DSCR Loan Short-Term Rental Restricted Cities: What Investors Need to Know in 2026

Short-term rental regulations have reshaped how DSCR lenders underwrite investment properties in a growing number of US cities. The mechanics are straightforward: if the rental income projected at origination later becomes illegal, the DSCR collapses — and so does the lender’s collateral assumption. Lenders know this, and they’ve adjusted. Some have stopped writing STR DSCR loans in the most restricted markets entirely. Others underwrite at lower LTVs and apply rate premiums that reflect the regulatory risk.

If you’re acquiring or refinancing an STR property in a regulated market, understanding the lender posture for that specific city — not DSCR lending generally — is the work that determines whether your deal gets done and at what cost. This guide covers what DSCR loan underwriting looks like in each of the seven most significant restricted markets, and what alternatives exist when standard STR programs won’t work.

Why STR Regulations Matter to DSCR Underwriting

DSCR lenders underwrite investment properties based on their expected income. For STR properties, that income comes from platforms like Airbnb and Vrbo — and lenders typically use AirDNA projections, historical platform statements, or some blend of the two to estimate the gross annual income from which the DSCR ratio is derived.

The underwriting problem with restricted markets: If city regulations ban or materially restrict whole-unit STR, the income assumption behind the DSCR calculation may not be achievable — or may not be legal to achieve. Lenders don’t want to originate a loan based on $48,000/year in projected STR income if the city ordinance caps occupancy, requires owner presence, or requires a permit that’s unavailable to non-owner-occupants.

This creates two distinct risks that lenders price or exclude:

1. Income risk: If the regulation reduces actual STR income below the level required to service the debt, the DSCR drops post-closing, and the borrower may face repayment stress. Our DSCR drops after closing guide covers what happens when the ratio deteriorates.

2. Valuation risk: In markets where whole-unit STR is banned, appraisers are required to value properties on their legal use — which is long-term rental. A property that would command $650,000 on STR income projections may appraise at $520,000 on long-term rent. That gap affects LTV calculations and loan amounts.

The STR DSCR analyzer lets you model both risks before engaging lenders in regulated markets.

New York City — Local Law 18

New York City’s Local Law 18 was signed January 9, 2022, and began enforcement on September 5, 2023. It requires all short-term rental hosts to register with the city, and registration requires that the host be present during the guest stay and limits bookings to two guests at a time.

The practical effect was immediate and severe. Active whole-unit STR listings in New York City fell from approximately 40,000 before enforcement to under 10,000 registered listings — and the registered listings are largely room-by-room within owner-occupied units, not the whole-unit investor rentals that most DSCR investors had been underwriting.

DSCR lender stance in NYC: No mainstream DSCR lender currently underwrites NYC residential investment properties using whole-unit STR income projections. The income model simply isn’t legal for non-owner-occupied whole units under Local Law 18. Lenders fall into two groups:

• Long-term rent only: The majority. They will close the loan if long-term market rent (as determined by the appraisal) produces a qualifying DSCR — typically 1.0 or higher. If long-term rent doesn’t pencil, they decline.
• No-ratio programs: A subset of lenders will close without an income test at 70%–75% LTV, 720+ FICO, and 12 months of reserves. This is a legitimate path for investors who want NYC exposure and are comfortable with the reserve and equity requirements.

Rate overlay in NYC (where STR was the thesis): No formal rate premium for the city itself, but the effective rate may be higher because borrowers are pushed toward no-ratio programs, which carry an inherent rate premium of roughly 0.35%–0.50% versus standard DSCR.

Boston — Short-Term Rental Ordinance and Owner-Occupancy Requirement

Boston’s STR ordinance limits short-term rental licenses to owner-occupied units. An investor who does not reside in the property cannot obtain a valid STR license, which means whole-unit STR is not a legal income strategy for non-owner-occupied investment properties in Boston.

The city maintains an active enforcement posture. Unlicensed STR listings have been removed from platforms following city complaints, and fines for non-compliant hosts are substantial.

DSCR lender stance in Boston: Similar to NYC — lenders do not credit STR income for investment properties. Boston DSCR deals are underwritten on long-term market rent. For a two-family or three-family in a strong Boston neighborhood (South End, Back Bay, South Boston), long-term rents are robust enough that DSCR frequently qualifies without any STR premium. The regulation issue is less acute than in markets where property prices were significantly inflated by the STR income expectation.

What does work in Boston: Investors targeting 2–4 unit properties where one unit is owner-occupied have access to legitimate STR income from the owner-occupied unit under the city’s license structure. Those deals are sometimes structured as DSCR on the investment portion, though the owner-occupancy element adds complexity to the underwriting.

Seattle — STR Licensing Requirements

Seattle operates a two-tier licensing system for short-term rentals. Operators must obtain an operator license and a platform-specific license for each property. Seattle does not impose an owner-occupancy requirement for STR licensing, which means non-owner-occupied investment properties can legally operate as STRs with the appropriate license.

Seattle’s regulatory environment is materially less restrictive than NYC’s or Boston’s. The licensing requirement adds an administrative step, but it doesn’t eliminate whole-unit STR as a legal income strategy.

DSCR lender stance in Seattle: Lenders willing to write STR DSCR in Seattle generally require that the license be in-hand at origination — not pending approval. Proof of the current license is part of the STR underwriting file. Lenders that accept AirDNA projections for STR income will apply their standard methodology in Seattle; those that require 12+ months of actual platform history will apply that standard as well.

The caveat: Seattle’s housing market has been politically active on rental regulation. Lenders with active STR programs in Seattle sometimes apply an overlay for properties in neighborhoods with high STR concentration, or limit maximum LTV on STR deals to 70% (versus 75% on standard programs) to buffer against potential future restriction.

New Orleans — French Quarter Ban and City-Wide Reform

New Orleans has maintained an evolving STR regulatory framework since 2019, with the most significant restriction being a ban on new non-hosted STR licenses in the French Quarter and residential neighborhoods. The city distinguishes between hosted (owner-present) and non-hosted (owner-absent) STR, and the non-hosted category — which is the income model most investment DSCR deals depend on — faces the most significant restrictions.

Commercial STR zoning exists in New Orleans, but properties that qualify for commercial STR licensing are typically in specific zones that command commercial rather than residential pricing and are underwritten by commercial programs rather than DSCR.

DSCR lender stance in New Orleans: For properties in restricted residential zones, lenders treat the income as long-term rental only. For properties with an active non-hosted license in a commercial zone, some DSCR lenders will credit STR income — but the program selection is narrower and the verification requirement (active license, not just projections) is consistent. Rate overlays of 0.25%–0.50% above standard STR programs apply at lenders who still write these deals.

Honolulu — Bill 41 and the 90-Day Minimum

Honolulu’s Bill 41, signed into law and implemented across Oahu’s residential zones, established a 90-day minimum stay requirement for short-term rentals in most residential areas. The effect was a near-total elimination of legal nightly and weekly STR outside of designated resort zones (primarily Waikiki and Ko Olina).

That decision sits inside our DSCR Loan Types hub, where DSCR Authority maps program fit and what investors usually prep before booking a strategy call.

That decision sits inside our DSCR Loan Types hub, where DSCR Authority maps program fit and what investors usually prep before booking a strategy call.

That decision sits inside our DSCR Loan Types hub, where DSCR Authority maps program fit and what investors usually prep before booking a strategy call.

The practical implication for investors: a whole-unit STR property in Oahu’s residential neighborhoods (Kailua, Manoa, Diamond Head) can no longer legally rent for fewer than 90 consecutive days. That is no longer short-term rental — it is medium-term rental.

DSCR lender stance in Honolulu: Most DSCR lenders will not use Airbnb/Vrbo projected income for Oahu residential properties in non-resort zones. The legal use constraint is too clear. Properties are underwritten on long-term or medium-term rental rates. For the resort zones where STR remains legal, some lenders still write STR DSCR, but the loan amounts relative to market values require scrutiny — Hawaii property prices reflect prior STR income assumptions that are no longer supportable.

The medium-term path: Properties near hospitals, universities, or major employers can often achieve competitive rental rates at 30–90 day lease terms. Some lenders will credit medium-term rental income using a signed lease or platform history at 30+ day rates. This is a legitimate exit from the STR income constraint, and it connects to the mid-term rental DSCR strategies that work in other regulated markets.

Nashville — Non-Owner-Occupied STR Permit Cap

Nashville implemented restrictions on non-owner-occupied (NOO) short-term rental permits, capping the number available in residential zones and imposing a prohibition on new NOO STR permits in certain residential zones within the Urban Services District.

The NOO permit cap has created a secondary market dynamic: existing NOO STR permits in Nashville have significant value, and properties that carry an active permit trade at a premium. Investors acquiring properties without existing NOO permits in restricted zones cannot legally operate a whole-unit STR.

DSCR lender stance in Nashville: Lenders treat Nashville STR deals in two ways. For properties with an active, transferable NOO STR permit, most lenders will credit STR income — the permit is transferable with the property in most cases, and the legal basis for the income is clear. For properties without a NOO permit in restricted zones, lenders underwrite on long-term rent.

The permit-attached approach creates an underwriting challenge: lenders must verify permit transferability, which requires title company review and sometimes a city confirmation letter. Plan for additional underwriting time on Nashville STR deals involving permit transfers.

Rate impact: Nashville with a transferable NOO permit is underwritten similarly to standard STR markets by lenders active there — no specific rate premium for the city. The rate differential comes from the standard STR program adjustments (higher FICO, potential LTV cap at 70%) rather than Nashville-specific risk.

Portland, Oregon — Type A vs. Type B and the 270-Day Rule

Portland’s STR ordinance distinguishes between Type A licenses (owner’s primary residence, STR of the whole unit permitted when owner is temporarily absent up to 270 days per year) and Type B licenses (accessory structures, such as a detached ADU, on the owner-occupied primary property).

For investors who don’t occupy the property as a primary residence, neither Type A nor Type B applies. Portland does not issue STR licenses for non-owner-occupied investment properties as a standard matter. This effectively places Portland in the same category as Boston — whole-unit STR income is not a legal model for investment properties.

DSCR lender stance in Portland: Lenders treat Portland investment properties as long-term rental only. Portland has strong long-term rental fundamentals — vacancy is relatively low and rents have remained stable — so the elimination of the STR premium doesn’t necessarily kill the deal math. It does mean that investors who underwrite Portland properties based on STR income projections will find their financing options significantly constrained.

Lender Posture Matrix

The table below summarizes how DSCR lenders currently approach these seven regulated markets. “Active” means the lender type is currently closing deals in that market with STR-eligible income. “LTR only” means the lender will close the deal but underwrites on long-term rent regardless of STR projections. “Avoided” means most mainstream DSCR programs decline to originate in this market for STR purposes.

The rate-add column reflects the delta from a standard long-term-rent DSCR at equivalent LTV and FICO. Markets where lenders simply switch to LTR underwriting don’t carry a city-specific premium — the deal is just underwritten differently. Markets where lenders apply an overlay for regulatory risk (Seattle, Nashville) reflect a modest premium for the permit-dependent income model.

Common Mistakes in Regulated STR Markets

1. Assuming the AirDNA projection is still the income basis. In all seven markets above, either the income model is legally prohibited for non-owner-occupied properties, or it requires a permit that must be in-hand. Running an AirDNA projection for a NYC or Boston property and presenting it to a lender as the DSCR income basis will result in an immediate decline or a program switch to LTR underwriting. Know before you apply.

2. Not checking whether the permit or license is transferable. In Nashville and Seattle, the deal may close based on an existing permit — but only if it transfers. Confirm with the city and with a title attorney before going under contract. A permit that attaches to the seller, not the property, is worthless to you.

3. Ignoring what regulation does to appraised value. If the appraiser determines that the highest and best legal use is long-term rental, the property will be valued on that basis — not on STR income potential. An investor who buys at a price predicated on STR income and later finds that the appraiser values the property on LTR rents may face an appraisal gap at closing. Model both scenarios before going under contract.

4. Shopping lenders without filtering for market expertise. A general DSCR lender with no active deal history in NYC or Honolulu may tell you they can’t do the deal. A lender whose STR program has handled these markets will tell you exactly what they’ll accept and on what terms. The difference isn’t the program minimum — it’s whether the underwriter has a protocol for your specific regulatory environment.

5. Forgetting the mid-term rental exit. Markets where whole-unit STR is banned or limited to 90-day minimums are often strong mid-term rental markets. The same property that doesn’t work as a DSCR STR deal may work cleanly as a DSCR mid-term rental deal if you can document 30+ day lease income. Run both scenarios through the DSCR calculator before concluding the deal doesn’t work.

Investing in a regulated STR market involves lender selection that most generalist brokers haven’t mapped. We have. We know which lenders are actively funding STR deals in Seattle and Nashville, which are writing no-ratio programs as an alternative path in NYC and Honolulu, and which require which documentation at which stage. If you’re working a deal in one of these markets, get matched — we’ll tell you which lenders still finance there and what it takes to qualify.

Frequently asked questions