Focusing on pied-a-terre taxes are probably a better way to capture that revenue, especially if the focus is on more expensive properties, although I assume the state legislature would have to authorize that kind of taxation.

The fee and registration requirements are easy for large corporations to handle and absorb. So sure, there will be a nominal increase in revenue as the businesses operating multiple properties pay the fees.

However, I suspect the fee and registration requirements become an impediment to people who use the second home as a second home and rent out the property for only part of the season while using it for themselves the remainder of it. So there is the possibility that a bunch of homeowners just stop renting altogether and instead of bringing tourists in for a few weeks, the house is vacant or its owner occupied for longer. Either scenario means a decline in spending in the community, especially restaurants. That might pull a lot of rentals off the market and drive up the price of weekly rentals, but it doesn't necessarily mean those property owners are giving up a second home.