In four weeks time, a little over half the international arrivals into New Zealand will start paying $100 each for the international visitor levy, up from $35 now. The Government says it will have little impact on arrivals. #TourismIndustryAotearoa has estimated it could result in 48,000 fewer visitor arrivals over the next 12 months, reducing international visitor spend by $273m. Meanwhile, the government will collect an extra $100m or so each year from the increased levy. It is a significant change for tourism in New Zealand, but the big question still to be fully answered - what is the money collected by the Government going to be spent on? Will it improve the visitor experience for those paying the tax, and will it relieve pressure on tourism destinations? https://lnkd.in/gxqteZwt
Nikki Hurst
3mo
Good interview on Checkpoint asking similar questions, in case you didnt spot it Chris.
Nigel Birt
3mo
Agree with seeing where the dollars go. Currently spending time in Europe and seeing some results of over tourism along with in-depth discussions with locals. Interlaken has changed dramatically since I lived here in late 90s. IMO it’s lost some of it’s cultural charm it had. Now feels less authentic and more dirty. Some locals have left as a result. Roads up to Grindelwald and Lauterbrunen very congested with a change in the visitor profiles. Locals choose not to travel during key periods. New railways planned at phenomenal costs and a fee likely per tourist car. Many media reports regarding impacts of over tourism in Switzerland. In the news also was Greek islands banning any further hotel developments due to negative impacts of over tourism. NZ needs to consider its position and strategy to prevent these impacts in the future.
Alienor Izri
3mo
It will be interesting to see what the impact really is - $100 is starting to be a sizable amount to enter a country. Especially when being in competition with the rest of the world - we are an expensive destination already! Might have been a better strategy to have fees to enter our National parks (like in Tasmania for example, or Argentina). Time will tell...but it would be nice to know where the money is going for once ..
Carlo Ellis
3mo
I might be oversimplifying but emigration is at an all time high and now another barrier added to influx… net effect, reduced population - now what impacts will that have on house prices, cost of living and other key drivers 🤔 layered policy, strategic inattention in other areas… looks like strategy to me. Im not saying its right or wrong, it jist looks purposeful so if you like it thats great, if its not the direction you supporr then be aware. Love you falas!
Marty Byrne
3mo
Well said … when you add on the various port levies for cruise ship passengers , particularly in Auckland , it starts to really add up
I don't like it. But $65 extra is insignificant compared to the cost of flights here, "a" meal somewhere, even a taxi ride. However, you are right to raise the issue of monitoring it to ensure it is spent on the right things - our fuel tax was never dedicated to improving our roads!
Simon Russell
3mo
Well said Chris Roberts . NZ seems to view taxing our No.1 Export earner as a clever idea. $100m extra? Agree, likely to disappear into an opaque general fund, and a flimsy premise that tourists are somehow contributing to tourism-related improvements.
Chief Executive Officer at Kāpuhipuhi Wellington Uni-Professional
3moI sure you will get an answer of where the $go and what they are being used for!! 🤔 🙂