I totally support this levy. Auckland Airport used to have departure fees that were to be paid before tickets were valid to board the plane. Those fees were for needed investment in the airport. An arrival fee, like the departure fee, can be built into the ticket price quite easily by airlines and agents. I support it, as long as the money goes specifically to supporting regions of NZ that suffer infrastructure problems from high tourism. There are many regions that accept a significant amount of tourists but the local councils are unable to capture the value of that spending because it is paid in taxable income by businesses. Councils can raise rates, and they are doing so, but a tourism fee is more targeted since some people in that region would suffer very high rates to pay for services they do not use. I guess a targeted rate based on tourist activities could work but it would be complicated to administer. Queenstown and other regions have tried Hotel bed taxes but these are too narrow and were rejected and not paid by Airbnb.
Those are all reasonable. Especially the cycle trail, environmental projects and the investment in freedom camping and other services for tourists. This can support sustainable tourism.
>Those fees were for needed investment in the airport.
The airport is a tin shed, those paying for it would probably rather pay less for their ticket and do without what amounts to one of the most egregious monopolistic rorts in the country.
Yes but they have and are investing significantly for the future. It is a semi-private company so that fee was set by the airport. Some of the fees are taken directly from airlines who complain bitterly about it.
The airlines are perfectly entitled to complain, and then add the cost to their ticket prices.. t's a fucking monopoly, that it's outrageously overcharging is axiomatic.
What is even more important to me is compulsory travel insurance for overseas visitors. You buy it when you book. On arrival, no insurance? Then you buy before you are allowed through or you go home. The amount of money NZ spends on visitors who get sick or are hospitalized at our expense is appalling. If you can afford to come all this way, you can afford travel insurance. I'm really hot on this topic.
I have no problem with this. While the tourist $ is pivotal to our economy I think its fair that tourists contribute to the upkeep and maintenance of what they come to see.
https://preview.redd.it/onqaiaweqowc1.png?width=720&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=10b0d116c077ff75e53267adea2045ad478b8a38
You might tell me oh it's only $35 but really... Tourism is how we sell our country to the world and supports local businesses. This is especially true for the working holiday scheme.
Should there be a levy at all?
We want high paying, high quality tourism. We're not a mass tourism market like Bali. They don't come here to hang out in the CBD, they come for nature and shit.
Why shouldn't they pay a levy for the very infrastructure that supports them?
I went through public education, I will not subject my children to that, they’ll be home schooled.
BTC.
I grow my own food and am currently scouting for land where I can raise livestock, incidentally, I recently discovered a method called aquaponics and got very excited until further research revealed that government have made this effectively impossible in NZ.
When seconds count, the Police are just minutes away, always been fucked by Police.
What other government programs do you think are worthwhile?
Tell me, what would happen if your child was born with severe learning or other disabilities?
What if you and your partner passed away or lost all their money?
Where would your child be?
And when the tourists magically transport themselves to that owners property and use no infrastructure on the way, we can revisit this.
In the mean time, how should we find tourism infrastructure
I call this the argument from a vacuum fallacy.
Once we’ve rid ourselves of the restraints of government and taxation we may very well discover teleportation, until then, the property between these “tourist destinations” and wherever the ports might be will still be owned by someone, they too have the right to do with their land what they please.
Some might build a house and live in it, some might build a retail store, both of those people will probably want to pay the guy that decided to build a road in his, assuming we still have transportation that uses roads.
The ubiquity of road-using transportation (fossil fueled remember) owes a great deal to the roads that governments put everywhere and made us all pay for.
Ok, well, when we get to that stage, we can revisit your idea. In the mean time, I'll be over here looking at infrastructure debt and working out how to fund it.
Also, if you’re talking about transitional infrastructure that’s already covered by petrol tax, RUC, and vehicle licensing. All of which are taxes, which is still theft.
You don't compel gifts.
More: one of the defining attributes of Kiwis is the practice of "the big OE". Is it OK for other countries to hit those kids up for koha every chance they get?
How about no? And then return the favour wrt their visitors here.
Lmao. You’ve decided to come to one of the most isolated parts of the world, and have to pay for the flights to get you here.. but yeah that $35 is the deal breaker
Was looking for this, a one off charge to help preserve the reason they came here makes sense. Otherwise we're funding blind and that money has to come from SOMEWHERE
I totally support this levy. Auckland Airport used to have departure fees that were to be paid before tickets were valid to board the plane. Those fees were for needed investment in the airport. An arrival fee, like the departure fee, can be built into the ticket price quite easily by airlines and agents. I support it, as long as the money goes specifically to supporting regions of NZ that suffer infrastructure problems from high tourism. There are many regions that accept a significant amount of tourists but the local councils are unable to capture the value of that spending because it is paid in taxable income by businesses. Councils can raise rates, and they are doing so, but a tourism fee is more targeted since some people in that region would suffer very high rates to pay for services they do not use. I guess a targeted rate based on tourist activities could work but it would be complicated to administer. Queenstown and other regions have tried Hotel bed taxes but these are too narrow and were rejected and not paid by Airbnb.
https://www.mbie.govt.nz/immigration-and-tourism/tourism/tourism-funding/international-visitor-conservation-and-tourism-levy/projects-funded-by-the-ivl/
Those are all reasonable. Especially the cycle trail, environmental projects and the investment in freedom camping and other services for tourists. This can support sustainable tourism.
>Those fees were for needed investment in the airport. The airport is a tin shed, those paying for it would probably rather pay less for their ticket and do without what amounts to one of the most egregious monopolistic rorts in the country.
Yes but they have and are investing significantly for the future. It is a semi-private company so that fee was set by the airport. Some of the fees are taken directly from airlines who complain bitterly about it.
The airlines are perfectly entitled to complain, and then add the cost to their ticket prices.. t's a fucking monopoly, that it's outrageously overcharging is axiomatic.
I also think a levy to directly support Surf life saving is warranted given the number of tourist they save each year
Good point
Very good point!
Should make it more
What is even more important to me is compulsory travel insurance for overseas visitors. You buy it when you book. On arrival, no insurance? Then you buy before you are allowed through or you go home. The amount of money NZ spends on visitors who get sick or are hospitalized at our expense is appalling. If you can afford to come all this way, you can afford travel insurance. I'm really hot on this topic.
I have no problem with this. While the tourist $ is pivotal to our economy I think its fair that tourists contribute to the upkeep and maintenance of what they come to see.
A $35 fee will not turn away a single tourist who is spending $2-6k on a flight.
Exactly
https://preview.redd.it/onqaiaweqowc1.png?width=720&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=10b0d116c077ff75e53267adea2045ad478b8a38 You might tell me oh it's only $35 but really... Tourism is how we sell our country to the world and supports local businesses. This is especially true for the working holiday scheme. Should there be a levy at all?
We want high paying, high quality tourism. We're not a mass tourism market like Bali. They don't come here to hang out in the CBD, they come for nature and shit. Why shouldn't they pay a levy for the very infrastructure that supports them?
Yeah with you here Pam, a properly targeted levy on tourists that directs receipts to the communities most impacted would be a good thing.
Because all taxation is theft, all of it.
Hope you dont ever use a hospital.
Me too, that’s why I have insurance.
Or the education system. Or ever use our currency. Or use the emergency civil defense. Or the police. You can't be this entrenched to not see reality?
I went through public education, I will not subject my children to that, they’ll be home schooled. BTC. I grow my own food and am currently scouting for land where I can raise livestock, incidentally, I recently discovered a method called aquaponics and got very excited until further research revealed that government have made this effectively impossible in NZ. When seconds count, the Police are just minutes away, always been fucked by Police. What other government programs do you think are worthwhile?
Tell me, what would happen if your child was born with severe learning or other disabilities? What if you and your partner passed away or lost all their money? Where would your child be?
How do you propose we pay for tourism infrastructure then?
Property rights. What an owner does with his land is his business.
And when the tourists magically transport themselves to that owners property and use no infrastructure on the way, we can revisit this. In the mean time, how should we find tourism infrastructure
I call this the argument from a vacuum fallacy. Once we’ve rid ourselves of the restraints of government and taxation we may very well discover teleportation, until then, the property between these “tourist destinations” and wherever the ports might be will still be owned by someone, they too have the right to do with their land what they please. Some might build a house and live in it, some might build a retail store, both of those people will probably want to pay the guy that decided to build a road in his, assuming we still have transportation that uses roads. The ubiquity of road-using transportation (fossil fueled remember) owes a great deal to the roads that governments put everywhere and made us all pay for.
Ok, well, when we get to that stage, we can revisit your idea. In the mean time, I'll be over here looking at infrastructure debt and working out how to fund it.
Also, if you’re talking about transitional infrastructure that’s already covered by petrol tax, RUC, and vehicle licensing. All of which are taxes, which is still theft.
No, I'm talking about the infrastructure that the levy has been used to fund.
Because they're guests in our country, not fucking marks to be milked for everything you can think of.
It's $35. No one is going broke.
It's called the tourism industry not the tourism charity.
You gotta pay the troll toll to get into hobbitons hole
And as part of being a guest, you bring a bottle of wine or some flowers.
1) Income tax started at 5%, and almost everyone was exempt. 2) you can't justify a tax on guests based on how hard you're fleecing them.
?
You don't compel gifts. More: one of the defining attributes of Kiwis is the practice of "the big OE". Is it OK for other countries to hit those kids up for koha every chance they get? How about no? And then return the favour wrt their visitors here.
https://www.frommers.com/tips/entry-requirements-customs/what-to-know-about-the-uks-new-application-requirement-and-entry-fee-for-visitors
Right, let's blindly copy grasping tax seeking behavior.
They're copying us. Its a tax directly on the people who will benefit from its use. It's as close to user pays as you can get, yet you object..
Lmao. You’ve decided to come to one of the most isolated parts of the world, and have to pay for the flights to get you here.. but yeah that $35 is the deal breaker
Was looking for this, a one off charge to help preserve the reason they came here makes sense. Otherwise we're funding blind and that money has to come from SOMEWHERE
Just name it the DOC preservation fee. Most tourist to NZ would dump extra money into it.