$10 fee on visitors to the United States. (CDNs excepted)

[Seanster]

A visa is required in France for students to study there. It is a miserable process. Italy no longer requires it for short stays nor does Ireland. I don't feel bad about having the US assess the fees and if they raise it to $50.00 in a few years so be it. Better for us. It seems to me that with our concerns about potential European Tariffs....have you ever purchased Euros??? Have you taken cruises and had port charges included in your fares?

 

Maybe I have a different idea about what that money can and will be used for which benefits all countries. You seem to be taking a very narrow and jaded political path, but it was certain sooner or later some one would.;)

 

Clearly, we do have "very different ideas."

 

First, a student visit and a tourist visa are two entirely different things. A student visit is for a potentially extended period of time; a U.S. tourist visa, on the other hand, is valid only on a renewable basis for no more than 6 months out of a given 12-month period. As such, there are additional administrative and other costs incurred in processing and enforcing a student visa. Also, when you refer to a "short" stay for a student, I do not agree that that a student's stay for one or more semesters is "short," particularly since many students, regrettably, overstay their visas.

 

(BTW: My wife lived and worked in France for several years. And her brother is a naturalized French citizen currently living in France. My brother, a U.S. citizen, was also recently a student in Limoges, for which he had no problem obtaining a student visa. I can assure you that the French visa and immigration requirements are no more stringent than our own -- arguably, they are less stringent. The green card process in the U.S. is also no walk in the park, let me assure you based on near-hand experience.)

 

Second, in terms of port fees being comparable to a mandatory entry tax, you're mixing apples and oranges. A port fee for a cruise covers a discretionary activity (i.e., cruising). An entry tax covers all form of travel, including travel necessary for medical treatment, business, familial reasons (e.g., adoptions), etc. In other words, one can choose to cruise; one cannot necessary choose not to visit a dying relative in the U.S.

 

Finally, the "cost" of EUROs has no bearing on this discussion. It is not akin to an entry fee assessed by a Government; rather, it is an exchange rate based on the relative strengths of a nation's currency. Among other things, the U.S. economy has been marked by an "easy money" lending policy in recent years, which has lowered the value of the USD relative to the EURO, and that in turn has lowered the number of Euros you can get for USDs.

 

My views are not "jaded." Perhaps you enjoy paying taxes. If so, I will send you some Governmental addresses in D.C., and you can send them some more of your money, as I understand they are desperate for more revenue. Personally, I would prefer that the travel industry (and the bureaucracies that support it) pay their own "freight," rather hitting up visitors to our country for additional stimulus. If a travel business cannot survive on their own merits, then I'm sure some other entrepreneur will step up to fill the gap. Also, my views may be economic, but they are not political. I would have the same issue regardless of which "politician" is occupying the White House.

[Ine]

A visa is required in France for students to study there. It is a miserable process. Italy no longer requires it for short stays nor does Ireland. I don't feel bad about having the US assess the fees and if they raise it to $50.00 in a few years so be it. Better for us. It seems to me that with our concerns about potential European Tariffs....have you ever purchased Euros??? Have you taken cruises and had port charges included in your fares?

 

Maybe I have a different idea about what that money can and will be used for which benefits all countries. You seem to be taking a very narrow and jaded political path, but it was certain sooner or later some one would.;)

 

ANY person that stays longer then 3 months in a european country needs a visum, no matter for what a reason they come. Not just France or Italy. The regular tourist from the USA and many other countries who in general stay up to a few weeks doesnot need a visum.

If a person wants to stay in the USA longer then 90 days (if the country participates at the visawaiverprogramm) he also needs a visum, which is a difficult, long process and that also costs money.

Why impose a tax to a tourist that comes to the USA and will spend money there (car, hotel, meals, excursion etc.). Since nowadays all information re any visit to any state can be found on the internet it is useless to open informationcenters about the USA elsewhere in the world.

We have been visiting the USA since 1970 on a frequent basis. it was not that difficult to get a visum. Once the visumwaiverprogramm started we travelled without visum of course.

Now I donot need a visum, but I have to apply for ESTA, and also give my address for the 1st night. That same information is asked by the airline when making a reservation, again when I do online-checkin, often once more at the airport when leaving, again on the green form that I get on board and yes again at passportcontrol.....Now I also might have to pay US$ 10.- to get ESTA??????????????

This apart from the the TSA rules...

 

Why do you think I donot feel that welcome in the USA anymore??

More countries have suffered from terrorists-attack, remember e.g. Madrid and London? They still welcome tourists without hardly additional regulations.

[Seanster]

Whatever the merits or lack thereof of this tax--and I find it deeply lame--I think it's a stretch to say it's a burden for anyone who is already spending several hundred or more than a thousand dollars to fly here, even if they're elderly or students. If it went up to $50, yes, it would be, but that's one reason the airlines would never, ever allow that to happen. They have lobbyists, too.

 

You miss my point. The tax will go up to $25 or $50. As a NJ resident, I have yet to see any of my federal, state, or local taxes go down. (Oh yes, the federal gov't did repeal the "Spanish American War" tax on telephone bills two years ago -- more than 100 years after the Spanish American War ended.)

[C 2 C]

 

Maybe I have a different idea about what that money can and will be used for which benefits all countries.

 

I believe the purpose of the $ 10 fee is to pay for the advertising to attract more tourists (Come to America campaign).

 

How will the new $10 charge benefit any other country?:confused:

[GITC]

Wouldn't tourism to the US rise on its own if all the ridiculous security measures and taxes for that were reduced? The cost far outweighs the benefit IMO when one considers everything that goes into it to try to catch the infinitesimaly small number of people who actually pose a legitimate threat to homeland security and who will find ways to carry out their hair-brained schemes anyway in spite of the 'security'.

 

It's not that it's another $10 or whatever it eventually becomes. It's another $10 on top of all the other surcharges, fees, taxes etc that have been added over the last several years. Sooner or later enough is enough.

 

The fees coupled with how much more hassle it is to travel into the US are actually a disincentive to travel there.

[bobbyleduck]

People have had a choice to respond to the Alaska tax with their wallets, as you put it, because a cruise is recreational and discretionary. Conversely, with the respect to the Administration's new $10 tax, the impacted travelers extend well beyond those who come to the U.S. to recreate. Such travelers are frequently engaged in business or volunteer activities, visiting sick relatives, etc. Therefore, such visitors cannot simply choose to avoid this tax (dressed up as a "fee") by not visiting the U.S.

 

As such, I don't believe a port or cruise fee like Alaska's is comparable to an entry tax that applies to all visitors. While $10 today (or $25 or $50 tomorrow) PER PERSON may not be a lot of money for to any of us who visit this board, it can be a burden on larger families, elderly visitors, and student groups, just to name a few.

 

As an aside, I volunteer to assist student groups on European educational trips for college credit, and an additional $10 per head today (or $25 or $50 tomorrow) adds up to a lot of cash when one is taking about a group of 30 or 40 students. Most of these kids pay for the trips themselves (as they should) by working while going to school and/or during the summers. While the students are lucky to have the opportunity to travel at all, these kinds of taxes and fees, including the huge fees embedded in airline fares, have made it nearly impossible for us continue these trips, particularly in rougher economic times.

 

The current Administration has said that it will help improve America's image in the world. I don't see how these fees, by nickling and diming visitors for additional cash right as they enter our country, will do anything to achieve that lofty goal. It's merely more "stimulus" for the Government and travel industry, which has come out all in favor of the tax. It merely screams: "Welcome to America: Now Open Your Wallet!" That sort of message may be fine for a poor third world country, but it's pretty ridiculous for the U.S.

 

It's all about politics for you, isn't it? A $10 fee is bad because you don't agree with the current political leadership, but a $50 fee (5 times more) was OK because you agreed with the political leadership that instituted it.

 

Hmm!:rolleyes:

 

Happy cruising to all!

 

Bob

[C 2 C]

If you wish to find more news about the new fee, the legislation is called the Travel Promotion Act (TPA)

 

for example: http://www.4hoteliers.com/4hots_fshw.php?mwi=4873

 

I wonder about the implementation. Will visitors be charged every time they enter the USA. For example if one were to fly to Newark, pay $10 per person at the airport, get on a ship such as the Summit, cruise to Canada, return to the USA and pay again? Or cruise through the canal from FLL, having paid at the airport and then pay again when disembarking in San Diego and passing through immigration?

 

A very good background to the decline in travel is found here:

http://dpc.senate.gov/dpcdoc.cfm?doc_name=lb-111-1-85

The Department of Commerce estimates that since 9/11, the nation has lost $182 billion in visitor spending and $27 billion in lost tax receipts.

[Seanster]

It's all about politics for you, isn't it? A $10 fee is bad because you don't agree with the current political leadership, but a $50 fee (5 times more) was OK because you agreed with the political leadership that instituted it.

 

Hmm!:rolleyes:

 

Happy cruising to all!

 

Bob

 

If you're going to accuse me of being political, then at least get your facts right. The Alaska cruise tax was not instituted by "political leadership"; it was instituted by ballot initiative of the residents of Alaska. The initiative was the result of efforts by local scientists and others beginning before 2000, aimed at generating more revenue for preservation and other state affairs. So, I'm not sure what "political leadership" you're referring to, unless you're referring to all residents of Alaska as "politicians." There were D, R, and Independent residents who opposed the head tax in the statewide ballot, and a majority who supported it, to the chagrin of many of us cruisers.

 

At any rate, who said that I support the Alaska head tax? I merely pointed out that, unlike the new $10 U.S. entry tax, the Alaska head tax is avoidable by not cruising to Alaska, which is a choice about recreation. The $10 entry fee (soon-to-be $25 entry fee, $50 entry fee, etc.), on the other hand, can only be avoided by not coming to the U.S., which is not practical for many who must travel here for their small business or family, etc. Therefore, the new U.S. entry fee is vastly more pernicious. (In the same way, one could conceivably support a $5.00 tax on cigarettes, which is a recreational activity, but I would not support a $5.00 tax on a gallon of milk, which is a necessity for many.)

[02143]

You miss my point. The tax will go up to $25 or $50. As a NJ resident, I have yet to see any of my federal, state, or local taxes go down. (Oh yes, the federal gov't did repeal the "Spanish American War" tax on telephone bills two years ago -- more than 100 years after the Spanish American War ended.)

 

I saw your point, but I disagree with it. There's simply no reason to assume the tax will quintuple, and ample reason to think that business interests who lose revenue to that tax would prevent that from happening. It's easier to attack this fee if you quintuple it in your head, but since it is only $10 now, we have to assess it for what is actually being charged.

 

Your federal income taxes went down in 2001 and 2003--and in 1981, if you're old enough. Your state income taxes went down under Gov. Whitman in the 1990s. The sales tax went up to 7% in 1990 and back down to 6% a few years later, and then back up to 7%. I grew up in NJ and live in Massachusetts, and my income tax went down from 5.9% to 5.3% several years ago.

[Aussie One]

I entered the United States as a tourist thirty years ago when going through imigration in said USA passports and the other desk said Aliens.

maybe saying others it would be worth $10.

Indonesia to enter $30 to leave about $15

[Seanster]

I saw your point, but I disagree with it. There's simply no reason to assume the tax will quintuple, and ample reason to think that business interests who lose revenue to that tax would prevent that from happening. It's easier to attack this fee if you quintuple it in your head, but since it is only $10 now, we have to assess it for what is actually being charged.

 

Your federal income taxes went down in 2001 and 2003--and in 1981, if you're old enough. Your state income taxes went down under Gov. Whitman in the 1990s. The sales tax went up to 7% in 1990 and back down to 6% a few years later, and then back up to 7%. I grew up in NJ and live in Massachusetts, and my income tax went down from 5.9% to 5.3% several years ago.

 

You are taking snippets of tax history out of context. Since you formerly lived in NJ, you will know that our state income taxes went from a top marginal rate of between 2 and 3% in the early 1980s to a rate which is currently above 10%. The rates of taxation for other mid- and higher-income earners have also gone up substantially during the same period. Our assessment of real property also skyrocketed during that time, to a extent that far outstrips any inflation, and to the point where NJ leads the nation with its ratable. So, for each dollar in tax reduction at the federal level you cite, we have seen an increase in state tax to more than compensate for the reduction in federal funding flowing into the state, with the net effect being an overall increase in the tax burden.

 

Back to the travel-related topic at hand: In terms of the the U.S. entry tax not going up, I think history bears out the fact that such taxes and fees typically go up. If folks want to believe that these sorts of taxes will not go up, then that's their right. Personnaly, I have a different view. (You might also want to let them know that their cable rates have not gone up in recent years, and that they will not be going up in the future. Nor will their airline security, fuel, facility, and other taxes be going up.)

[02143]

(You might also want to let them know that their cable rates have not gone up in recent years, and that they will not be going up in the future. Nor will their airline security, fuel, facility, and other taxes be going up.)

 

My combined cable/internet/phone rates have gone down about 50% over the last five years even as service has gotten better. ;)

[Seanster]

My combined cable/internet/phone rates have gone down about 50% over the last five years even as service has gotten better. ;)

 

That's great. I worked at Comcast in their HQ for 15 years. I sure they would be happy to hear your support for their pricing. Unfortunately, we typically only heard from the customers who felt that they were not getting value for their money, particularly the basic-only customers.

[jan and jon]

As DiNiro would say 'Ya wanta talk bout taxes----Ya wanta to talk bout taxes---- I'll show ya taxes.':mad:

 

Philadelphia currently charges 8% sales tax--the rest of Pa. is 6%.

Now the mayor of Phila. has proposed a 2% tax per ounce of soft drinks.

Thats an extra $.24 per can of Coke--$5.76 per case--$1.18 per 2ltr.

 

Hope the cruise lines aren't listening!:D

[FinelyCruising]

Clearly, we do have "very different ideas."

 

First, a student visit and a tourist visa are two entirely different things. A student visit is for a potentially extended period of time; a U.S. tourist visa, on the other hand, is valid only on a renewable basis for no more than 6 months out of a given 12-month period. As such, there are additional administrative and other costs incurred in processing and enforcing a student visa. Also, when you refer to a "short" stay for a student, I do not agree that that a student's stay for one or more semesters is "short," particularly since many students, regrettably, overstay their visas.

 

For France for a period of greater than 90 days, a student cannot get a visa unless they produce a college/university letter, a return ticket and the stay is only for the period specified. In fact, students parents must give an affadavit from their bank, and have minimum account balances that meet the standard along with surety of heath insurance or the agreement to purchase same immediately and agree to support the student while there.

 

Now, trust me on this one, the Visa costs more than $10.00 let alone the effort to make an appointment to get one. Point is one does what the country to go to says to do, or guess what, you can't go.

[FinelyCruising]

Clearly, we do have "very different ideas."

 

F

Second, in terms of port fees being comparable to a mandatory entry tax, you're mixing apples and oranges. A port fee for a cruise covers a discretionary activity (i.e., cruising). An entry tax covers all form of travel, including travel necessary for medical treatment, business, familial reasons (e.g., adoptions), etc. In other words, one can choose to cruise; one cannot necessary choose not to visit a dying relative in the U.S.

 

No, these are fees to travel

 

Finally, the "cost" of EUROs has no bearing on this discussion. It is not akin to an entry fee assessed by a Government; rather, it is an exchange rate based on the relative strengths of a nation's currency. Among other things, the U.S. economy has been marked by an "easy money" lending policy in recent years, which has lowered the value of the USD relative to the EURO, and that in turn has lowered the number of Euros you can get for USDs.

 

Baloney, the currency it is the cost of doing business in those Euro countries. People do it regardless of the dollar. And the loss is more than $10.00

 

My views are not "jaded." Perhaps you enjoy paying taxes. If so, I will send you some Governmental addresses in D.C., and you can send them some more of your money, as I understand they are desperate for more revenue. Personally, I would prefer that the travel industry (and the bureaucracies that support it) pay their own "freight," rather hitting up visitors to our country for additional stimulus. If a travel business cannot survive on their own merits, then I'm sure some other entrepreneur will step up to fill the gap. Also, my views may be economic, but they are not political. I would have the same issue regardless of which "politician" is occupying the White House.

 

Let them hit up who ever they can, this country has had an open check book policy for years. Time to fill the kitty.

[FinelyCruising]

I believe the purpose of the $ 10 fee is to pay for the advertising to attract more tourists (Come to America campaign).

 

How will the new $10 charge benefit any other country?:confused:

 

The report indicated that it would be used for global travel. Maybe they take some of this $$$ and install a few more body scan machines in airports to make the world safer from people that carry bomb stuff and like to attack.

 

To me, thats a positive spend of the money and I don't think anyone could find fault with the concept. It literally benefits all travelers and makes the world safer too.

[VistaRio]

 

Why do you think I donot feel that welcome in the USA anymore??

 

It is clear that you dislike having to pay to visit (and spend money in) a country. This is not unreasonable on the surface.

 

Now, perhaps you missed my earlier post and question of you: What Visa do you have (FMx) for Mexico, if any, and how much does it cost?

[jackdiamond]

By the way, does B.V.I.,still have their entry fee?

[Seanster]

For France for a period of greater than 90 days, a student cannot get a visa unless they produce a college/university letter, a return ticket and the stay is only for the period specified. In fact, students parents must give an affadavit from their bank, and have minimum account balances that meet the standard along with surety of heath insurance or the agreement to purchase same immediately and agree to support the student while there.

 

Now, trust me on this one, the Visa costs more than $10.00 let alone the effort to make an appointment to get one. Point is one does what the country to go to says to do, or guess what, you can't go.

 

Okay. So, what's difficult about the steps above? It sounds like things that anyone with a college education could handle in a few hours. And, of course, on the flip side, European applicants to a U.S. university are required to fill out a US DoS I-20 and to undertake such steps as required by the university. At any rate, I'm not sure that applying for a student visa has anything to do with tourist entry process and tax. You may want to make that analogy, but merely making the analogy does not make the situations analogous. That being said, I would certainly encourage you to attend a French university (to the extent you have not already done so), since it could be an eye-opener.

[Ine]

It is clear that you dislike having to pay to visit (and spend money in) a country. This is not unreasonable on the surface.

 

Now, perhaps you missed my earlier post and question of you: What Visa do you have (FMx) for Mexico, if any, and how much does it cost?

 

This may surprise you, but upon entering the country (airport of Puerto Vallarta) we asked the officer right away for a permit for 4 months (instead of the regular 3 months), as we planned to stay that long.

Much to our surprise we got a permit for even 6 months with a big smile and: ""Bienvenidos"...with NO costs.

That indeed was a nice welcome.

[FinelyCruising]

 

Point is one does what the country to go to says to do, or guess what, you can't go.

 

There it is twice. You do what you are required to do for the purpose you desire to enter a country. $10.00 is a small price for this great one. ;)

[VistaRio]

This may surprise you, but upon entering the country (airport of Puerto Vallarta) we asked the officer right away for a permit for 4 months (instead of the regular 3 months), as we planned to stay that long.

Much to our surprise we got a permit for even 6 months with a big smile and: ""Bienvenidos"...with NO costs.

That indeed was a nice welcome.

 

And you understand, that is NOT the current law for the country, right? Or perhaps you did not know you are supposed to go pay for that at a banjercito?

 

:)

[Ine]

And you understand, that is NOT the current law for the country, right? Or perhaps you did not know you are supposed to go pay for that at a banjercito?

 

:)

 

I know from experiences by my daughter who lives in P. vallarta and from other "snowbirds" that this is done many times in the past too by others.

But it necessary to do it right away when entering the country.

If one gets the permit for only 3 months indeed for the extension of that it takes time and money.

Maybe the officers in PV realise the importance of tourism.

Anyway we (and also friends of us) got the official permits.

[VistaRio]

Anyway we (and also friends of us) got the official permits.

 

Not until they are paid for.

 

In any case, happy tavels.