The Anaheim Transient Occupancy Tax ordinance has been in existence since 1992 and became 15% starting in 1995, so no, there is really not any "grandfather " in for VGC, which did not go on sale until 2008. The real difference between VGH and VGC has to do with the different agreements each has with Anaheim. The applicable city ordnance generally makes the 15% tax applicable to those staying at hotels and similar entities, including timeshares, and it is 15% of the rental price and applies to any stays of less than 30 days.
Since timeshares usually do not have rental rates, there is a special provision in the applicable ordinance under which Anaheim can enter into agreements with a timeshare proprietor which can ignore the 15% tax rate to the occupant provision and set up its own tax system based on amounts and factors agreed to, usually related to values and dues. VGC has had such an agreement since its beginning, which I understand has been modified somewhat at times. Rather than basing the applicable tax on reserved rooms and applied to the person reserving the room. the VGC agreement applies a tax as part of dues for all owners, even if they do not stay at the resort during a year. I do not know the actual terms but the amount of the tax is an annual budget item, currently in the 51 cent per point range -- the tax has steadily risen over the years.
It appears, based on the reports I have seen, that the agreement applicable to VGH has an agreed-to per point charge of $2.73 per point (that amount can also rise as time passes), but unlike VGC, the agreement does not adopt it as an item of dues chargeable to all owners. Instead, it will be payable per actual reservation and the tax is per point used for the reservation, which means that even owners of other
DVC resorts, who use their points to reserve VGH, will have to pay the tax. The existence of the VGH agreement does not change the VGC agreement.
What I cannot tell from the VGH reports I have seen is exactly who has to pay the tax if someone other than the member is the occupant for the reservation made by the member. What actually applies to that situation will be important to member rentals. If, like the general 15% clause, it is a tax per point used for the reservation which is payable by the occupant, then there will be difficulties for renting, e.g., fewer may want to rent from a member if they have to pay extra in fairly high taxes for the stay. If, instead, the tax is imposed on the member who makes the reservation, the members will likely set rental rates that include at least a share of the taxes. I also wonder what potential purchasers will do when they are told dues are, for example, $9 or $10 a point per year, but if they really want to stay at the resort they have come up with another $2.73 a point every time they make a reservation. One benefit Anaheim gets from a VGC-like agreement is certainty in amounts per year, e.g., even if there is a pandemic closing the rooms for a substantial period of time, Anaheim still gets it taxes paid by dues.
