&w=3840&q=100)
Heading to Europe? ₹2,000 travel permit required for each adult soon
ETIAS, which is now scheduled to begin in late 2026, will apply to nationals of over 50 visa-exempt countries, including the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, Japan and others. Indian citizens with valid long-term multiple-entry visas or residence permits from countries such as the US, UK, Canada, Australia, Japan, New Zealand, Israel, South Korea, Ireland, Schengen states or GCC countries will also need to apply for ETIAS.
What is ETIAS
ETIAS was approved in 2018 as a digital travel permit, much like the US ESTA or the UK's new ETA. Travellers from visa-free countries will need to apply online before entering most EU countries in the Schengen area.
Once granted, the authorisation will be valid for up to three years or until the traveller's passport expires, whichever is earlier. However, it will only allow stays of up to 90 days within a 180-day period.
The European Commission said the price hike is due to inflation, increased running costs and new technical features. Officials also pointed out that the new €20 fee brings it closer to other systems — the US ESTA currently costs $21, and the UK ETA is £10.
The Commission added that, once live, ETIAS is expected to process applications within minutes for most travellers using a fully online system.
Who has to pay and who doesn't
The €20 fee will apply to all eligible travellers between the ages of 18 and 70. Children under 18 and adults over 70 will not be charged. Family members of EU citizens and residents who have the right to free movement in the bloc will also be exempt.
Travel industry pushes back
Although ETIAS is still more than a year away, European travel and tourism groups have criticised the move to triple the fee.
'While the fee may represent a small fraction of overall travel expenses, the cumulative impact on families is not negligible,' a group of tourism associations wrote in a joint statement on July 24.
HOTREC, a European body representing hotels, restaurants, and cafés, has joined the pushback.
'Europe's hospitality sector fully supports the objective of secure and efficient borders. However, the proposed tripling of the ETIAS fee raises serious concerns about proportionality and transparency,' said Marie Audren, Director General of HOTREC in a press release.
'We urge the European Parliament and the Council to reject the proposal and demand evidence-based justification. Any surplus revenue should be reinvested into strengthening the tourism ecosystem,' she said.
The coalition of industry bodies is asking for:
< An impact assessment justifying the €20 fee
< Clarification on whether alternatives such as €10 or €12 were considered
< Any surplus revenue to be redirected into tourism infrastructure, training and sustainability projects
They argue that tourism is a key economic pillar for Europe, supporting millions of jobs and contributing vital revenue. They say any new administrative cost should be balanced against how it might deter visitors or weigh down the sector.
The proposed fee still needs to pass through the European Parliament and Council, where such technical adjustments are usually approved without much debate.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
9 minutes ago
- Mint
Trump vs Powell puts spotlight on central banks' independence: How does RBI score?
The very public friction between US President Donald Trump and Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell has once again thrust central bank independence into the spotlight. The underlying question is both simple and consequential: should elected leaders have a say in how central banks set interest rates? This tension isn't new. Trump repeatedly criticised the Fed's rate hikes during his earlier term. European leaders were unsettled by the European Central Bank's aggressive tightening in 2022. And back in 2018, India witnessed its own showdown between the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) and the finance ministry. Still, the consensus among economists is clear: independent central banks are critical to maintaining macroeconomic stability. To measure the independence of central banks across countries and time, researchers have created an index based on some core criteria. Each criterion is assigned a score, and then these scores (with or without weights) are used to arrive at an index value, ranging from 0 to 1, with 1 representing the highest level of independence. Common central bank parameters assessed in these indices include rules of appointment of the governor and the monetary policy committee, freedom to formulate monetary policy, norms for conflict resolution, primary policy objective, rules for lending to government, financial independence, and reporting and disclosure norms. A recent index assigns India's RBI a score of 0.59, indicating moderate independence. RBI's report card The RBI scores high on several key parameters of central bank autonomy. It has a clear inflation-targeting mandate, operates with an independent budget, and adheres to sound reporting and disclosure standards. However, its overall independence is moderated by structural constraints, most of them stemming from its ownership and governance structure. These can be grouped into three categories. First, while the six-member Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) includes three external members and three RBI representatives, all are appointed by the government. The RBI governor, also a government appointee, holds the casting vote in case of a tie. Second, in the event of a policy disagreement, the government retains the final say. Both these rules are seen as a lack of independence in monetary policy. Third, under the RBI Act, the central bank is required to transfer its surplus to the government after meeting expenses and provisioning. This is viewed as a lack of financial independence. Despite these limitations, the RBI has largely delivered on its core mandate. Between August 2016 and June 2025, inflation exceeded the official upper tolerance band of 6% in just 28 of 107 months. Inflation volatility has also declined significantly since the adoption of flexible inflation targeting (FIT). Through the turbulence of the last five years, when RBI shifted from covid-era easing to post-pandemic tightening, inflation fluctuations were still lower than in the pre-FIT years. Importantly, the RBI has built credibility as a steward of price stability. Its consistent emphasis on the 4% inflation target has helped anchor public expectations, even though households tend to overestimate inflation by 3-4 percentage points, their expectations remain stable over time. Independence and co-operation If India's central bank, despite being government-owned, manages to do its job well, should it still aspire to greater independence? Perhaps. Research shows that greater central bank independence is associated with lower inflation and more effective monetary policy in the long run, especially for developing economies. However, India's situation is different for two reasons. One, the scope for conflict on monetary policy is slightly lower. Conflict is most likely when inflation is on its way down: the government would prefer lower rates to boost growth, while the RBI may want to wait until inflation is stamped out. But given that inflation is as much a political hot potato as a monetary headache—elections have been lost on the price of onions—the government is more sensitive to inflation, and less likely to demand rate cuts until inflation is under control. Two, the present government is committed to reducing its fiscal deficit and debt. Therefore, it is unlikely to push for lower rates just to reduce debt servicing costs. When governments are fiscally profligate, monetary policy has to compensate by printing money or keeping interest rates at artificially low levels. In contrast, fiscal prudence frees monetary policy from the pressure of propping up budget deficits. Central bank independence in itself does not guarantee effective policy. The US Fed has full independence in setting monetary policy, yet hasn't escaped criticism from the White House. Turkey has a high independence score of 0.8 out of 1, but President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan's policy interference has led to runaway inflation. The takeaway? Independence is necessary but not sufficient. What matters most is whether fiscal and monetary policy can work in sync. Price stability is best achieved when governments and central banks act as partners, not adversaries, in managing the economy. The author is an independent writer in economics and finance.
Indian Express
39 minutes ago
- Indian Express
A bad trade deal: US-EU pact offers a template, which India is keen to avoid
As US President Donald Trump's new set of tariffs takes effect from August 7, there is a question that is resonating in New Delhi's policy circles: What does a bad trade deal look like? The new trade deal signed by the United States with the European Union perhaps qualifies. Critics of this pact, including politicians in EU member countries such as France, are now openly lambasting the US-EU trade agreement, claiming that 'while one side got a deal, the other side got a bill!' There is a growing sense within sections of India's government that rushing in to sign a deal on Trump's terms has its perils, and could lead to such a lopsided trading arrangement. Also, in the Trumpian scheme of things, the countries that have been called 'friends' have gotten it worse than others. Being soft has been construed as a sign of weakness by the US administration. From New Delhi's perspective, it might also be better to wait out till China signs on the dotted line, to discern in comparative terms if India is getting something favourable out of the headline tariff numbers being offered as part of a deal. Lopsided EU deal What the EU deal effectively does is that it forces the 27-nation bloc to pay a 15 per cent baseline tariff on most of its exports to the US. In exchange, Washington DC gets more access to the EU market at far lower tariff rates, and has pretty much made no concessions for that access. On top of that, Brussels has promised to ramp up investment in the US to the tune of 600 billion Euros, alongside a promise to buy more energy from America to the tune of 750 billion Euros over the next three years. How did the EU end up with this deal? This surrender has a predictable build-up to it, which is typical of the tactic that the US administration has followed with most others who rushed in to sign up early, including South Korea and Vietnam. At the start of negotiations, Brussels was offering zero-for-zero tariffs, and then at some point, it looked like they sweetened the deal by pitching zero-for-10 per cent tariffs, with some exceptions for certain sectors such as automobiles. Then came the letter last weekend from Trump, threatening a 30 per cent tariff if there was no deal reached by August 1. That seems to have been the final trigger for this final deal, which Ursula von der Leyen, the President of the European Commission, said was the best agreement under the given circumstances. When Trump's tariff action started in March, it was widely believed that the US President had only had one thing in sight – a headline tariff number being thrashed out with each country. Progressively, the deals signed closer to the August 1 deadline have been broadbased to include investment commitments such as in the EU deal. Japan too has committed to invest $550 billion, and the UK has pledged to adopt a 'structured, negotiated approach' in investments, while South Korea has committed to investing $350 billion in the US in projects 'owned and controlled by the United States' and 'selected by President Donald Trump'. All this while agreeing to let in most American goods duty free into each of their countries, in return for the 15 per cent tariff. The build-up too has been predictable in all these cases – concessions being offered by the respective side, followed by a threat of a big tariff number as a deadline loomed, and eventual capitulation. According to Deborah Elms, Head of Trade Policy at the Hinrich Foundation in Singapore, while some 'napkin deals' were locked in headline rates of 15 per cent, others were less successful. Even with a deal, Vietnam got 20 per cent and an additional 20 per cent on trans-shipped goods, while others in ASEAN with no deal got 19. Switzerland had early agreement but got whacked with 39 per cent while the UK, despite its trade deficit with the US, got tariffed at 10 per cent. 'All rates can be changed at any point, so this doesn't really ensure stability'. What is striking is that those without a deal in ASEAN got a better tariff deal as compared to those who signed early, such as Vietnam. Then there is the practical aspect of these deals: beyond the headline tariff number, there are question marks over whether the other provisions included in the deals will ever come to fruition. The detailed text is not out for most of the deals signed so far. Even when the details trickle out, there is a chance that these terms will be fiddled with, tweaked and rewritten, to make them implementable. Trade deals typically run to thousands of pages and take months, if not years, to negotiate. This fast-tracked method of signing up multiple deals over a span of weeks is really mind boggling. The only deals where some degree of actual negotiations have taken place so far seem to be the one with China, and the extended talks with India. Implementation woes, legal challenges Then there is the question of the legality of what Washington DC is doing, and the implication for its trading partner too. The US threatening to, or imposing additional tariffs forcibly on goods from another country, are a violation of Article I of the General Agreement of Tariffs and Trade, apart from being in contravention of its own bound tariff commitments under Article II of GATT, which entails an assurance that tariffs will not exceed the rates mutually agreed upon by the two parties. On the other hand, the concessions that the EU has given to the US could be up for challenge from other countries, if these sops are not in line with the World Trade Organisation (WTO) trading rules. This is because under WTO rules, if the US has now been given some sort of preferential access to the EU market, Brussels needs to offer the same terms to others or could be deemed to be violating international trade laws. Then there is also the domestic legal challenge that Trump's trade-linked executive orders are facing in the US. Lastly, there is the practicality aspect. Do the EU member countries really have the scope to ramp up energy imports from the US by 750 billion Euros over the next three years? And, can the Commission guarantee that 650 billion Euros of investments into the US, given that much of this is not public spending, but private sector spending by individual companies. Then there is the big question mark over the ability of American customs department and trade officials being able to effectively monitor, police and implement these multiple country-specific provisions. The reason why the rollout of the July 31 tariffs have been delayed till August 7 was to ostensibly give time for the American Customs department to prepare for these new tariff rates. It is unlikely to be a smooth process at major US ports, given the short lead time. Anil Sasi is National Business Editor with the Indian Express and writes on business and finance issues. He has worked with The Hindu Business Line and Business Standard and is an alumnus of Delhi University. ... Read More
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
39 minutes ago
- Business Standard
Re 1 visa sale: Get Schengen, UK, US visas for just ₹1 on Atlys today
Today and tomorrow, you can get a Schengen, UK or Georgia visa for just Re 1. Atlys, a visa processing platform, has launched India's first Re 1 visa sale under its 'One Way Out' campaign. The two-day sale, which started today, will end tomorrow. Travellers can book visa applications for countries including the UAE, UK, Vietnam, Indonesia, Australia, South Africa, Egypt, Hong Kong, Georgia, Oman, Morocco, Qatar, Kenya and Taiwan for just Re 1. For destinations that require in-person appointments, such as the United States and some Schengen countries, appointment bookings are also being offered at Re 1. How does the process work? The application procedure remains unchanged. Applicants must submit their details through the Atlys website, where the discounted price will be automatically applied at checkout. However, the Re 1 offer does not cover everything. 'Consulate and biometric fees must be paid directly by the applicant at the processing centre and are not included in the promotion,' Nahta clarified. The company has not imposed a strict limit on daily applications but will manage the flow. 'To ensure a smooth and superlative experience for all applicants, appointment slots for certain countries will be released periodically in limited quotas. Users will be encouraged to regularly check the website for updates on newly available slots,' Nahta said. What's included in the Re 1 offer? 'If you book through Atlys, for select Schengen countries like Greece, France, Germany, Spain and Italy among others, we have slashed both our service fee and the appointment fees,' said Mohak Nahta, founder and CEO of Atlys. He explained how this works for France. 'The appointment fee is about Rs 2,047 and our usual service fee is Rs 2,950. As part of this offer, both the appointment fee and our service fee are reduced to just Re 1.' The offer extends to US visa applicants as well. 'For the US, the service fee, which is normally Re 19,940, is also available for Re 1 during the campaign period,' Nahta said. In the case of UK visas, Atlys is waiving even more. 'The standard UK visa fee is Re 15,850, and normally we charge a service fee on top of that. But for this sale, we have slashed all costs and are charging users just Re 1 for everything. No other fees, no hidden costs. That means travellers pay only Re 1 total, with no additional visa or processing fees,' said Nahta. Why is Atlys offering visas at Re 1? According to a 2024 report by the European Commission and Condé Nast Traveller, Indian applicants lost over Rs 664 crore globally in non-refundable visa fees that year. These include payments made for applications that were either refused or withdrawn, as well as fees kept by private agents. 'For the first time, travellers can get visas at a price that feels impossible. We want to challenge what people expect from this industry and prove that global travel can be truly within reach,' Nahta said. Over the past two months, Atlys has seen a sharp rise in interest. Search queries for destinations like Vietnam, Indonesia, Georgia, the UK and the UAE have risen between 18 per cent and 44 per cent, largely driven by Gen Z and millennial travellers from tier 1 and tier 2 cities. 'We anticipate the strongest demand for UAE visas during the sale, followed closely by the UK,' said Nahta. 'Urban millennials and Gen Z from metro cities are likely to drive the most traffic.' Nahta also said that the campaign is a way to increase awareness about Atlys. 'The sale will help us reach a wider audience and allow more users to experience our platform, the seamless application process, and the innovative technology we've integrated to simplify visas,' he said.
