud Surges

/in Featured Home - Consumer Protection/by

Media Contact: Lisa McDonald, Vice President of Communications, 202-207-2829 

Washington, DC – Phishing and spoofing scams soared by 85.6% over the past year, doubling median losses from $1,000 to $2,060, according to the National Consumers League’s Fraud.org Top Ten Scams of 2025 report. Of 1,376 consumer complaints analyzed, investment scams caused the highest median loss at $30,000. 

“Given widespread evidence that scammers are increasingly using artificial intelligence tools to craft better pitches, the rise in phishing complaints is particularly concerning,” said NCL Vice President of Public Policy, Telecommunications, and Fraud John Breyault. “AI enables criminals to quickly generate highly realistic phishing emails and clone voices, making scams more convincing and allowing them to reach more targets than before. This underscores the need for consumers to verify information before trusting it.” 

The changing landscape is evident in attack methods as well. In a dramatic shift, web-based contact has overtaken phone scams as the primary attack vector, with 48% of victims reporting their first interaction with scammers occurred online—marking the end of the robocall era’s dominance.  

The Top Ten Scams categories reported to Fraud.org in 2025 were:    

  • Phishing/Spoofing
    Emails pretending to be from a well-known source ask consumers to enter or confirm personal information. 
  • Internet: General Merchandise
    Goods purchased are either never delivered or misrepresented. 
  • Prizes/Sweepstakes/Free Gifts
    Requests for payment to claim fictitious prizes, lottery winnings, or gifts. 
  • Investment: Other (including cryptocurrency)
    Consumers are tricked into paying money for bogus cryptocurrency investments. 
  • Advance Fee Loans, Credit Arrangers
    False promises of business or personal loans, even if credit is bad, for a fee upfront. 
  • Fake Check Scams
    Consumers are asked to cash fraudulent checks and then send the proceeds to a scammer before the check clears. 
  • Friendship & Sweetheart Swindles
    A con artist nurtures an online relationship, builds trust, and convinces victims to send money. 
  • Family/Friend Imposters
    A scammer calls or emails, claiming that a friend or family member is in distress (in jail, in the hospital, etc.) and urgently needs funds to help. 
  • Home Repair
    Fraud involving contractors or repair services that take payment upfront, perform poor or no work, or disappear before completing promised repairs. 
  • Credit Repair
    Fraud involving companies that promise to fix or improve credit scores for a fee, often using illegal or misleading tactics and failing to deliver real results. 

The National Consumers League’s Top Ten Scams report analyzes 1,376 complaints submitted to Fraud.org in 2025. These complaints are self-reported and do not constitute a nationally representative sample of fraud victims. NCL shares complaint data with a network of law enforcement and consumer protection partners, who combine it with other data sources to identify fraud trends and support enforcement actions.  

### 

About the National Consumers League (NCL)      

The National Consumers League, founded in 1899, is America’s pioneer consumer organization. Our mission is to protect and promote social and economic justice for consumers and workers in the United States and abroad. For more information, visit www.nclnet.org.   

Inside the 2026 International Consumer Product Safety and Health Organization (ICPHSO) Conference: Where Consumer Safety Meets Accountability

/in Blog, Featured Home - Consumer Protection, Thought Leadership/by

By Sally Greenberg, NCL CEO

Did you know that there are 1 billion pencils in circulation in the United States, including those ubiquitous NUMBER 2 pencils required to take the SAT exam? Pencil manufacturers even have their own industry association dedicated to safety, environmental responsibility, affordability, and compliance with recognized standards. I didn’t know that either.

But that is the kind of thing you learn at the annual International Consumer Product Safety and Health Organization (ICPHSO) conference, which I’m attending this week in Orlando. More than 700 participants are here, representing manufacturers, government regulators, supply chain and recall specialists, inventory and IT operations teams, and numerous law firms that specialize in regulatory compliance.

This is a must-attend conference for manufacturers of consumer goods; it’s also a meeting where parents whose children have suffered injuries or even killed by dangerous products, such as tiny batteries or water-absorbing beads that expand if children swallow them.

Daniel Greene, who leads auto and product safety work at the National Consumers League, and I have spent the last few days with many of these companies, learning how they ensure the safety of their products. There are many tools and resources available to help manufacturers comply with the law. We also met with a firm that specializes in designing accessibility into consumer products, so they are usable by people with a wide range of disabilities.

I’ve learned some interesting things at this conference about the importance of consumer advocacy:

  1. The Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008, enacted at the urging of consumer advocates after a child died from ingesting a toy containing lethal levels of lead, now requires far more rigorous safety testing before products enter the marketplace. One arts and crafts manufacturer told me the law has increased compliance demands but ultimately leads to much safer products.
  2. There are highly sophisticated services available to help companies manage product recalls, comply with complex regulations, interpret voluntary standards, and do outreach to consumers.
  3. I learned that the legal business for compliance with safety regulations is booming.
  4. Despite progress, children and adults continue to suffer preventable injuries from hazardous products, including bath seats, bed rails, window blinds, tip-over furniture, poorly made bike and motorcycle helmets, and table saws.
  5. Not surprisingly, the table saw industry was not present. With one notable exception, saw manufacturers continue to resist adopting safety technology that has been available since 2001. I had an infuriating conversation about table saw safety with someone who worked for a major retailer. She spouted all the usual verbiage about the expense of fixing table saws that inflict 10 amputations a day, overlooking the fact that over the past 25 years, hundreds of thousands of innocent consumers and workers have suffered mangled hands and lost fingers that could have been saved had the industry done the right thing from the start.

That said, many good things come out of this conference. We were joined by consumer groups, including Consumer Reports, Consumer Federation of America, SafeKids, and Nancy Cowles, founder of Kids In Danger (KID). We are vastly outnumbered by the companies here, but we play an essential role in advocating for consumer safety. Many people and families who have experienced terrible injuries with products come to the conference in force, sharing powerful stories and urging industries to fix their products.

Thanks to the ICPHSO leaders, including Mark Schoem and David Kossoff, the organization’s director and president, and their teams, for putting together a critically important event for consumer safety and ensuring that the consumer voice remains part of the conversation.

From left to right: Sally Greenberg; Daniel Greene; Sean McCurry, Accessibility Specialist at TransPerfect

Sally Greenberg & Don Mays, former colleague at Consumer Reports

Sally Greenberg & Bob Eckert, former Mattel CEO

SCOTUS Decision Is an Opportunity to End Anti-Consumer Tariffs

/in Featured Home - Consumer Protection/by

Media Contact: Lisa McDonald, Vice President of Communications, 202-207-2829 

Washington, DC – The National Consumers League applauds today’s decision by the Supreme Court of the United States, striking down President Trump’s sweeping tariff program, which is a major victory for American consumers and a rebuke of a costly experiment that functioned as a hidden tax on families.  

The following statement is attributable to John Breyault, National Consumers League Vice President of Public Policy, Telecommunications and Fraud:  

“For months, shoppers have been forced to shoulder tariff-related junk fees, price hikes, and supply chain disruptions that had little clear economic justification. These tariffs didn’t protect consumers — they punished them.  

The Court’s ruling should close the door — permanently — on this anti-consumer tariff regime. These tariffs operated as a nationwide price hike affecting everything from household goods to everyday essentials. American families should not be collateral damage in an ideologically driven trade policy.”  

The White House should respect both the spirit and the letter of this ruling and refrain from attempting to resurrect these sweeping tariffs under alternative statutory authorities. Repackaging the same policy under a different legal label would only prolong economic uncertainty and continue to squeeze household budgets.  

At a time when families are struggling with affordability, federal policy should be laser-focused on lowering costs and promoting competition — not reviving broad-based tariffs that act as hidden taxes at the checkout counter.” 

### 

About the National Consumers League (NCL)      

The National Consumers League, founded in 1899, is America’s pioneer consumer organization. Our mission is to protect and promote social and economic justice for consumers and workers in the United States and abroad. For more information, visit www.nclnet.org.   

14 Public Interest Groups Urge Meta to Act on Scam Ads

/in Featured Home - Consumer Protection, Featured Home - Fraud Prevention/by
Media Contact: Lisa McDonald, Vice President of Communications, 202-207-2829 

Washington, DC – Today, the National Consumers League and 13 other public interest groups urged Meta to implement new policies to combat the epidemic of scam ads on its platforms, which includes Facebook and Instagram. The advocacy effort comes after reporting that the company at one point projected 10% of its revenue to come from advertisements for scams and banned goods. Meta also privately estimated that the company facilitated a third of all successful scams in the United States.

“Preventing the proliferation of scams is one of the most effective ways to protect the public from further losses,” said John Breyault, NCL Vice President of Public Policy, Telecommunications, and Fraud. “Meta is uniquely positioned to stop a massive amount of fraud before it even happens. We believe it has a responsibility to do so.”

The consumer groups are pushing Meta to establish a victim restitution program, strengthen its oversight of advertisers, and increase transparency into its handling of suspected scam ads.

The organizations also indicated that they are exploring ways to support new state and federal legal requirements, including the enforcement of existing statutes prohibiting unfair and deceptive practices and the enactment of new legislation regarding the facilitation of scam advertisements.

“Given Meta’s enormous size and the scale of its platforms, it is one of the entities in the fraud ecosystem best positioned to combat these crimes,” wrote the groups.

The full letter can be found here.

### 

About the National Consumers League (NCL)      

The National Consumers League, founded in 1899, is America’s pioneer consumer organization. Our mission is to protect and promote social and economic justice for consumers and workers in the United States and abroad. For more information, visit www.nclnet.org.   

Strong Vehicle Safety and Fuel Standards Save Families Thousands Without Harming Affordability, Finds the National Consumers League

/in Featured Home - Consumer Protection, Featured Home - Traffic Safety/by

Media Contact: Lisa McDonald, Vice President of Communications, 202-207-2829 

Washington, DC — A new analysis from the National Consumers League (NCL) finds that federal vehicle safety and fuel economy standards account for only a small share of vehicle prices while delivering thousands of dollars in savings per vehicle and trillions of dollars in societal benefits. The full report is available here: Sticker Shock: Uncovering the Real Drivers of Rising Vehicle Prices. 

 “Families don’t have to choose between safety, fuel efficiency, and vehicle affordability, and the data proves it,” said Daniel Greene, Senior Director of Consumer Protection and Product Safety at NCL.“Federal safety and fuel economy standards save households thousands of dollars over the life of their vehicle while having a marginal effect on vehicle prices. Our findings reveal the true culprit of sticker shock: production of more luxurious models, more expensive vehicle mix, and showroom markups.” 

“While automakers discontinue their smaller, cheaper, more efficient vehicles, dealers charge higher and higher fees and inflation across the entire economy gets worse – but somehow we’re supposed to buy the industry’s arguments that safety and fuel economy standards are responsible for the high cost of cars,” said Senator Markey (D- Mass). “The National Consumer League’s report shows us definitively that fuel economy and safety standards save lives, clean our air, and make travel more affordable, while carmakers drive up costs on their own.”

“Americans deserve cars that are safe and affordable. The latest report from the National Consumers League shows that safety technology represents just a small fraction of what consumers pay for a car. We don’t need to trade away safety to talk about price. Instead, we should be looking at corporate pricing practices and gouging across the supply chain for why car prices have gone up, while continuing to promote safety standards that protect families and prevent tragedies,” said Jan Schakowsky (IL-09) 

Since 2002, average expenditures per new vehicle have increased $23,349.83. Improvements in fuel economy and safety standards account for only a modest share of this increase, as follows:    

  • Safety standards (2002-2019):$628.98, or 2.7 percent.  
  • Equipment upgrades: $3,040.20, or 13 percent. Equipment upgrades include fuel economy improvements, safety standards requiring compliance between 2020 and 2025, and improvements in durability, performance, horsepower, comfort, and convenience. 
  • Trimflation: $5,863.32, or 25.1 percent. Trimflation is the sale of more profitable, high-quality models. 
  • Vehicle mix: $3,998.54, or 17.1 percent, of the increase. Vehicle mix is the sale of more profitable light trucks than cars. 
  • Dealer markups and margins: $1,810.78, or 7.8 percent. 
  • Automaker margins and production costs: $8,008.03, or 34.3 percent.  

Vehicle affordability has stayed strong over time. Adjusting for inflation, the average price of new cars has actually fallen since 2002, while the real price of light trucks has risen modestly. Household spending on new and used vehicles has grown more slowly than on essential household costs such as housing, healthcare, education, and groceries, easing pressure on budgets.  

 “The relatively modest rise in household spending on new and used vehicles is actually easing household budgetary pressures, which are mounting due to skyrocketing healthcare, education, housing, and grocery costs,” Greene said. “Weakening safety and fuel economy standards would actually exacerbate the affordability crisis, leading to more unnecessary deaths, injuries, illnesses, property damage, and gasoline consumption. Families can ill afford the associated loss of wages and increase in healthcare, repair, and fuel costs.”  

Today’s vehicles are safer and more fuel-efficient than ever. The real–world fuel economy has risen by more than 60% for cars and nearly 50% for light trucks since 2002, saving owners of 2024 vehicles roughly $9,000–$10,000 in fuel costs over their lifetimes. Federal safety standards from 1968 to 2019 have generated an estimated $12.8 trillion in benefits, including $5,164.51 per household in 2025 alone.  

 The full report is available here.  

###

About the National Consumers League (NCL)      

The National Consumers League, founded in 1899, is America’s pioneer consumer organization. Our mission is to protect and promote social and economic justice for consumers and workers in the United States and abroad. For more information, visit www.nclnet.org.   

Senate Hearing on Ticketing Should Push TICKET Act Forward 

/in Featured Home - Consumer Protection/by

Media Contact: Lisa McDonald, Vice President of Communications, 202-207-2829 

Washington, DC — In advance of a Senate Commerce subcommittee hearing on reform in the live event industry, the National Consumers League urged leaders in the U.S. Senate to prioritize passing the bipartisan TICKET Act (S. 281/H.R. 1402), which has already overwhelmingly passed the U.S. House of Representatives and the Senate Commerce Committee.  

“Consumers do not need another round of blame-shifting. They need Congress to act and to finally fix a live event ticketing system that has been broken by design, not by accident,” said NCL Vice President of Public Policy, Telecommunications, and Fraud John Breyault in a letter to Consumer Protection, Technology, and Data Privacy Subcommittee chairman Senator Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) and ranking member Senator John Hickenlooper (D-CO). “Passing the TICKET Act and strengthening it through legislation like the MAIN EVENT Act would finally begin to rebalance a marketplace that has been tilted against fans for far too long.” 

NCL continues to advocate for passage of the TICKET Act, which would ban hidden fees, prohibit speculative tickets, crack down on deceptive resale tactics, and guarantee refunds for event cancellations and postponements. NCL also supports the MAIN EVENT Act, which would implement much-needed improvements to the decade-old BOTS Act—an underused law that allows federal regulators to go after predatory scalpers.  

NCL’s full letter can be found here. 

Additional reading: 

### 

About the National Consumers League (NCL)      

The National Consumers League, founded in 1899, is America’s pioneer consumer organization. Our mission is to protect and promote social and economic justice for consumers and workers in the United States and abroad. For more information, visit www.nclnet.org.   

Statement from the National Consumers League on the Proposed Netflix–Warner Brothers Merger

/in Featured Home - Consumer Protection/by

Media Contact: Lisa McDonald, Vice President of Communications, 202-207-2829 

Washington, DC – The National Consumers League is deeply concerned about the proposed merger between Netflix and Warner Bros. Discovery, and its potential impacts on competition, consumer choice, and subscription prices. 

By combining the nation’s largest streaming service with one of its most significant competitors — including HBO Max — this transaction would substantially reduce competition in the digital entertainment marketplace. The long history of consolidation in the media industry shows that mergers of this scale tend to diminish competitive pressure and give dominant firms greater leverage to raise prices rather than pass savings on to consumers. A Netflix-Warner combination, or an alternative merger between Paramount and Warner, could mean that consumers’ monthly subscription bills — already on the rise — are likely to increase again without meaningful improvements in choice or content quality. 

The following statement is attributable to Sally Greenberg, CEO of the National Consumers League: 

“Today’s streaming environment benefits from significant competition among multiple platforms. Losing HBO Max as a standalone competitor risks narrowing consumer options and weakening incentives for innovation in programming and pricing. Rather than delivering better value to households, this merger could lead to higher costs for viewers who already pay multiple streaming subscriptions. We urge antitrust enforcers and lawmakers to carefully scrutinize this deal to protect consumers, preserve competitive choice, and prevent undue price increases in the streaming market.” 

### 

About the National Consumers League (NCL) 

The National Consumers League, founded in 1899, is America’s pioneer consumer organization. Our mission is to protect and promote social and economic justice for consumers and workers in the United States and abroad. For more information, visit www.nclnet.org. 

Putting Consumers First in New York City

/in Featured Home - Consumer Protection/by

Media Contact: Lisa McDonald, Vice President of Communications, 202-207-2829 

Washington, DC – The National Consumers League applauds Mayor Mamdani and the New York City Department of Consumer and Worker Protection for taking bold executive action to combat hidden junk fees, subscription tricks, and traps. 

“As families face rising costs and increasingly opaque pricing practices, these orders represent a critical step toward transparency and fairness in the marketplace,” said NCL VP of Public Policy, John Breyault. “NCL has long supported stronger consumer protections that ensure companies cannot hide fees and pad prices with unnecessary charges.”

“We also commend the City’s commitment to eliminating subscription traps that make it harder for consumers to cancel services than to sign up for them. NCL has championed ‘click-to-cancel’ protections at the federal and state levels, arguing that the right to cancel should be as simple as the right to enroll and that consumers deserve clear consent and easy exits from automatic renewals,” Breyault continued. “By targeting junk fees and unfair auto-renewal practices, New York City is leading the way in protecting everyday New Yorkers from deceptive practices that drain household budgets and undermine trust in our economy,” Breyault concluded.

### 

About the National Consumers League (NCL)      

The National Consumers League, founded in 1899, is America’s pioneer consumer organization. Our mission is to protect and promote social and economic justice for consumers and workers in the United States and abroad. For more information, visit www.nclnet.org.   

Broad Coalition Opposes Politicization of DC Attorney General 

/in Featured Home - Consumer Protection/by

Legislation Would Endanger Consumers, Nonprofits, and Civil Society Nationwide 

Media Contact: Lisa McDonald, Vice President of Communications, 202-207-2829 

Washington, DC – The National Consumers League (NCL), joined by 29 nonprofit, consumer, civil rights, faith-based, and civic organizations, urged congressional leaders to reject H.R. 5179, the District of Columbia Attorney General Appointment Reform Act, today. The organizations warn that the bill would dangerously undermine the independence of the District’s chief law enforcement office and expose nonprofits and consumers to politicized enforcement. 

In a letter sent to Congressional leaders, the coalition stressed that replacing DC’s independently elected Attorney General with a presidential appointee would concentrate sweeping legal and regulatory power in the Executive Branch. 

“The DC Attorney General plays a critical role in protecting consumers, overseeing nonprofits, and enforcing civil and charitable laws,” said NCL CEO Sally Greenberg. “Stripping that office of its independence would create a clear pathway for political retaliation and selective enforcement—regardless of which party controls the White House.” 

The DC Office of the Attorney General (DCOAG) has broad authority over consumer protection, civil enforcement, and the oversight of nonprofits and charitable assets. Because many national 501(c)(3) and 501(c)(4) organizations are headquartered in the District, the impact of H.R. 5179 would be felt far beyond Washington, DC. 

The coalition warned that a President-appointed Attorney General could be used to launch ideologically motivated investigations, retaliatory audits, or harassing enforcement actions against organizations whose views diverge from an administration’s agenda. Such powers could chill free speech, suppress lawful advocacy, and deter donors—weakening civil society as a whole. 

“These are not abstract or hypothetical risks,” the organizations wrote. “They are the predictable consequences of placing an unaccountable enforcement authority under direct political control.” 

NCL and its partners also cautioned that politicizing the DCOAG could undermine consumer protection by shielding political allies from scrutiny while targeting perceived opponents. 

“The current system ensures accountability to DC residents, not loyalty to a single national political figure,” said Greenberg. “Congress should reject H.R. 5179 and preserve the independence that allows the DC Attorney General to protect consumers, nonprofits, and fundamental democratic freedoms.”  

To read the full letter, click here. 

### 

About the National Consumers League (NCL)      

The National Consumers League, founded in 1899, is America’s pioneer consumer organization. Our mission is to protect and promote social and economic justice for consumers and workers in the United States and abroad. For more information, visit www.nclnet.org.   

The Biloxi Lawsuit Isn’t Just Another “Hotels vs. Short-Term Rentals” Fight

/in Featured Home - Consumer Protection, Thought Leadership/by

By John Breyault, NCL Vice President, Public Policy, Telecom & Fraud

When cities crack down on short-term rentals, the headlines often scream “Airbnb vs. Hotels!” — but the story is bigger than a platform feud. Behind the zoning rules and permit limits lies a high-stakes battle over who gets to control the lodging market, and whether “consumer protection” is just a cover for keeping competition out. A recent lawsuit in the Deep South may seem local, but it highlights a national trend with real consequences for travelers, homeowners, and communities alike.

At first glance, Airbnb’s recent lawsuit against the city of Biloxi, Mississippi, looks like the latest episode in the long-running hotels vs. short-term rentals war. Cities pass restrictive ordinances. Platforms sue. Hotels cheer from the sidelines. Rinse, repeat.

But this case is bigger than a zoning dispute. It raises a fundamental question about the future of competition in the travel lodging market — and whether “consumer protection” is being used as a shield for market protectionism.

Airbnb and a Biloxi property owner allege that the city, heavily influenced by the local hotel-industry trade association, implemented restrictions designed not to protect neighborhoods but to kneecap competitors. Biloxi banned short-term rentals in many residential areas and later capped permits citywide at just 75 properties — a ceiling so low that it effectively freezes out meaningful competition.

Biloxi isn’t an anomaly. In recent years, hotels have deployed lobbyists in cities like New York and Chicago to limit short-term rental competition, often under the guise of protecting housing stock or neighborhoods.

Other short-term rental platforms, such as Vrbo (formerly HomeAway), Booking.com’s home-rental business, and regional home-sharing services are also part of this broader lodging-market dynamic. These platforms have introduced competition into a hotel industry that, over the past 10–15 years, has undergone deep consolidation. Today, just a handful of mega-brands dominate global hotel markets through ownership, franchising, or branding deals. When so few companies hold so much power, local regulations can become levers to shut out newcomers.

Short-Term Rentals Serve Consumers — and Communities

Short-term rentals (STRs) are more than an “Airbnb vs. hotels” story. For many travelers — families on a budget, groups of friends, or extended-stay guests — STRs offer flexibility, affordability, and value that hotels often struggle to match. They help keep lodging markets competitive, preventing hotels from hiking prices unchecked.

STRs also benefit local homeowners seeking extra income — especially in popular vacation spots or near college campuses when demand surges. In small towns around major sporting events or seasonal tourism, STRs can provide lodging when hotel rooms are booked out or priced through the roof.

Communities also deserve a voice. Some neighborhoods worry about noise, safety, or over-tourism; others worry about long-term housing loss. Smart regulations can balance these concerns without eliminating STRs entirely or favoring incumbents.

Short-Term Rentals Are Not a Panacea

STRs need thoughtful regulations. Anyone who has lived next to an unregulated party house — with rolling suitcases at 2 a.m., overflowing trash, or revolving-door renters — knows the concerns are real. STRs have caused nuisances, safety issues, and reduced long-term housing in some cities.

There are also consumer-facing horror stories: misleading listings, last-minute cancellations, “bait-and-switch” properties, and amateur hosts who fail to maintain basic safety standards. Platforms like Airbnb and Vrbo have economies of scale, but enforcement remains uneven, and small hosts often lack resources to follow best practices. STRs are far from perfect.

Transparent Pricing and Real Competition

Hotel pricing has long been opaque. Hidden costs — resort fees, amenity charges, “service” or “destination” fees — often don’t appear until checkout, making it hard for consumers to compare options. That kind of “drip pricing” distorts markets and misleads travelers.

The Federal Trade Commission’s Junk Fees Rule addresses this. As of May 2025, all lodging providers — hotels and short-term rental platforms alike — must disclose total prices up front. Transparency allows travelers to compare real costs and enables STRs to compete fairly rather than letting hotels exploit confusion.

This aligns with broader consumer-protection efforts, including state-level actions and advocacy by organizations such as the National Consumers League, which have challenged opaque hotel fee practices.

Toward Smart Regulations That Encourage Competition

We need regulations — but the right kind. The Biloxi lawsuit, along with the broader pattern in New York and Chicago, shows the risk of blanket bans or restrictive caps that eliminate lodging options in favor of legacy operators. Local governments should pursue rules that:

  • Ensure STRs meet safety, health, and nuisance standards;
  • Provide transparent permitting and accountability;
  • Maintain a sustainable number of rentals so STRs remain viable;
  • Incorporate community input — without letting incumbents rig the system.

Federal rules, such as the Junk Fees Rule, are also critical. By standardizing pricing disclosure, they help travelers compare hotels and STRs on a level playing field and discourage deceptive resort fees.

We should welcome — not fear — competition. Multiple lodging options — hotels, inns, and STRs — keep prices down, service quality up, and innovation alive. Overly restrictive regulations, especially those influenced by hotel-industry lobbyists, undermine this dynamic.

If we care about affordability, fairness, and consumer choice, lodging policy must focus on transparency, sensible safety rules, and real community input — not protectionism dressed up as “consumer protection.”