Not the Best Way for Promote Travel

Hmm., thats great for tourism..

Oh boy, I hope this doesn't start a trend.

Thank you, Homeland Security. But it will start a trend as more and more national budgets face strains. Anything to increase revenue, I fear.

"The fee has been introduced to fund a programme which aims to promote tourism in the US and attract foreign spending."

Is this the same person who thinks it's a great idea to charge people to take luggage with them when they travel on airplanes?

"And when do the other countries start charging Americans?"

Many already do. Like, a visa for Russia costs over $100, with lots of bureaucracy.

If you go to Argentina, you have to pay over $100 at the Buenos Aires airport to get in to the country.

Nicaragua charges $5 for a tourist card, but you also have to pay about $35 at the airport to leave the country.

We have a toll bridge that cuts across the bay so you don't have to drive around, but you have to drive forever from anywhere to get on the road that goes down the peninsula to get to the bridge.

Nobody much wanted it, but somebody made some bucks building it, I guess.

After a number of years, they figured out it wasn't paying its way.

They upped the price.

Now it makes less money.

Way to go guvmint!!!

Tyler ~ I don't think it's the money but the "logic" behind the it that's the problem. The article states that they are charging British people to come here will help promote tourism.

The Nicaraguan government probably isn't saying that charging tourists $35 to leave the country is helping to increase tourism. Although I love how they charge you more to get out than to enter! Haha!

Well it does seem stupid, especially since it affects nations which have an agreement to allow vistors without visas.

But the British have little room for complaint. It's my understanding that they will soon charge a $90 fee or more for trans-Atlantic flight departures.

Somehow the people who receive the money always think charging a tax or fee is a good idea - in this case it's the "tourism" industry.

Anywhere you travel in America, you probably pay a lodging tax as part of your hotel bill. The money goes to local governments, and most say they use all or part of the funds to promote tourism. How is this different?

Don't talk to me about taxes!!! We picked up our e-tickets the other day for our return flights to Frankfurt from Adelaide via Singapore. Check these taxes out:-

Australian Departure Tax $47.00 per person, Passenger Service Charge $38.90 per person, Adelaide Noise Tax $3.40 per person, Safety & Security Charge $4.07 per person Global Insurance Levy $396.00 per person, Singapore Tax $22.40 per person, German Tax $50.70 per person. Total: $1122,94.

I couldn't tell from the link whether this applies to Canadians? If so, my tourist trips to the U.S. will be coming to a halt very quickly!

Try departing the UK or France on a business or first class ticket. Using miles for a "free" ticket on British Airways round trip USA to London in First will cost almost $700 in luxury taxes. Even in economy it's nearly $400.

This is pretty much why I have specific airports I will fly into but not out of, or vice versa, or avoid completely. Fly to a neighbor airport or country and take a train. Case in point - there's an arrival tax for Americans entering Argentina at Buenos Aires - but if you connect to another Argentine airport that fee isn't charged for now.

It's not just another cost, it's another inconvenience. Not only do you have to sign-up online, you have get your card out, pay another separate fee, (pay conversion fees for paying a $US charge too?), deal with any payment problems, etc.

If it was to pay for administering the system, that would at least make sense. Funding tourism promotion by putting another barrier in the way of tourists and causing a significant negative news story (over here, at least) is just mad.

Following the whole border laptop-inspections/seizures issue, I'm finding myself put off of travel to the US.

Anthony