US set to lose US$12.5 billion in foreign tourism in 2025: Industry
PARIS: The United States is on track to lose some US$12.5 billion in revenue from foreign tourists this year, a tourism industry group said Thursday (May 15), as the Trump administration has led a crackdown in immigrants.
The study by the World Travel and Tourism Council (WTTC) and Oxford Economics found that the United States was the only country set to see a drop in spending from foreign tourists this year.
The drop to US$181 billion in spending by foreign tourists will put it 22.5 percent from the peak set a decade ago.
The WTTC, made up of leading travel firms, said this "represents a direct blow to the US economy overall, impacting communities, jobs, and businesses from coast to coast".
WTTC president Julia Simpson said that government support was needed to ensure tourism growth.
"While other nations are rolling out the welcome mat, the US government is putting up the 'closed' sign," she said in a statement.
With President Donald Trump leading a crackdown on illegal immigration, making politically charged comments about other nations, and slapping tariffs on foreign goods, there have been numerous efforts by consumers in other countries to boycott US products and calls to skip travel to the United States.
Visitors 'fearful'
Simpson told the New York Times that some foreign travellers were afraid to travel to the United States.
"There are also concerns over visas, whether they've got the right visa or might accidentally get arrested, which has made people quite fearful," she was quoted as saying.
The report highlighted US Department of Commerce data showing sharp drops in March 2020 arrivals from key countries, including nearly 15 per cent drops from Britain and South Korea.
The drops were over 20 per cent from Germany, Ireland and Spain.
The report also noted other data showing a 20 per cent drop in early summer bookings from Canada.
"This is more than a dip. It's a wake-up call," said the WTTC.
"The US is welcoming fewer visitors from its neighbours and countries further afield, which is a clear indicator that the global appeal of the US is slipping."
Meanwhile, the report found that US citizens are travelling abroad more, further hurting the US travel sector.
In 2024, the tourism sector contributed US$2.6 trillion to the US economy and supported more than 20 million jobs. It also contributed more than US$585 billion in tax revenues, or almost 7 per cent of the total.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNA
2 hours ago
- CNA
Commentary: The Johor-Singapore SEZ will need a lot of energy – nuclear power might be the key
SINGAPORE: The Johor-Singapore Special Economic Zone (JS-SEZ) is set to become a defining project for industrial and economic collaboration between Malaysia and Singapore. What the new economic corridor will need is stable, 24/7 carbon-free energy. Both countries face energy challenges that could undermine the long-term viability of the JS-SEZ. It is an opportunity for a strategic nuclear partnership. Singapore relies heavily on imported natural gas for electricity, exposing it to volatile prices and supply risks. It aims to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050, but electricity demand is expected to grow by 3 per cent to 5 per cent every year. Malaysia intends to increase its renewable energy capacity to 40 per cent by 2035, but intermittency (how consistently supply can be generated) and dispatchability (how supply can be adjusted to meet off-on demand) are challenging at a large scale. Current clean energy solutions can't quite keep up with the energy-intensive sectors like heavy manufacturing and data centres the JS-SEZ counts on attracting. Solar energy cannot provide round-the-clock reliability even with battery energy storage, while hydrogen is expensive and lacks infrastructure and regulations for large industrial applications. Nuclear energy, on the other hand, offers a more realistic solution. It has been proven to provide reliable baseload electricity with zero emissions, such as in France, Spain, South Korea and the United States. NUCLEAR ENERGY MAKES STRATEGIC SENSE Incorporating a nuclear energy partnership into the JS-SEZ framework would offer multiple benefits. Consider the Krsko Nuclear Power Plant, located in Slovenia near the Croatian border. Slovenia and Croatia each own a 50 per cent stake, sharing the electrical output and responsibility for nuclear waste equally. Krsko has delivered stable electricity to both countries for decades. A similar model could work for the JS-SEZ, bringing together Malaysia land availability and regulatory readiness and Singapore's financing capabilities and intention to import clean energy from the region. Malaysia and Singapore already have an electricity interconnector that allows energy to be transferred between the two national grids. It is currently used to import renewable electricity from Laos to Singapore, and from Malaysia to Singapore, with remaining capacity to carry more. There is also opportunity for collective technology transfer and supply chain development. Japan, South Korea and China have strengthened domestic nuclear industries, creating skilled jobs and new export options, through partnerships with established nuclear states. The JS-SEZ could do the same for Malaysia and Singapore. Talent development is already stated as a goal of the JS-SEZ. Nuclear energy requires a highly skilled and well-educated workforce. Both Malaysia and Singapore have the ability and the motivation to form academic and vocational training programmes supporting the nuclear energy sector. A joint nuclear project would also position Singapore and Malaysia as leaders within the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) in the area of civilian nuclear cooperation, which would shape the region's future and spur international investment. MOVING FROM CONCEPT TO REALITY Such an extraordinary partnership will not be easy to pull off. But there is a clear path to success that builds on the existing relationship between the two countries and past efforts. Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) in particular, are promising. They are safer, more flexible and require less capital investment than traditional large-scale reactors, as seen in countries that have already deployed or are actively pursuing deployment of SMRs. Singapore and Malaysia have the opportunity to benefit from their expertise and experience. Another critical step is to develop a transparent ownership and governance framework. Financing via public-private partnerships makes sense, in the context of JS-SEZ. And international best practices illustrate how to balance risk with reward while ensuring strict adherence to regulatory compliance. Most importantly, a bilateral task force could assess the feasibility of a shared nuclear facility and address concerns over nuclear safety, security and safeguards. A task force provides a platform to jointly engage all stakeholders, especially strategic international partners. This is critical: Engaging with established nuclear states, as well as independent technical organisations, experts and think tanks are necessary for success. This ecosystem approach would boost Malaysia and Singapore's access to the latest technology and maximise economic, social and environmental benefits. A BOLD STEP FOR THE FUTURE There are steps that both countries can take on their ends too. Singapore, as a global finance centre, could prioritise a policy and sustainable investment framework to allow a cross-border nuclear project, followed by a dedicated investment fund. It could accelerate research and regulatory development to shorten the runway to nuclear readiness. The need for a Singapore nuclear energy programme implementation organisation (NEPIO) will quickly emerge. MyPOWER, under the Malaysia Ministry for Energy Transition and Water Transformation, has been tasked as the country's NEPIO. Singapore could also expand education and training programmes to create a talent pool within the next decade, establishing its scientists, engineers, policymakers, and finance and legal professionals as leaders in the field. Malaysia could focus on its nuclear energy policy and regulatory environment. Establishing a clear roadmap for nuclear energy deployment that includes JS-SEZ is necessary to facilitate confidence. Malaysia could also build on the strength of the Malaysia Nuclear Agency to help establish the state of Johor as a regional hub for nuclear energy services attracting international technology and engineering companies and promoting local supply chains that support the nuclear industry. THE PUBLIC FACTOR As with all discussions around nuclear energy – and reasonably so – much attention is needed to address domestic social and political sensitivities and geopolitical considerations. Both nations should collaborate to address public concerns about nuclear safety and waste management. Again, there are international examples to follow. South Korea and Finland engaged with their citizens to build support for nuclear adoption. A Singapore-Malaysia endeavour would also need to proactively be transparent in communication and initiate public consultations and educational initiatives to help shape public attitudes. Singapore and Malaysia can take bold steps toward nuclear collaboration, ensuring a resilient, low-carbon future for the JS-SEZ and beyond.
CNA
2 hours ago
- CNA
Commentary: Trump's tariffs are likely to outlast him
WASHINGTON: Effective opposition to US President Donald Trump's trade policies has yet to pop its head above the parapet. Old-school pro-trade types are sidelined – consoling themselves, perhaps, that the protectionist turn will reverse once the costs are clearer. Be patient, we tell ourselves: This, too, shall pass. Will it? I don't doubt that the policies will fail. By itself, however, that won't restore the pre-Trump era. The reason is not, or not only, our diminishing capacity for good government. I'm also not assuming that MAGA economics will endure because Democrats will keep on losing elections. Depending on what happens in the mid-terms, and in 2028, the new economic order might be modified, but it's unlikely to be abandoned. Now that Republicans are converted to the cause, the post-neoliberal core of MAGA economics – use trade barriers to reshape the economy – commands a broad US consensus. The White House has encountered setbacks in the courts, and critics rightly say the execution has been a shambles, but it has many levers to pull on tariffs, and the purpose is widely endorsed. Support for the liberal trading order founded after 1945 has evaporated. When the costs of the new protectionism become more visible, the quarrel will be between Trump-style trade warriors and opponents who aim to do the same, but more skilfully. TRADE POLICY REDEFINED The president has redefined normal trade policy. Talk of TACO (Trump Always Chickens Out) is misleading. True, the administration has veered back and forth on tariffs, one day threatening extraordinarily high barriers, the next, after financial-market blowback, lowering or pausing them while it negotiates. Yes, by the standards of his most audacious threats, today's average effective tariff of roughly 15 per cent looks timid. But measured against pre-Trump, it's still transformative, and so is the thinking that underpins it. The presumption in favour of low or zero tariffs is gone. So is the idea that trade is positive-sum, and that a multilateral rule-based system is the best way to realise the gains. When the administration last week doubled US tariffs on steel and aluminium from 25 per cent to 50 per cent, the reaction wasn't, 'What on earth are they thinking?' It was, 'Well, that doesn't much change the overall average.' All by itself, the so-called 'baseline (that is, universal) reciprocal' tariff of 10 per cent renounces the post-war trading order – and it's already seen as no big deal. This new Washington Consensus isn't the only factor. Many businesses are pushing back against the new tariffs, arguing that the barriers will boost costs, disrupt supply chains and turn earlier investments into losses. But once they've adapted to the new regime, the same calculations will push the other way: Please don't change the rules again. In addition, domestic producers facing less competition from abroad will be able to raise their prices. Once they start collecting the rents created by trade barriers, they'll favour retaining them, or maybe raising them further. FISCAL CONSEQUENCES Perhaps the most important force cementing tariffs in place will be their fiscal consequences. This came into sharper focus last week when the Congressional Budget Office did an official score of the revenues the new taxes will raise. According to the CBO's numbers, if the new tariffs imposed between Jan 6 and May 13 stick (30 per cent on imports from China and Hong Kong, 25 per cent on cars and auto parts, the 10 per cent baseline tariff, the 25 per cent tariff on steel and aluminium, and partial 25 per cent tariffs on products from Canada and Mexico), they would reduce budget deficits by US$2.8 trillion over the next 10 years. This takes account of lower debt-interest payments, slightly slower economic growth, and inflation 0.4 percentage points higher this year and next. Nearly US$3 trillion is an enormous sum, even by US budget standards – and as public debt continues to grow, the government will need that money. In discussions over the budget Bill before Congress, projected tariff revenues aren't directly involved. Official and unofficial scorers focus on the effects of the Bill on projected deficits and debt while leaving tariffs to one side – they aren't in the measure, they're the result of executive action not legislation, and in the past the revenues have been both modest and stable, hence barely worth discussing. That's going to change. Revenues are revenues, as US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent points out. If tariffs raise US$3 trillion over the next 10 years, that matters a lot. Added to the budget Bill, they even simulate fiscal responsibility. To be clear, even US$3 trillion wouldn't come close to stabilising projected public debt. But it would be enough to cover most of the new fiscal losses in the forthcoming budget Bill. (It wouldn't cover all of them, as Bessent claims, because scores of the Bill ignore the front-end loading, 'temporary' measures and other accounting gimmickry which disguise its full likely cost.) More to the point, once it becomes routine to fold tariffs into discussions of fiscal sustainability, bringing the barriers back down will be hard. When the fiscal crunch comes and public debt demands immediate attention, as it must, policymakers will have to select from, say, higher income taxes, lower health-insurance subsidies and limits on social security payments. Alternatively, higher tariffs. If you see tariffs as a tax on foreigners not Americans – another misconception fostered by the new orthodoxy – the answer is obvious. Economic policy regimes can shift, as we've just witnessed. So there's hope: Restoring the old trade order isn't impossible. The question is how much damage, over how many years, will be needed to force another big rethink. Right now, I see few grounds for optimism.
CNA
4 hours ago
- CNA
Oracle beats quarterly results estimates on cloud services demand, shares rise
Oracle beat Wall Street estimates for fourth-quarter results on Wednesday, boosted by growing demand for its cloud offerings from companies deploying artificial intelligence, sending its shares up 7 per cent after the bell. The company's growth is largely nurtured by its Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI) solution and support for AI workloads. Analysts see the company becoming more of a cloud service provider that relies less on software growth. "We expect our total cloud growth rate — applications plus infrastructure — will increase from 24 per cent in fiscal year 2025 to over 40 per cent in fiscal year 2026," said CEO Safra Catz. Revenue for the quarter ended May 31 stood at $15.90 billion, compared with the analysts' average estimate of $15.59 billion, according to data compiled by LSEG. Quarterly revenue at Oracle's largest unit, cloud services and license support, grew 14 per cent to $11.70 billion from last year. Oracle has also been introducing AI assistants, advisers and agents. Its AI Agent Studio, announced in March, is designed to help customers and partners build their own customized AI agents.
