Trump's ‘visa integrity fee' could cause a decline in tourism
The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) initially estimated the fee would generate over $27 billion for the US economy over a decade.
However, a Tourism Economics analysis suggests the fee could cost the United States $11 billion over three years by deterring international visitors.
This potential decline in tourism could lead to reduced visitor spending and job losses, particularly impacting visitors from significant markets like India and Brazil.
The fee is being introduced despite the US already facing a decline in international tourism and ahead of major events such as the 2026 FIFA World Cup and 2028 Summer Olympics.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Spectator
21 minutes ago
- Spectator
The uncomfortable history of Narva
The Alaska talks between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin might have happened on American territory, but the symbolism of their location is a win for the Russian President. Alaska is considerably closer to Russia than it is to the rest of mainland America, and it was once a Russian territory. Putin was returning to a land previously conquered by his people. On Russia's opposite border, to the west, it is Russia's imperial past, and Putin's twisted view of shared history, that worries Europeans. Narva, Estonia's third largest city, is a strange place, and seems even stranger since the full-scale invasion of Ukraine. The Narva river – from which the city gets its name – separates Estonia from Russia; two fortresses stand across each other imposing on the landscape, the 13th century Hermann Castle on the Estonian side and the 15th century Ivangorod Fortress on the Russian side. Two other symbols of Russian influence are hard to miss in the town: the Orthodox Church, and a now abandoned 19th century textiles factory that suffered in the years following the collapse of the USSR. Over 90 per cent of Narva's population speak Russian. This worries many Estonians, who think Putin could invade under the pretext of protecting this minority. For years, Estonia's Russian minority wasn't considered problematic. That has changed since the full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Estonia has begun phasing out Russian as a first language in education and it plans to remove the voting rights of foreign citizens in local elections. In Narva, long queues now form at the aptly named 'Friendship Bridge' – a 162 mile Soviet-era bridge that links Estonia to Russia. Vehicle travel was banned in 2024, and it can take hours to cross now. In recent weeks, Estonia has begun installing metal gates on the bridge for further deterrence. One-hundred-and-thirty miles away in Tallinn, Estonia's modern, bustling and charming capital, opposition to Russia is hard to avoid. The Russian Embassy is in the centre of town and the makeshift riot fences, protecting the building from protestors, are plastered with posters. 'Putin is a Killer' stands out among a sea of red handprints and pictures of the late Alexei Navalny. A smattering of protestors gather every week outside the embassy to protest. This isn't new. It started in 2008 following the Russian invasion of Georgia, but has grown in size since. There are many reminders of Estonia's Soviet past. One of the most imposing buildings on the Tallinn skyline is the high-rise Hotel Viru. The rectangular 1970s block is a prefab building built in 1972 that stands imposing on the outskirts of the old city walls. The hotel is still in use, but it's more popular for the secrets held on its top floor – once upon a time it was the unofficial headquarters of the KGB in Estonia. The floor was out of bounds and, with only foreign dignitaries and visitors allowed to stay in the hotel. It was an open secret that rooms were bugged. In the confusion of the early 1990s as the USSR fell, KGB operatives slowly snuck out of the hotel. Locals were so terrified that it was weeks before they accessed the top floors to discover the spying devices and records left behind. Earlier this year when I toured the building, my Estonian guide told me he felt he could say 'with certainty' that 'the USSR is back'. It sounded like hyperbole, but only this week Estonia declared a Russian diplomat persona non grata. The Baltic memory of Russian espionage runs deep. Estonia became an independent sovereign nation in 1991 for only the second time in its history; both times bookended by Russia, with the former being the collapse of the Russian Empire in 1919. The pattern is the same for its Baltic neighbours Lithuania and Latvia. This history of Russian interference in the Baltics is why Estonians are still uneasy. The Baltic governments of the post-Soviet era were determined not to repeat the mistakes of their first period of collective independence. The countries were swallowed up by the USSR during the second world war and debate still rages between the Baltics, who view it as an occupation, and the Russians, who argue they protected them from the Nazis. The violence and oppression across the Baltics at the hands of the Soviets was so bad that many citizens quietly celebrated when the Nazis occupied them for several years in the middle of the war, though this isn't something many would be keen to highlight. The post-war period heralded almost half a century of Soviet occupation. Once the USSR fell, the Baltic nations lobbied, and fiercely planned, to turn west – and, less than a decade later, they joined both the EU and Nato on the same day. This is what has set the three nations apart from other former parts of the USSR which have faced continuous Russian interference – namely Ukraine and Georgia. The Russian threat for the Baltics remains, however. Estonia and Latvia are vulnerable across their eastern borders with Russia; Lithuania's longest border is with Belarus; and the exclave of Kaliningrad (between Lithuania and Poland) is just 40 miles from the Russian-backed autocracy. An incursion across this strip, the Suwalki Gap, would cut the Baltic nations off from the rest of Europe in one fell swoop. Half a century of Baltic history was determined by the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact, the carving up of Europe between the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany. Many Europeans have long feared that Putin will seek to do similar with Trump. For Estonians, suddenly Alaska doesn't seem so far away.
Telegraph
22 minutes ago
- Telegraph
How Starmer taught Zelensky to speak Trump
It is hard to overplay the sense of despondency and sheer dread felt by Downing Street insiders as they watched Donald Trump and Volodymyr Zelensky trade barbs in the Oval Office. Just 24 hours earlier, on Feb 27, Sir Keir Starmer had pulled off what the media and Labour loyalists alike saw as a diplomatic triumph with his first meeting with the US president. Weeks of preparation had been invested in how the Prime Minister handled that moment, how to strike the balance of massaging Mr Trump's ego while landing the critical UK talking points. The result was delight from the US president at a state visit invitation, support for Sir Keir's deal to give away the Chagos Islands and warm words on a trade deal from the world's most powerful man. How differently Mr Zelensky's meeting went the next day, when he was harangued by JD Vance, the US-vice president, for not saying thank you to America, as Ukraine's allies looked on, horrified. The contrast of those two meetings – and the way the spiralling row in the latter undercut the progress made on Ukraine in the former – left Sir Keir and his team kicking themselves. Why had they not done more to prepare the Ukrainian president as they had their own Prime Minister? Senior Number 10 figures have since told The Telegraph they felt they dropped the ball. As a result, a new approach is being taken by London and other European capitals – one that comes to fruition on Monday when Mr Zelensky travels to Washington not alone but alongside his allies. A similar trip had almost happened within days of the Oval Office skirmish as Sir Keir, Emmanuel Macron, the French president, and others tried to repair the damage done. But those attempts to get Mr Zelensky back to the White House with European leaders in tow ultimately did not come to fruition. The Prime Minister ended up doing something else to project a similar message: Hugging Mr Zelensky outside the black Number 10 front door in an image that showed he was standing by Kyiv's side. Since then, behind the scenes, there has been a deliberate attempt from British ministers and officials to teach the Ukrainian leader how to 'speak Trump'. It is notable that now Mr Zelensky often begins conversations with American counterparts with a word of thanks for all the US support in countering Russia – a nod to what Mr Vance had demanded. Jonathan Powell, Sir Tony Blair's former chief of staff, who, as Sir Keir's national security adviser, is one of the most influential figures in British foreign policy, has worked closely with the Ukrainians on ways they can best achieve their goals with a MAGA White House. Sir Keir's inner circle believe – with some evidence to back up their case – that they have sussed out the best strategy for trying to influence Mr Trump from the outside. The touchstones are: Do not bite on every provocative statement he makes; Do not publicly try to bounce the US president into a corner (for fear of a backlash by pricking his ego). Instead, heap as much praise on Mr Trump in public as is possible and use your influence behind the scenes to nudge him into a position that best suits your national interests. It is notable how Sir Keir's statement after Mr Trump's Alaskan huddle with Vladimir Putin was not one of condemnation but praise at the White House's attempt to secure peace. 'President Trump's efforts have brought us closer than ever before to ending Russia's illegal war in Ukraine,' read the first line of the Starmer statement issued on Saturday. Meanwhile, European allies have clearly reached a similar conclusion to the Prime Minister – that the best chance of avoiding another White House clash on Monday is to be there themselves alongside Mr Zelensky. As well as Sir Keir, Mr Macron, Friedrich Merz, the German chancellor, Ursula von der Leyen, the European Commission president, and Mark Rutte, the Nato secretary general, and others will all be in Washington. Mr Rutte, who bent the knee so far at this summer's Nato summit that he ended up referring to Mr Trump as 'daddy', but in turn won praise for the military alliance at a precarious moment, is a leader who is evidently taking a similar strategy to Sir Keir. But the decision to fly to Washington is also a sign of concern. Getting Europe's most prominent political leaders to rip up their August plans and to rally together many hours of travelling time away from their homes underscores the sense of uncertainty and fear. Two former British ambassadors to Washington told The Telegraph the scramble for the White House shows they know how important it is to unpick Putin's spin. Lord Darroch, who was ambassador during Mr Trump's first term, said: 'This rapidly assembled highest level European delegation accompanying Zelensky to Washington is a sign of profound concern about two aspects of the outcome of the Alaska summit. 'First, the news that President Trump now thinks a comprehensive peace deal should precede a ceasefire. And second, the suggestions that the way to peace could involve Ukraine surrendering still further territory in the Donbas.' Trump was 'rolled over' in Alaska Sir Peter Westmacott, our man in Washington during Barack Obama's tenure, said: 'It indicates to me that the more they look at what happened in Alaska the more they realise that it went badly wrong and that Trump has been rolled over. 'Putin has given nothing and gone home feeling very pleased with himself. So whatever he has talked Trump into believing about Zelensky's responsibility for the conflict, or Russia's right to reconquer its former subjects in eastern Europe, is going to require some pretty robust pushback. 'The president really needs to have a better solution than just thanking Putin for agreeing that he won the election he lost in 2020 and giving up all his threats to sanction Russia simply because Putin says he doesn't want a ceasefire.' Sunday's press conference between Mr Zelensky and Ursula von der Leyen, the European Commission President, revealed many of the points the Euro contingent will be pressing on Monday. One, pushing back on the idea of handing over all of Donbas to Putin. Two, demanding an end to Russia's attacks before proper talks. Three, meaningful security guarantees backed up by the US for Ukraine after peace. There will also be a call for Mr Zelensky, Mr Putin and Mr Trump to get together as a three to negotiate territorial changes – a position Moscow is expected to reject, thereby helping frame Putin, not Mr Zelensky, as the blocker to peace. The Prime Minister travels out on Monday. Sir Keir's team believes he understands how to 'speak Trump'. Being there in person is another attempt to help Mr Zelensky to do likewise, helping Ukraine's cause in the process. Whether the US president hears what he wants is another matter.
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
With Armenia and Azerbaijan, Trump has proven he can broker peace
For over three decades, my country Azerbaijan and our neighbour Armenia have been locked in one of the world's most intractable conflicts. The last 30 years have seen two major conflicts and many smaller skirmishes. During this time, consecutive rounds of peace talks have failed and failed again. But this month in Washington the stars aligned. Azerbaijan and Armenia agreed what the world thought was impossible: an agreement. This may not have happened had it not been for two factors: first, that Azerbaijan had already restored its sovereign borders after a generation when a fifth of its territory was under Armenian occupation and second, because Donald Trump was back in the White House. President Trump welcomed President Ilham Aliyev of Azerbaijan and Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan of Armenia at the White House where they signed a declaration witnessed by President Trump reiterating and reinforcing mutual, irreversible commitment to peace and normalisation, while the two country's foreign ministers initialled the text of the future peace agreement. Azerbaijan and the United States agreed to set up a working group to prepare a strategic partnership charter and ExxonMobil and Socar, Azerbaijan's State Oil Company, inked an MOU on exploration. Adding a great measure of symbolism, President Trump signed a waiver to the infamous Section 907 of the Freedom Support Act, which prohibited U.S. assistance to Azerbaijan, a sore point in bilateral Azerbaijan-U.S. relations since 1992 and a glaring example of a counterproductive, self-defeating piece of legislation driven by narrow special interests at the expense of wider U.S. objectives in the region. Another significant step was a joint letter signed by the two foreign ministers requesting the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) to abolish its long-defunct Minsk Group, a mediating body co-chaired by France, Russia and the United States, which has, over decades, firmly established its absolute inability to produce any progress towards peace between Azerbaijan and Armenia. The importance of this joint letter should not be underestimated as it clearly demonstrates that Azerbaijan and Armenia have left the post-Soviet nightmare of never-ending, externally driven conflict-management behind and are entering the era of normalcy. Moreover, the two nations have fully assumed responsibility for their bilateral relations, exactly as neighbours and sovereign states should. Azerbaijan has long insisted on ending the Minsk Group because that would reflect a commitment to a peaceful future for our region rather than entanglement in the legacy of past conflicts. In fact, as acknowledged by the Armenian leadership, it was Azerbaijan's restoration of its territorial integrity and ending the illegal occupation of Azerbaijani lands that allowed Armenia to assert its sovereignty more forcefully. And normalisation also brings growth and development, including through regional integration and communications. Moreover, it was Azerbaijan's President Ilham Aliyev, who shortly after securing a decisive military success in 2020, proposed a roadmap for peace and normalisation. Over the last five years, the peace process slowly, with some setbacks and interruptions, progressed along the very road map Azerbaijan has suggested already in 2020. This is because over the three decades of conflict with Armenia, the international law was firmly on the side of Azerbaijan and because President Aliyev's vision is based on Azerbaijan's long-standing policy of regional development, shared prosperity and promoting sovereignty of nations in the region. Since early days of independence in 1990s, Azerbaijan has pursued a strategy of expanding partnership and making sure that the economic growth is not limited to Azerbaijan alone but includes partners such as Georgia and Central Asian nations across the Caspian. Today, such growth and path to prosperity can be shared by our neighbour Armenia because of normalisation. Nor is President Trump's support for peace in the Caucasus a new phenomenon. During Trump's first administration – I served as Azerbaijan's ambassador in Washington at the time – the U.S. Government pursued a pragmatic policy of ensuring prosperity in our region. I witnessed first-hand the hard work of the Trump administration in establishing the Abraham Accords and, having attended the Abraham Accords signing ceremony at the White House in September of 2020, I saw President Trump's ability and desire to be a global peacemaker. In fact, this is precisely what President Aliyev recognised and praised openly in July of 2024 at the Shusha Media Forum in Azerbaijan. The United States had previously attempted to address the relations between Azerbaijan and Armenia, under the Clinton administration and more seriously under the George W. Bush administration with Secretary of State Colin Powell presiding over unsuccessful talks in Key West. While I can personally attest to the beautiful setting of Florida Keys as someone present at that time, the premise of the U.S. approach was neither productive, nor sustainable. More recently, the clumsy attempts of the Biden Administration to push through a rushed success driven by special interest groups and ideological narrative predictably backfired causing major damage to U.S. interests in the wider Caspian region. This is why, Trump's approach based on a clear focus on a lasting peace, economic development and genuine interests of both Azerbaijan and Armenia, as well as the United States, is welcome and supported by President Aliyev, whose own strategy is based on a similar vision. In Washington, President Aliyev stated that Azerbaijan and Armenia are closing the page of enmity and confrontation and choosing a lasting peace. President Aliyev and Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan agreed to advance President Trump's nomination for the Nobel Peace Prize. In addition to the most important part, the peace between Azerbaijan and Armenia, such a nomination would have another symbolic connection to our region since it has historically been, at least partially funded by the money the Nobel brothers made from the oil business in Azerbaijan's capital Baku. This is the time to look forward to a prosperous, peaceful future for our region and not listen to the usual naysayers. After all, they too benefit from peace and inclusive economic development.
