'Disproportionate': European tourism chiefs blast ETIAS fee hike
ETIAS
), expected to become operational in late 2026, will require visa-exempt non-EU travellers to obtain an online authorisation and pay the related fee before entering the 29-country EU/Schengen area.
Travel and tourism groups however expressed 'deep concern' at
the proposed hike
and called on the European Parliament and European Council, which will have to endorse it, to reject the proposed fee hike from €7 to €20.
They also called for an impact assessment to justify the costs and adopt a 'more proportionate, evidence-based' fee.
'While the fee may represent a small fraction of overall travel expenses, the cumulative impact on families is not negligible, not least given the broader context of increasing overnight taxes,' the groups said in a joint statement.
The signatories of the statement include Airlines for Europe, the European Regions Airline Association, the European Tourism Association, the European Travel Agents' and Tour Operators' Association, the European Association of Hotels, Restaurants and Cafés, and the European Federation of Rural Tourism (RURALTOUR) among others.
The groups say that the increase 'appears disproportionate' and 'lacks transparency'. They also say the EU Commission should publish 'a detailed cost breakdown' and specify whether alternative pricing models, such as €10 or €12, were considered.
Advertisement
The Commission said on Friday that the ETIAS system is expected to become operational in the last quarter of 2026 and explained the fee increase with 'the rise in inflation since 2018… additional operational costs related e.g. to new technical features integrated into the system,' and the intention to bring the fee 'in line with similar travel authorisation programmes', such as the UK's Electronic Travel Authorisation (ETA) and the US Electronic System for Travel Authorization (ESTA), which charge £16 (€18.4) and $21 (€17.8) respectively.
The travel and tourism industry however argued that the Commission's decision to reference similar travel authorisation schemes, 'sets a concerning precedent'.
'Fee decisions should reflect the actual operational needs of the EU system and be fully justified. They should not aim to align with unrelated schemes without a clear rationale and legal basis,' the statement said.
The groups also add that 'any surplus revenue collected through ETIAS, after covering its official costs, should be assigned to a specific budget line, or ideally earmarked for the travel and tourism sector' within the EU budget, including to support tourism infrastructure, staff training and sustainable development initiatives.
The ETIAS is the second part of the EU's new border control measures and will follow the introduction of the EU Entry/Exit System (EES), which is set to begin its
phased roll out
on
October 12th 2025
after several delays.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Euronews
5 hours ago
- Euronews
Slovenia becomes first EU country to ban weapons trade with Israel
Slovenia will be 'the first European country' to ban weapons trade with Israel in response to Tel Aviv's actions in Gaza, Prime Minister Robert Golob told the country's Press Agency (STA) on Friday. 'At the initiative of Prime Minister Dr. Robert Golob, the government today adopted a decision prohibiting the export and transit of military weapons and equipment from or through the Republic of Slovenia to Israel, as well as the import of such goods from Israel into the Republic of Slovenia,' according to a statement cited by STA and published on the Slovenian government's webpage. The statement added that Golob's decision stems from his promise to 'act independently' against Israel if the EU 'failed to adopt concrete measures by mid-July'. 'Due to internal disagreements and lack of unity, the European Union is currently unable to fulfil this task,' the statement said. EU member states have now repeatedly failed to rally enough support to respond to Israel's ongoing actions in Gaza. Despite a review of the EU-Israel association agreement which revealed that the country's actions in Gaza were violating human rights, the EU 27 couldn't agree on any of the 10 sanctions proposed to them, including a partial suspension of Israel's access to the EU's Horizon Europe research and innovation programme. An embargo on arms to Israel was never tabled among options for action at EU level. United Nations and EU rules state that human rights violations and war crimes should give rise to arms sales embargoes. In addition, following the Israel-Hamas war in Gaza, Italy, Spain, Belgium and the Netherlands have already halted or restricted exports. Israel imports almost 70% of its arsenal from the US, the world's largest arms exporter but Germany is Israel's second supplier. Since 7 October 2023, it has exported €485 millions' worth of weapons. Italy ranks third, supplying less than 1%. Slovenia has been one of the most vocal EU countries calling for EU action against Israel. The country recognised a Palestinian state in June last year and has since repeatedly called for a ceasefire in Gaza and increased aid deliveries to the enclave. It has also declared two far-right Israeli ministers, National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich as personae non grata.
Euronews
5 hours ago
- Euronews
White House keeps tariff pressure on EU car industry
US President Donald Trump doesn't appear willing to ease the pressure on German carmakers. The US executive order on reciprocal tariffs published just before 1 August stopped short of applying the 15% tariffs agreed by Trump and Commission president Ursula von der Leyen to US imports of EU vehicles. Since 2 April, EU cars have been hit with 25% US tariffs under the section 232 of the US Trade Expansion Act, which allows the US president to restrict imports of goods threatening US national security. The deal concluded last Sunday with President Ursula von der Leyen was meant to apply the 15% tariffs to EU cars, and to exempt certain strategic products such as aircraft from tariffs, but neither proviso appears in the executive order. The executive order imposes a blanket 15% tariff on EU goods to apply from 8 August. Goods already in transit before that date will enjoy the previous tariff rate of 10% until 5 October, the US order says. Any attempt to circumvent these tariffs will be penalized with a 40% duty on the goods concerned, the order adds. Despite the apparent omissions from the order, EU Trade Commissioner Maroš Šefčovič welcomed 'the first results of the EU–US deal". 'This reinforces stability for businesses as well as trust in the transatlantic economy,' he said on X, adding: 'EU exporters now benefit from a more competitive position.' Šefčovič also said, however, that 'the work continues', referring to ongoing negotiations on a joint statement intended to formalise the political trade agreement reached on July 27. Diverging narratives The Commission and the US administration are struggling to agree on a joint text, and up to now have pushed diverging narratives on the deal. Uncertainty remains over the fate of steel and aluminium, currently hit by 50% US tariffs, which, according to the Commission, are expected to soon be subject to lower tariff-rate quotas. Negotiations are also ongoing over a series of exemptions, as pressure mounts from the EU wine and spirits industry. In a factsheet published on Monday, the US also claimed that the EU committed not to apply telecommunications network usage fees in an upcoming Digital Network Act, which is currently being disputed between EU telecom companies and US tech giants in Brussels. On Thursday the Commission noted that a white paper on digital networks published in February 2024 assessed that imposing a network fee was 'not a viable solution'. 'Such an exemption would not apply to US company only,' a Commission spokesperson said.
France 24
5 hours ago
- France 24
UK top court to rule on multi-billion pound car loan scandal
The loans, made available for 14 years from 2007, incentivised car dealers to offer higher interest rates in return for a bigger commission from banks. The Supreme Court will determine whether to uphold a judgment by the Court of Appeal last year that ruled it was unlawful for car dealers to receive a commission on loans without sufficiently informing borrowers. It is estimated that millions of drivers would be eligible for compensation should the Supreme Court side with borrowers, following its three-day hearing in April. One case involves Marcus Johnson -- who in 2017 bought a Suzuki Swift from a car dealer in Cardiff for £6,500 ($8,560 today) including loan costs -- unaware that interest paid on the loan amount would fund commission of more than £1,600. When the Court of Appeal ruled in favour of Johnson, ordering South African lender FirstRand Bank to refund the commission plus interest, it sparked panic across the finance sector. British banks have set aside considerable sums in preparation for the ruling, including Lloyds, which has earmarked nearly £1.2 billion. The total estimated cost for banks varies, but HSBC bank analysts suggested before the trial that it could come to £44 billion. Since then, analysts have revised down the potential exposure of banks, British media reports suggesting a figure of around £11 billion. In the three cases being judged by the Supreme Court, consumers are also facing off against British bank Close Brothers. The Financial Conduct Authority, which banned undisclosed commissions in 2021, could mandate a collective automatic compensation programme should the court sides with borrowers. Analysts said that Britain's Labour government may be concerned about the impact on banks' willingness to provide credit amid economic uncertainty caused by US tariffs and geopolitical unrest.
