What a “low-amenity association” is

The lower ceiling turns on a definition the bill added at § 57-1-46(1)(i):

“‘Low-amenity association’ means a common interest association that: (i) is comprised of only detached single-family homes; and (ii) does not provide capital intensive infrastructure maintenance services to the members of the association.”

Both limbs have to be satisfied. A subdivision of detached homes that maintains a private road system or a shared water line is not low-amenity; a subdivision of detached homes whose association mows a common strip and replaces signage is. The bill narrowed “capital intensive infrastructure maintenance” to exclude routine maintenance, landscaping, signage and perimeter fencing, which is what pushes ordinary single-family HOAs into the 0.25% tier.

The reserve requirement, and the vote behind it

Section 57-1-46(10) attaches three conditions to imposing the fee at all:

“On or after May 6, 2026, an association may not impose a reinvestment fee unless: (a) imposing the reinvestment fee is authorized in the declaration or a reinvestment fee covenant; (b) a majority of voting interests in the association, or a higher percentage if required in the organizational documents, approves the reinvestment fee; and (c) if the association is not a large master planned development, the association deposits at least 50% of the reinvestment fee into reserve funds.”

Unlike the cap in subsection (5), this subsection is written against the act of imposing — not against the recording date of the covenant. An association collecting under an older covenant is still imposing a fee on or after May 6, 2026 every time a home sells.

The 50% deposit changes what the money can do. Reinvestment fee revenue that previously flowed into operations now half-flows into a fund that § 57-8a-211(9)(a) protects: “A board may not use money in a reserve fund for any purpose other than the purpose for which the reserve fund was established, unless a majority of association members vote to approve…” and § 57-8a-211(9)(c) requires the fund be kept separate from other association funds. Our Utah reserve studies page covers the six-year analysis cycle and three-year update the same section requires.

The neighbouring fee, which is a different animal

Utah renamed the “association transfer fee” to “administrative setup fee,” and that charge sits under its own rules in the same section. Subsection (9), in force since May 7, 2025, is narrow and unforgiving:

“(a) An administrative setup fee imposed on or after May 7, 2025, is void and unenforceable unless the association uses the fee only to pay expenses related to the transfer of real property. (b) No later than December 31 each year, if a manager collects an administrative setup fee, the manager shall provide to the association an annual accounting of each administrative setup fee the manager collects in a calendar year.”

The definition at § 57-1-46(1)(a) catches the fee whether the association or “a person acting on behalf of the common interest association” imposes it — which is to say, a management company's own charge is not outside the section. Our Utah estoppel and resale page sets out the disclosure documents that travel with a Utah closing and which party is responsible for each.

Registration now discloses the fee

H.B. 306 also amended § 57-8a-105 and § 57-8-13.1, the registration provisions, so that an association's filing with the Department of Commerce states whether it imposes a reinvestment fee or a transfer fee. That puts the answer in a public record a buyer's agent can check before an offer rather than in a closing statement after one.

What to watch next

The interaction between the cap and the recording date leaves a two-tier market: pre-May-2026 covenants at whatever rate they set, post-May-2026 covenants at 0.5% or 0.25%. S.B. 196 of the same session, separately, made a stale or improperly recorded transfer-fee-covenant notice actionable as a wrongful lien — which is the mechanism by which an older covenant can be cleared rather than capped.³