Is the New $10 Tourist Tax on Foreign Visitors Good for the U.S. Travel Industry?

[EnLinea Media]

The new $10 US tax on foreign visitors from countries that participate in the Visa Waiver Program was signed into law on March 4 by President Obama to help fund a Corporation for Travel Promotion. This non-profit organization will use the funds to promote the U.S. as a destination to foreign tourists.

What is your opinion on this tax? Will it help bring more tourists to our shores, or will it further alienate foreign tourists already upset by U.S. entry requirements and procedures?

Here's some good background from CNN.com.

Your thoughts by March 26th are sincerely appreciated!

[Donna M. Airoldi]

People already planning to visit the U.S. won't be deterred by an additional $10 fee (and I agree that the real value of that tax will be minimal, once you take out the costs of administering it, and the money would be better spent on charm school for certain border agents). What I'd rather see is an effort to make travel easier and more affordable overall for individuals around the world with lower incomes/lower travel budgets. I travel internationally regularly and meet plenty of people around the globe who have been to Canada, Mexico, Europe, South America and Southeast Asia, but never to the U.S. When asked why, "It's too expensive and difficult to get around" is the answer I get more often than not. And I agree. It's too expensive even for many Americans to travel around much. Plus, experience leads to understanding. In discussions with travelers and locals around the world, the ones bashing the U.S. and Americans the most were those who had never visited. Others who had been here were able to distinguish between hating government actions yet loving the country and its individuals. Let's lower the costs of transportation for budget travelers, add more affordable hotels and hostels, lure tourist with deals as opposed to fees. If done right, the efforts will be more effective and efficient than managing yet another tax, and the rewards greater.

[Cessy Meacham]

Money to be handled by Homeland Security???? did I hear that right??? P-lease! They should work on perfect the "Security" in our borders and all over the country. We don’t need to create new sources of bureaucracy and corruption, The world WANTS to see America , the world is already SOLD on USA, to visit , to love it, to critic it , but they all want to visit America, the reason the numbers on visitors are down is not because of the lack of Travel Promoting councils, the image of America is being destroy in the last decade, some visitors feel they are treated like criminals, I have many European clients that told me "too sad, too bad, but I am not coming back .In my humbled opinion the great image was destroy for supporting the big mistakes of getting into War. Now is time the SMART people in this Industry, specially all the smart members of Tripatini , step up as work together as the Powerful, Bi- or Trillionaire Industry we are, and help making the right decisions. :)

[James Ruggia]

It's not only a question of stimulating ads & promotions, it's also about researching markets and providing the information needed for stimulating new tourism experiences and products. What strikes me about tourism in America is how poorly, how rotely we present our culture, landscape & heritage. Think of how they have reduced Mark Twain's majestic vision of the Mississippi into a trite Tom & Becky fence painting golly gee experience. When people from diverse cultures explore a country they bring their own travel priorities with them & the well-run tourist offices look for ways to offer the destinations so as to meet the particular longings in their quests. In the process they give the citizens of those destinations new ways to see their own country. A good tourist office does that research on behalf of the broad national interest. If done privately, it will serve narrower interests. Thus it should be done by government; that will cost money & thus a tax. I never mind a tax if it raises money to achieve important goals. I wonder about the principle of taxing people who are not American citizens though. Since we're the beneficiaries I believe we should pick up the tab, but as many have written above, $10 is nothing and I pay similar fees all of the time overseas

[Sandy MacDonald]

It's a done deal, so discussion is moot, but yes, this move is chintzy and ungracious. The most influential country in the world now needs to nickle-and-dime would-be visitors, all in the name of engendering interest? Please.

[Karin Leperi]

The $10 US tax on foreign visitors will only serve to deter visitors even more from visiting the US. Why pay to be subjected to humiliating searches? I am sure that many foreign visitors will simply choose alternate destinations for their vacation time. This "user tax" just doesn't make sense if the purpose is to drum up travel to the US. We could first start by making visitors feel welcome rather than treat them as an intrusion.

[James Martin]

Sure travelers can afford $10 to be advertised at. That's no problem at all.

I live half the year in a small village in northern Tuscany. When I rave about a restaurant that serves lunch for 10 Euros--three courses including wine, fizzy water, and an after dinner "digestivo"--folks will counter with, "yeah, but there's that insidious bread charge in Italy, you know, where you pay a Euro or two for "bread and cover."

They're absolutely incensed. You can see the forehead veins popping out. IN THE EMAIL. They don't care that in America you pay tax, tip, and now health insurance for your server on top of the bill--the cover charge gets their goat big time, despite the fact that the whole meal is of high quality and costs half of what it would cost in the US when you add all those things we got used to paying long ago. Oh, and I forgot to add, they can afford the 2 Euros.

It's all about perception. The US needs to show some good will to our potential visitors.

james

[CanCan]

Currenty, the US visa "application" fee is $131.00. Most visa applicants (visitors, students, temporary workers, etc.) are charged this $131.00 visa "application" fee. Many people apply and are denied multiple times. I have worked in Laos for many years and apparently there are some kind of quotas for the amount of visas granted to Lao nationals, Phillipine nationals, and who knows what other countries. People that don't make it within the quota range get turned down.
Are the quotas publicized? I don't know?

I think lots of people would love to travel to the US if the visa process were more reliable.

The $10 tax doesn't bother me, but using the money for USA destination PR sounds kind of useless given the other obstacles that foreign would-be tourists have to surrmount.

CanCan
MomMostTraveled.com

[Beverly Burmeier]

Perception is the key. People get antsy when they feel "nickle and dimed" to death, so knowing there's another fee could be irritating to visitors, although I don't think $10 will keep anyone away. Rolling it into the cost of air travel (while still disclosing the fee--no deception intended) is probably the simplest way for the fee to be collected and then distributed to a national tourism board (the same principle as merchants collecting and disbursing sales tax). Regarding the country's economic woes overall, this is small potatoes.

[Nina Zapala]

Well the discussion feed is quite interesting. As not to regurgitate what has been penned above, I pose a question. How has the government managed collected funds previously? I think we all know the answer to that question which directly relates to the answer on the new $10 tax.

[Barbara Hansen]

The tax will discourage foreign visitors, just as Argentina's large new arrival fee for visitors from the US has discouraged me frok going there. The U.S. tax, seems insulting, counterproductive to what it claims to promote.

Barbara Hansen
Los Angeles

[Tony Humphrey]

How much of the $10 will be lost in this new bureaucratic money pit - for non-promotional items such as rents, salaries and a new expenses trough.
Let the travel industry handle their own promos...they can always do it better than govt servants and many states and regions and municipalities and even villages have their own 'visitor' (not alien) bureaux.that do a great job....just check out a few websites....
How will it be collected?...in the ticket or at the arrival desk (causing more entry delays).
Now every country has the excuse to add another tax on tourism...one of the cleanest industries!
Let's not stop with the $10 per 'foreigner' or 'alien'...let's charge for extra bags....underweight travellers (they will not buy enough food)....extra $10 if 'in-country' for more than 3wks....and backpackers (they are so cheap!)....but now maybe the immigration officers will be able to smile as they will get that extra compensation...or will they still un-welcome us aliens?

[Kathy Moroney]

Kat Morgenstern said:

Actually, I think it is a ridiculous proposition, not a question of whether people can afford it or not. The tourist board should be properly funded by the federal government, because a well managed national advertizing agency (the tourism board) will hopefully help to generate additional national income through taxes paid by the tourist industry. Every State has its own tourist board and funds it directly - why can't the government do the same for the whole country?

I'd like to add some clarity to the comment that "every State has its own tourist board and funds it directly..."

I can't speak for other states, but this statement isn't true for California. You can read how California's funding works at this link: http://tourism.visitcalifornia.com/Industry/Assessment/About/ Industries that benefit from tourism pay $650 per $1 million of tourism receipts, per location. The participating industries are:
Accommodations
Restaurant and Retail
Attractions
Transportation and Travel Industry
Passenger Car Rental Industry

There isn't any state, public, funds put into the promotion of tourism to California.