Florida Tourism Change Sparks Warning: 'Sounding the Alarm'
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources.
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
Florida's tourism industry leaders are raising concerns over proposed legislation that could dismantle the existing tourism promotion infrastructure.
Newsweek reached out to state Rep. Monique Miller, one of the sponsors of the bill, via email on Tuesday.
Why It Matters
Florida's tourism industry is one of the largest drivers of the state's economy, generating billions in tax revenue and supporting hundreds of thousands of jobs.
Industry leaders are warning that redirecting funding away from tourism promotion could reduce visitor numbers and weaken a vital stream of income for the state.
What To Know
In Florida the Tourist Development Tax, a levy collected from visitors staying at short-term rentals, has traditionally been used to fund local tourism marketing efforts through Tourist Development Councils.
However, two new bills—House Bill 1221 and House Bill 7033—aim to dissolve the Tourist Development Councils and instead redirect the tax revenue to offset property taxes.
Tourists relax on the beach in Miami Beach, Florida, on March 18, 2020. Florida's tourism industry is raising concerns over proposed legislation that could affect the industry.
Tourists relax on the beach in Miami Beach, Florida, on March 18, 2020. Florida's tourism industry is raising concerns over proposed legislation that could affect the industry.
CHANDAN KHANNA/AFP via Getty Images
Under HB 1221, counties would have to reapprove their Tourist Development Tax every eight years or lose it, making funding for tourism promotion more unstable or uncertain.
Supporters of the proposal argue that shifting the revenue toward property tax relief would ease the financial burden on residents.
But tourism industry leaders warn that cutting funding for tourism promotion could hurt the industry and threaten a critical source of income for the state.
One industry leader said they are "sounding the alarm" over the bill, while another said the changes could put Florida's tourism economy "on a never-ending treadmill of uncertainty."
What People Are Saying
Robert Skrob, executive director of the Florida Attractions Association, said: "For weeks, we've been sounding the alarm about House Bill 1221 by Representative Monique Miller (R)—a proposal that would force all Tourist Development Taxes (TDTs) to expire every eight years, placing Florida's tourism economy on a never-ending treadmill of uncertainty."
He added that a new amendment "not only maintains the damaging 8-year sunset provision—it completely eliminates the ability of counties to use TDTs for their intended purpose: promoting tourism."
Milton Segarra, President and CEO of Discover The Palm Beaches, said: "If we disrupt that balance to the level of what this particular legislation is proposing, to really defund this model, it will have very negative impacts, including the loss of thousands of jobs, not only here in Palm Beach County, but across the state."
Rep. Monique Miller told the House State Affairs Committee: "Tourists flock here to spend their money. This bill gives local governments more control over these taxes and the power to use tax revenues to make Florida more affordable for its residents."
"People are losing their homes. We have to bring them relief. This is a way to bring them immediate relief."
What Happens Next
The proposal has been passed by the state House and now faces deliberation by the state Senate.
Tourism industry leaders are likely to continue lobbying against the bills and warning lawmakers about the long-term economic risks.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
9 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Grocery Outlet Sued Over False Savings, 'Fictitious' Price Comparisons
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Grocery Outlet, a discount supermarket chain known for its "Bargain Market" branding, is facing a class-action lawsuit in Oregon over allegations of deceptive pricing practices. Newsweek contacted Grocery Outlet for comment via email outside of usual working hours on Saturday. Why It Matters Grocery Outlet Inc. is a California corporation that does business in Oregon through its branded grocery outlet locations. Since 1971, Oregon law has protected consumers from the use of unfair and deceptive reference pricing practices. The lawsuit, as reported by Grocery Dive, was filed in Multnomah County Circuit Court on Monday and claims that the retailer systematically used fabricated "elsewhere" prices to create the illusion of significant savings, violating Oregon's Unlawful Trade Practices Act. "This putative class action arises from a widespread and coordinated scheme by Grocery Outlet Inc. and its affiliated Oregon operators to mislead consumers through the use of fictitious 'elsewhere' pricing," the lawsuit states. "Defendants systematically advertised grocery items with inflated or fabricated reference prices—purportedly representing competitor pricing—without identifying the source of those comparisons, as required by Oregon law," the lawsuit adds. "These deceptive practices created the illusion of significant savings," the filing continued, "when, in fact, consumers often paid the same or more than they would have at other local retailers." The lawsuit claims that Grocery Outlet's pricing strategy violates "multiple provisions of Oregon's Unlawful Trade Practices Act and related regulations, including prohibitions against false or misleading price comparisons and requirements for transparency in advertising discounts." File photo: The exterior of a Grocery Outlet store is seen on February 25, 2025 in San Rafael, California. File photo: The exterior of a Grocery Outlet store is seen on February 25, 2025 in San Rafael, To Know The complaint has been brought by three Oregon consumers, named as Schearon Stewart, John Franz, and Roger Sullivan, and represented by OCJ Law, P.C., in partnership with Oregon Consumer Justice. The complaint alleges that Grocery Outlet advertised inflated or fictitious reference prices without identifying the source of those comparisons, as required by Oregon law. In some instances, the lawsuit claims that the "elsewhere" prices cited by the retailer were higher than the actual prices offered by nearby competitors. The filing alleges that "the violations are rampant within the stores," citing as an example: "Tide pods at Grocery Outlet in King City are sold for $12.99 with a stated 'elsewhere' price of $18.99." However, the lawsuit cites that "there is no competitor in the same geographic area called 'elsewhere' and the reference price use of that term is prohibited by Oregon law. "Second, a survey of the grocery stores in the same geographic area shows the actual prices of that same product never approached $18.99. Instead, at the nearest competitors it was priced for $12.99 (Fred Meyers) and $12.97 (Walmart)." File photos: One of the "elsewhere" signs named in the lawsuit is seen on display; and the exterior of Grocery Outlet in Salem, Oregon. File photos: One of the "elsewhere" signs named in the lawsuit is seen on display; and the exterior of Grocery Outlet in Salem, Oregon. Lawsuit/ Google street view/Lawsuit/ Google street view "These deceptive practices created the illusion of significant savings, when in fact, consumers often paid the same or more than they would have at other local retailers," the lawsuit alleges, as reported by Supermarket News. Law firm Tycko & Zavareei LLP said that the lawsuit seeks injunctive and equitable relief to stop the alleged unlawful conduct and hold Grocery Outlet accountable. Plaintiffs intend to amend the complaint to seek monetary damages on behalf of the class after the statutory notice period under Oregon law has expired. What People Are Saying F. Peter Silva II, attorney at Tycko & Zavareei LLP, said: "This case is about fairness and transparency. Oregon law is clear: if you advertise a discount, you must be honest about where that comparison comes from. Grocery Outlet's use of vague and unverifiable 'elsewhere' prices deprived consumers of the ability to make informed purchasing decisions and unfairly competed with other businesses." What Happens Next The lawsuit states the plaintiffs, "representing a class of similarly situated Oregon consumers, seek injunctive and equitable relief to halt these practices and hold Defendants accountable for the financial harm caused by their unlawful conduct." The case adds to Grocery Outlet's legal troubles, as the company is dealing with a separate lawsuit, filed earlier this year, relating to security fraud. The lawsuit is the latest in a series targeting grocers over their pricing and promotional tactics. Last year, as reported by Grocery Dive, Albertsons agreed to a $3.9 million settlement following a civil complaint that claimed the retailer unlawfully overcharged customers. More recently, Publix was hit with a class-action lawsuit alleging it overcharged shoppers for discounted items sold by weight, including meats, cheeses, and deli products.
Newsweek
28 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Map Reveals 'Russia's Plans' That Would Cross Trump's Red Line
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Russia plans to seize half of Ukraine by the end of next year, according to Kyiv, which has released a map outlining purported territorial expansion plans that could put Moscow on a collision course with President Donald Trump's repeated calls for peace talks. Ukrainian Presidential Office Deputy Head Colonel Pavlo Palisa made the claims, and they were followed by Trump warning that he would use further sanctions against Moscow if the war dragged on. Newsweek has contacted the White House and the Kremlin for comment. File photo: Donald Trump shakes hands with Vladimir Putin (right) in Helsinki on July 16, 2018. File photo: Donald Trump shakes hands with Vladimir Putin (right) in Helsinki on July 16, It Matters The map presented by Kyiv shows territorial intentions far beyond the formal demands Moscow has made before it would agree to a ceasefire. But Trump has warned of further sanctions on Russia if it drags out peace negotiations. A bipartisan sanctions bill in the U.S. seeks to impose a 500-percent levy on imports from countries that buy Russian oil and raw materials. What To Know Palisa told reporters Thursday that Russia intends to capture all of Ukraine's Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts by September 1 and create a buffer zone along the northern Ukrainian-Russian border by the end of this year. Palisa also said Moscow intended to occupy all of Ukraine on the east (left) bank of the Dnieper River and capture the regions of Odesa and Mykolaiv by the end of 2026, which would deprive Ukraine of access to the Black Sea. The Institute for the Study of War (ISW) published a map Palisa had presented. It pointed to Moscow's plans to seize roughly 85,000 additional square miles of Ukrainian territory and hold a total of 129,000 square miles by the end of 2026, over half the total area of Ukraine. Yuriy Boyechko, founder of Hope for Ukraine, which helps those living on the front line, told Newsweek that Moscow will not stop its current offensive until December and warned that it will occupy new regions of Ukraine by the end of 2025. However, the Washington, D.C., think tank ISW said Friday that Russian forces are highly unlikely to be able to make the advances Palisa suggested in this time frame, given the current pace of Moscow's advances, and if Ukraine continues to receive Western aid. The ISW said that Palisa's map suggests Moscow will try to seize and leverage positions in Zaporizhzhia and Dnipropetrovsk regions to push on and capture all of Donetsk and Luhansk. This graphic from the Institute for the Study of War (ISW) shows what Ukraine said on June 5 2025 are Russia's territorial expansion plans. This graphic from the Institute for the Study of War (ISW) shows what Ukraine said on June 5 2025 are Russia's territorial expansion plans. Institute for the Study of War Russian forces would also purportedly try to seize Kherson Oblast and create a "buffer zone" along the border in northern Ukraine by the end of this year. But neither of these scenarios is likely in this period, the ISW said. In Donetsk, Russia had only advanced around 30 miles from the outskirts of Avdiivka in the last 15 months. Moscow would struggle to capture the rest of Kherson region, which required crossing the Dnieper River, the ISW added. But Russia's plans as described by Palisa far exceed Moscow's formal territorial demands it has made as terms to any ceasefire or long-term peace deal, which Trump has pushed for. U.S. Bipartisan Sanctions Bill The Wall Street Journal reported that the White House is trying to get Republican Senator Lindsey Graham to soften the "bone crushing" sanctions bill against Russia he introduced along with Democratic Senator Richard Blumenthal. However, Trump administration officials have called on Graham to water down the legislation, congressional aides told the WSJ by inserting waivers allowing Trump to choose which entities get sanctioned and changing the word "shall" to "may." Republican Senator Roger Wicker said on Wednesday said that Trump had asked the Senate to postpone voting on the bill, which, if implemented, would impose measures that include: a 500 percent tariff on imports from any country that buys Russian oil, gas, uranium and other products. the prohibition of any investments by U.S. financial institutions that benefit the Russian government. the prohibition on listing or trading of Russian entities on United States securities exchanges. sanctions on financial institutions linked to the Russian Government, such as the Russian Central Bank, and Russian banks. sanctions on Russian officials, including Putin, his cabinet ministers and military chiefs. Boyechko, from Hope for Ukraine, told Newsweek that tough U.S. sanctions were essential to maintaining American credibility, especially after what he described as a "complete disaster" for U.S. diplomacy in the past four months in which Putin ignored Trump's 30-day ceasefire proposal. "Putin used the four months of empty peace talks to regroup, and now the Russians have begun their summer offensive campaign, taking over 100 square kilometers [38 square miles] of new territory, including some villages in the Sumy region," Boyechko added. What People Are Saying Ukrainian Presidential Office Deputy Head Colonel Pavlo Palisa said Thursday: Russia's "plan for next year is to occupy the whole part of Ukraine which is situated on the left bank of the Dnieper River," and "occupy the Odesa and Mykolaiv regions to cut Ukraine's access to the Black Sea." President Donald Trump said about U.S. sanctions: "If I think Russia will not be making a deal or stopping the bloodshed … I'll use it if it's necessary." He added: "I'm OK with it. I haven't decided to use it. It's a very strong bill." Yuriy Boyechko, founder of Hope for Ukraine, told Newsweek: "Russians will not stop their offensive until November or December, so, unless the U.S. and Western allies get serious by applying severe sanctions and getting more weapons to Ukraine, we are looking at new regions of Ukraine occupied by Russians by the end of 2025." What Happens Next Regardless of the battlefield predictions made by Kyiv, all eyes will be on what Trump does regarding the U.S. bipartisan bill against Russia; Graham said it has the backing of 72 senators and sufficient support in the House of Representatives. .
New York Post
29 minutes ago
- New York Post
‘The girls are fighting' AOC mocks Trump-Musk break-up
She had her popcorn ready. A smug Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez had a snarky six-word comment for broken-up bros President Trump and former 'First Buddy' Elon Musk. 'Oh man . . . the girls are fighting, aren't they?' the socialist lawmaker gloated in a story she shared to her 9.2 million Instagram followers Friday. Advertisement 3 AOC gloated as she commented on the bromance beak-up. instagram/aoc The gleeful remark, which came outside the US Capitol, was in response to a journalist asking the New York congresswoman for her two cents on the highly public spat. 3 Big, beautiful break up: President Trump and former 'First Buddy' Elon Musk are no longer an item. AFP via Getty Images Advertisement AOC, who previously blasted the once-burgeoning bromance and called Musk 'one of the most unintelligent billionaires I have ever met,' went on to say, 'I told you so.' 'This was something that was a long time coming. . . . These two huge egos were not long for being together in this world as friends,' she mocked. 'We'll see what the impacts of it are legislatively.' 3 The two men engaged in a public spat this week, trading insults on their respective platforms. Getty Images Advertisement AOC previously slammed Trump's big beautiful bill — which is at the center of the feud between the former BFFs. The social media tiff escalated quite quickly this week, after Musk called Trump's budget bill a 'pork-filled . . . abomination,' and the president accused the Tesla CEO of having 'lost his mind.'
