Airbnb fined €8.6M over tourist tax failures — and a constitutional challenge that could change everything
The community of communes of Île d'Oléron has successfully obtained a judgment against Airbnb for €8.6 million in fines for failing to collect tourist tax. But Airbnb has managed to bring the matter before France's Constitutional Council: the QPC (priority constitutionality ruling — a mechanism allowing any party to challenge a law on constitutional grounds) on the proportionality of the fines will soon be examined by the "Sages". As a result, the entire penalty framework that applies to all platforms — and indirectly to every player in the short-term rental market — is now under serious scrutiny. Here is what this concretely means for your business as a host or property management company.
1. The case in 60 seconds: what happened at Oléron
Since 2020, platforms such as Airbnb, Abritel and Leboncoin have been legally required to collect the tourist tax from guests and remit it to local authorities. Île d'Oléron decided to enforce this rule. After formally requesting that Airbnb hand over its booking records, the community of communes took the matter to court. The result: two successive judgments — first €30,000 in 2023, then €1.385 million in 2024 for breaches covering 2021 and 2022.
Airbnb appealed. It proved a costly miscalculation: in April 2025, the Poitiers Court of Appeal increased the penalty to €8.6 million, applying a fine of between €1,000 and €1,500 per undeclared overnight stay, multiplied across the 7,410 nights in question. The legal mechanism is uncompromising and carries no overall cap. It is precisely this point that Airbnb is now challenging before France's Constitutional Council.
2. The QPC: what it is, and why it matters
A QPC (question prioritaire de constitutionnalité — priority constitutionality ruling) is a legal mechanism that allows any party to a case to challenge a law they believe infringes rights guaranteed by the French Constitution. In practical terms: if the Constitutional Council finds a law unconstitutional, it can be struck down or amended, with immediate effect for everyone. Airbnb attempted on three separate occasions to have this question examined. On the first two occasions, the courts declined, finding no "serious" constitutional question to answer. On the third attempt, the Court of Cassation (France's highest civil court) ruled that the question "raises a serious issue in light of the principle of proportionality of penalties".
Airbnb's argument rests on Article 8 of the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen: the law may only establish penalties that are "strictly and evidently necessary". The complete absence of any cap on cumulative fines for failure to collect the tourist tax creates, according to the platform, a risk of sanctions entirely disproportionate to the offence committed. The Constitutional Council must now rule: is this absence of a cap consistent with the French Constitution? The answer will have consequences far beyond the Oléron-Airbnb case alone.
"Airbnb does not contest the existence of its obligation to collect the tourist tax. It contests solely the unlimited amount of the fines incurred for failing to do so. These are two very different things."
Editorial summary of the constitutional issue at stake
3. Don't draw the wrong conclusion
It is tempting to read this constitutional challenge as a signal: "if even Airbnb is contesting the fines, perhaps the regime is too harsh, and I can relax." That is precisely the wrong message to take away. The lawyer representing the Île d'Oléron community of communes has been unequivocal: Airbnb is not contesting the obligation to collect, only the level of the penalties incurred. Whatever the Constitutional Council decides, your obligation to collect the tourist tax remains fully in force and will not be called into question.
Furthermore, in this case it is the platforms that have legally borne the collection obligation since 2020: Airbnb, Booking and Leboncoin collect on your behalf. But as a property owner or management company handling direct bookings (outside of any platform), you remain personally responsible for collecting and remitting the tourist tax. Article L2333-34-1 of the General Code of Local Authorities explicitly covers "landlords, hoteliers, property owners, intermediaries and professionals". There is no way around this.
What this means for property management companies
Review the scope of your obligations. If you manage bookings through Airbnb or Booking, the platforms collect on your behalf. But if you handle direct bookings — by phone or through your own website — you are responsible for collecting the tourist tax and remitting it to the relevant local authority. This flow must be tracked, documented and paid over within the required timeframes.
Prepare for a possible reform of the penalty scale. If the Constitutional Council strikes down the absence of a cap, the legislature will need to redraft Article L2333-34-1 to introduce an overall ceiling. This could result in more predictable thresholds, but also in updated enforcement procedures. Stay alert to any legislative developments following the ruling.
Use your compliance record as a selling point with your property owner clients. This case demonstrates that local authorities are no longer hesitating to take legal action — even against global technology giants. Your role as a professional management company, centralising and securing fiscal obligations, carries even greater value in this context.
Automate your collection and audit trail. Anywhere's Online Check-in is designed with exactly this in mind — automating guest registration and the collection of mandatory information for every stay, thereby reducing the risk of declarative omissions that courts are penalising with increasing severity.
What this means for property owners
If you let exclusively through platforms that collect the tourist tax on your behalf (Airbnb, Booking, etc.), you have nothing to do on this specific point: the platform is responsible for collection and remittance. But if you also offer direct bookings — via your own website, by email or by phone — you must collect the tourist tax yourself, declare it, and pay it to your local authority within the applicable deadlines. Even a handful of overlooked nights can quickly become costly.
In practical terms, check two things: does your commune or inter-municipal authority apply an "actual rate" tourist tax (taxe de séjour au réel — calculated on the actual nightly rate rather than a flat amount per person)? And have you registered your property as a furnished tourist accommodation (meublé de tourisme) with your local town hall? Both prerequisites underpin the entire mechanism. The Oléron case shows that even small local authorities now have the legal tools to monitor rental activity on their territory — and they are increasingly willing to use them.
What the Constitutional Council could decide: the scenarios
Scenario 1: the Council upholds the law as it stands. The absence of a cap is found to be consistent with the Constitution. The current mechanism (between €750 and €2,500 per night, with no cumulative ceiling) remains in force. Nothing changes for Airbnb, nothing changes for you. Local authorities retain a powerful enforcement tool.
Scenario 2: the Council strikes down the absence of a cap. The legislature must redraft Article L2333-34-1 of the General Code of Local Authorities to introduce an overall ceiling. During that period, the law remains applicable but the penalty scale for future infringements could change. Note carefully: even in this scenario, the obligation to collect is not called into question. Only the quantum (the amount) of sanctions could be revised. This scenario does not exempt you from anything.
This article is an informational summary and does not constitute legal advice. If you have any doubts about your own situation, please consult a specialist lawyer.