New Mexico HOA Short-Term Rentals

Quick-Reference Table

Last verified: July 17, 2026

Section 1: Overview — Can an HOA restrict short-term rentals in New Mexico?

Yes. A New Mexico condominium restricts short-term rentals through its recorded declaration and bylaws under the New Mexico Condominium Act, and a planned community does so through its recorded covenants, with the New Mexico Homeowner Association Act supplying recording and disclosure requirements. Two separate statutes govern: condominiums under the New Mexico Condominium Act, NMSA 1978, §§ 47-7A-1 to 47-7D-20,¹ and homeowners associations (planned communities) under the New Mexico Homeowner Association Act, NMSA 1978, §§ 47-16-1 to 47-16-18.²

The Condominium Act is condominium-only and is based on the 1980 Uniform Condominium Act; it is not a full common interest ownership act.¹ The Homeowner Association Act is a disclosure-oriented statute that requires recording of governing documents and provides for record access and resale disclosure; it is not a comprehensive governance code.² Because neither statute regulates the substance of rentals, the authority to restrict short-term rentals is declaration-driven, arising from the recorded governing documents. New Mexico has not adopted the Uniform Common Interest Ownership Act, so the Condominium Act does not contain the 2008-UCIOA rental owner-protection provision.

New Mexico does not appear to preempt local short-term-rental regulation, and short-term-rental rules are set locally, with the City of Santa Fe a notably strict example that caps residential short-term-rental permits at 1,000 citywide.⁵ That local layer governs the owner-to-government relationship and is distinct from association authority. The sections below detail the framework, the amendment and grandfathering mechanics, the tax treatment, and the enforcement path. Trial-level disputes proceed in the New Mexico District Court, with appeal to the New Mexico Court of Appeals and discretionary review by the New Mexico Supreme Court.

Section 2: The legal framework for HOA short-term rental restrictions

2A. The two statutes and the disclosure overlay

New Mexico is not purely CC&R-primary, but its two association statutes occupy different roles. The New Mexico Condominium Act, NMSA 1978, §§ 47-7A-1 to 47-7D-20, was enacted in 1982 and is New Mexico's enactment of the 1980 Uniform Condominium Act.¹ It governs condominiums only. It addresses creation, alteration, and termination (Article 7B); management of the association (Article 7C); and protection of purchasers (Article 7D). It applies to condominiums created after its effective date; condominiums created earlier remain under the older Building Unit Ownership Act (§§ 47-7-1 to 47-7-28) unless the unit owners opt in by a resolution approved by a majority of unit owners and recorded (§ 47-7A-2).¹² It is not a full common interest ownership act, and it does not reach planned communities.

The New Mexico Homeowner Association Act, NMSA 1978, §§ 47-16-1 to 47-16-18, enacted in 2013, governs planned communities but is primarily a recording, disclosure, and transparency statute.² It requires an association to record a notice of homeowner association with the county clerk, and it suspends the association's authority to charge assessments, levy a fine for late payment of an assessment, or enforce a lien for nonpayment if the association fails to record (§ 47-16-4).⁴ It requires record disclosure to members (§ 47-16-5)¹³ and a resale disclosure certificate (§ 47-16-12). It is lighter than the Uniform Common Interest Ownership Act or New Jersey's PREDFDA and does not function as a general governance code. By its own terms it does not apply to a condominium governed by the Condominium Act (§ 47-16-15).⁷

Because the Homeowner Association Act does not govern the substance of use restrictions, the source of rental authority for a planned community is its recorded covenants. Planned communities are also subject to the New Mexico Nonprofit Corporation Act, NMSA 1978, §§ 53-8-1 et seq., for corporate governance, and to New Mexico common law. For both community types, the recorded governing documents, not a statute, supply the rental rule.

2B. Rental authority, amendments, and grandfathering

No New Mexico statute directs whether an association may restrict short-term rentals; that authority is declaration-driven. A condominium adds or strengthens a rental restriction by amending its declaration and bylaws. Under the Condominium Act, amendment of the declaration requires the vote or agreement of unit owners of units to which at least 67% of the votes in the association are allocated, or any larger majority the declaration specifies (§ 47-7B-17).⁶ No action to challenge an amendment's validity may be brought more than one year after it is recorded, and every amendment must be recorded in each county where any portion of the condominium is located to be effective. A planned community amends its covenants according to the amendment clause in its own documents; the Homeowner Association Act imposes no separate vote threshold but does require recording of the association's declaration and notice (§ 47-16-4).⁴

Because the Condominium Act is based on the 1980 Uniform Condominium Act rather than the full 2008 Uniform Common Interest Ownership Act, it does not contain the 2008-UCIOA provision that shields an existing owner from a later-adopted rental restriction. Whether a rental restriction adopted by amendment binds an owner who bought before the amendment therefore turns on the Condominium Act, the governing documents, and New Mexico common law, not on any statutory grandfathering rule. New Mexico does not provide a Florida-style or California-style statutory shield for existing owners. New Mexico courts read restrictive covenants strictly and resolve ambiguity in favor of the free enjoyment of the property, which is a material consideration for any board relying on older, general covenant language rather than an express short-term-rental amendment.¹⁴

That reading principle has produced New Mexico appellate decisions holding that general covenant language did not reach short-term rentals. In Mason Family Trust v. Devaney, the New Mexico Court of Appeals held that an owner's short-term rental of a Ruidoso cabin for dwelling purposes was a permitted use and not a prohibited business or commercial use under the deed restrictions.¹⁴ In Estates at Desert Ridge Trails Homeowners' Ass'n v. Vasquez, the Court of Appeals held that short-term rentals did not, by themselves, constitute an impermissible business or commercial activity under a "single-family residential purposes" covenant, and that an owner's receipt of an economic benefit did not automatically make the use commercial.¹⁵ The lesson for boards is that a specific, expressly adopted rental restriction is more durable than an attempt to read a rental ban into a general residential-use covenant.

2C. State law, tax, and the local layer

New Mexico does not appear to have a statute preempting local short-term-rental regulation, and regulation is primarily local. Santa Fe is the notably strict example: its short-term-rental ordinance caps residential permits at 1,000 citywide, limits permits to one per natural person, imposes a 50-foot proximity rule between rentals, and defines a short-term rental as a dwelling rented for fewer than 30 calendar days.⁵ Santa Fe County, Taos, Taos County, and Albuquerque also regulate, with varying caps and requirements; the Town of Taos, for example, caps permits at 120.¹⁶ These regimes bind owners to local government; they do not enlarge or shrink association authority.

New Mexico does not impose a conventional sales tax. It imposes the gross receipts tax, NMSA 1978, §§ 7-9-1 et seq., at a state rate of 4.875% (effective July 1, 2023) to which local increments are added, and lodging is subject to it.⁸ Municipalities and counties may also impose a lodgers' tax under the Lodgers' Tax Act, NMSA 1978, §§ 3-38-13 to 3-38-25, at a rate not exceeding 5% of gross taxable rent (§ 3-38-15), which applies to lodging furnished for periods of less than 30 consecutive days (§ 3-38-16).³ The state Taxation and Revenue Department administers the gross receipts tax; local governments administer the lodgers' tax.

The critical distinction is that local regulation and tax govern the owner-to-government relationship; they neither grant nor remove association authority. An owner who holds a Santa Fe permit and remits the lodgers' tax may still violate a recorded covenant or condominium declaration that prohibits short-term rentals, and an owner in full compliance with the governing documents may still be operating unlawfully if the owner lacks the required local permit. The two layers operate independently.

Section 3: Operational mechanics and enforcement

A. Adopting a valid restriction (the tools)

The most common and most defensible tool is a minimum-lease-term restriction written into the declaration or covenants, which converts the "short-term rental" question into a measurable lease-duration rule rather than a contest over whether a use is "residential" or "commercial." As Section 2B notes, New Mexico appellate courts have declined to read short-term-rental bans into general residential-use language, so an express minimum-stay or no-transient-rental provision is preferable to reliance on older covenants.

Rental caps by percentage of units are not addressed by either statute, so they must rest on the governing documents. For condominiums, adopting or tightening a cap is a declaration amendment subject to the 67% threshold of § 47-7B-17 (or a larger majority the declaration specifies).⁶ For planned communities, the cap and the amendment mechanism live entirely in the covenants. Registration, owner-information, and lease-filing requirements imposed on owners internally are matters of the governing documents and board rules; they are separate from the Homeowner Association Act's requirement that the association record its own notice and declaration with the county clerk (§ 47-16-4).⁴

B. Enforcement

Both statutes require process before a fine. For condominiums, the association may impose charges for late payment of assessments and, after notice and an opportunity to be heard, levy reasonable fines for violations of the declaration, bylaws, and rules and regulations (§ 47-7C-2(A)(11)).⁹ For planned communities, the association may levy reasonable fines after written notice and an opportunity to dispute the violation, and before imposing a fine or suspension the board must provide an opportunity for a written statement or a hearing, with written notice given 14 days before the hearing; if the board or committee does not approve the proposed fine by majority vote, it may not be imposed (§ 47-16-18).¹⁰ Section 47-16-18 applies unless the community documents provide otherwise.

Available remedies are fines where authorized, injunctive relief, and an assessment lien. A condominium association has a lien on a unit for assessments and for fines imposed against a unit owner, which may be foreclosed like a mortgage on real estate, and fines are enforceable as assessments (§ 47-7C-16).¹¹ A planned-community association has a comparable lien for assessments and fines, enforceable by foreclosure (§ 47-16-4).⁴ Injunctive relief is the usual remedy for an ongoing rental violation, as the Devaney and Vasquez cases illustrate, both of which arose from suits for injunctions.¹⁵

A contested enforcement action proceeds in the New Mexico District Court, which has general jurisdiction. An adverse judgment may be appealed to the New Mexico Court of Appeals, with discretionary further review by the New Mexico Supreme Court. Association enforcement is separate from local-government enforcement: a city such as Santa Fe enforces its permit regime through its own administrative and municipal processes, and a local citation neither substitutes for nor bars an association's separate action under the governing documents.

Section 4: Recent legislative and judicial activity

A. Recent bills

One measure from the past 24 months bears directly on short-term rentals as they touch associations and taxation.

Two other 2025 bills touching associations did not pass. Senate Bill 239, which would have amended § 47-16-18 to allow a lot owner to seek Attorney General enforcement on the owner's behalf, was postponed indefinitely in the Senate Tax, Business and Transportation Committee on February 28, 2025 and did not become law.¹⁸ House Bill 232, which would have prohibited certain homeowner-association fees, died in committee.¹⁹ Neither addressed rental authority directly.

B. Recent rulings

No New Mexico Court of Appeals or New Mexico Supreme Court decision within the past 36 months squarely addresses rental-restriction or covenant enforceability, association amendments, or the Homeowner Association Act in the short-term-rental context. The controlling New Mexico appellate authority predates that window: Mason Family Trust v. Devaney, 2009-NMCA-048, 146 N.M. 199, 207 P.3d 1176,¹⁴ and Estates at Desert Ridge Trails Homeowners' Ass'n v. Vasquez, 300 P.3d 736 (N.M. Ct. App. 2013),¹⁵ both discussed in Section 2B, remain the significant New Mexico decisions on whether general residential-use covenants reach short-term rentals.

C. Active legislative or local debates

State lawmakers are weighing whether to standardize the classification and taxation of short-term rentals following the HM 52 work group's December 2025 report, which found that of nearly 14,000 short-term rentals statewide, roughly 85% are seasonal or partially owner-occupied, and concluded that inconsistent county assessment "is harming homeowners" and should be made uniform.²⁰ Local caps have continued to tighten, with Taos County adopting a 400-permit cap in Ordinance 2024-4 (effective October 2024)¹⁶ and Santa Fe County limiting non-owner-occupied rentals to either 3% or 7% of a community's housing stock across dozens of designated communities.²¹

Section 5: National positioning and related coverage

New Mexico occupies a middle position among the states. It is not purely CC&R-primary: it has a UCA-based condominium statute and, since 2013, a disclosure-oriented Homeowner Association Act. But that HOA statute is lighter than the Uniform Common Interest Ownership Act or New Jersey's PREDFDA, and neither statute limits association rental authority the way Arizona and California constrain associations, nor does New Mexico preempt local short-term-rental bans the way Florida and Arizona restrict local governments. Local regulation, including Santa Fe's permit cap, and the lodgers' tax restrain local governments and owners, not associations. For a multi-state operator entering New Mexico, the practical takeaway is a UCA-based condominium statute, a recording-and-disclosure HOA statute, and rental authority that lives in the recorded governing documents rather than in a state code.

HOA Weekly's New Mexico Short-Term Rentals coverage updates quarterly as the Legislature, the New Mexico Court of Appeals and Supreme Court, and local governments act. Federal frameworks (the FHA, ADA, FDCPA, SCRA, and OTARD) also apply to New Mexico associations regardless of the state framework.

1. New Mexico Condominium Act, NMSA 1978, § 47-7A-1 (short title) and compiler's notes (Laws 1982, ch. 27, enacting New Mexico's version of the Uniform Condominium Act as amended in 1980), §§ 47-7A-1 to 47-7D-20 ↩
2. New Mexico Homeowner Association Act, NMSA 1978, §§ 47-16-1 to 47-16-18 (Chapter 47, Article 16; Laws 2013, ch. 122) ↩
3. Lodgers' Tax Act, NMSA 1978, § 3-38-16 (exemptions; 30-consecutive-day threshold for permanent residence / lease), §§ 3-38-13 to 3-38-25 ↩
4. NMSA 1978, § 47-16-4 (recording of homeowner association notice and declaration; suspension of authority to assess, fine, or enforce a lien for failure to record; association lien for assessments and fines, foreclosable like a mortgage) ↩
5. City of Santa Fe Short-Term Rental Ordinance summary (1,000-permit residential cap; one permit per natural person; 50-foot proximity rule; STR defined as under 30 calendar days), and City of Santa Fe Short-Term Rentals page ↩
6. NMSA 1978, § 47-7B-17 (amendment of declaration; at least 67% of allocated votes or larger majority the declaration specifies; one-year limitation on challenges; recording required) ↩
7. NMSA 1978, § 47-16-15 (applicability; Homeowner Association Act does not apply to a condominium governed by the Condominium Act) ↩
8. NMSA 1978, § 7-9-4 (imposition and rate of gross receipts tax; four and seven-eighths percent beginning July 1, 2023) ↩
9. NMSA 1978, § 47-7C-2(A)(11) (powers of unit owners' association; after notice and an opportunity to be heard, levy reasonable fines for violations of the declaration, bylaws, and rules and regulations) ↩
10. NMSA 1978, § 47-16-18 (enforcement of covenants; dispute resolution; written notice and opportunity to dispute; written statement or hearing on 14 days' notice; majority-vote approval required) ↩
11. NMSA 1978, § 47-7C-16 (lien for assessments; lien for assessments and fines; foreclosable in like manner as a mortgage; fines enforceable as assessments) ↩
12. NMSA 1978, § 47-7A-2 (applicability; Condominium Act applies to condominiums created after its effective date; pre-Act condominiums under the Building Unit Ownership Act may opt in by majority resolution recorded) ↩
13. NMSA 1978, § 47-16-5 (record disclosure to members; access to financial and other records; penalty for willful failure to comply) ↩
14. Mason Family Trust v. Devaney, 2009-NMCA-048, 146 N.M. 199, 207 P.3d 1176 (N.M. Ct. App.) (short-term rental of Ruidoso cabin for dwelling purposes not a business or commercial use; deed restrictions read strictly and ambiguity resolved in favor of free enjoyment of property) ↩
15. Estates at Desert Ridge Trails Homeowners' Ass'n v. Vasquez, 300 P.3d 736 (N.M. Ct. App. 2013) (short-term rentals did not by themselves violate a "single-family residential purposes" covenant; economic benefit did not automatically make the use commercial; HOA denied injunctive relief) ↩
16. Town of Taos Short-Term Rentals page and Ordinance (permit cap of 120; STR prohibited in Historic District, Historic and Hotel Overlay Zones, Central Business District, and in condominiums/apartments) ↩
17. New Mexico HM 52 (2025 Regular Session), Short-Term Rental Work Group, LegiScan (passed the House; "Signed by one or both houses (for legislation not requiring Governor's signature)," March 22, 2025); HM 52 Report, presented to the Economic and Rural Development and Policy Committee, December 8, 2025 ↩
18. New Mexico SB 239 (2025 Regular Session), Fiscal Impact Report (proposed amendment to § 47-16-18 authorizing Attorney General enforcement on behalf of a lot owner); bill postponed indefinitely in committee February 28, 2025 and not enacted ↩
19. New Mexico HB 232 (2025 Regular Session), Prohibit Certain Homeowner Association Fees, LegiScan (introduced January 30, 2025; died in committee) ↩
20. Source New Mexico, "New Mexico legislators debate standard statewide property tax for short-term rentals" (December 9, 2025) (HM 52 study: nearly 14,000 STRs statewide, ~85% seasonal or partially owner-occupied; assessment confusion "is harming homeowners") ↩
21. Santa Fe County Ordinance 2022-07 (Short-Term Rental Regulation, Registration, and Licensing Ordinance), FAQs (non-owner-occupied STR caps set at 3% or 7% of housing stock across designated community districts; STR defined as under 30 consecutive days) ↩