Is it reasonable to levy a "tourist tax" or to collect tourists' wool?

A few years ago, Paris, Rome, London, Amsterdam and other famous European tourist attractions began to levy tourism tax, adding a fee on the basis of the accommodation fee per night, and settling the account uniformly when leaving the store. Later, this form was widely adopted by many countries and regions.

Judging from the situation in recent years, it has become a new international trend to levy a "tourism tax". Obviously, due to the small amount, it has not become an important indicator for tourists to choose tourist destinations. However, with the vigorous development of global tourism, the number of outbound tourists from various countries has greatly increased, and the huge base makes "tourism tax" a new source of income for many countries.

Take Botswana and Japan as examples. Botswana receives more than 6.5438+0.9 million inbound tourists every year (except "countries with the same development in southern Africa"), which also means that Botswana's tourism revenue will increase by more than 5.7 million US dollars every year through the introduction of the tourism tax policy. It is said that this money will be used for environmental protection, scenic spot construction and people's livelihood improvement in the future.

According to the data released by the Japan Tourism Agency, the number of inbound tourists in Japan reached 28.7 million in 20 17, and Japan tentatively imposed a departure tax of 1000 yen (about 60 yuan RMB) on all outbound tourists. In addition to foreign tourists returning home, they also include Japanese citizens who go abroad or travel on business. In other words, once the policy is implemented, Japan will gain at least 28.7 billion yen (about1700 million yuan) every year.

Expert: The "tourism tax" used for infrastructure, environmental protection and public services is reasonable.

The news that many countries have announced the taxation of inbound tourists one after another has brought this tax, which was always neglected in the past, back to attention and aroused a complex and unspeakable emotion in people's hearts. Some netizens commented: "I have been staring at the booking platform for several months, just to grab discounted air tickets and hotels, saving more than ten yuan, and now I have to hand it in." Some tourists even questioned the rationality of levying "tourism tax". "After all, it is not a small amount after one year. I don't know where it will be used."

In this regard, Liu Simin, vice president of the Tourism Branch of China Future Research Association, said that judging whether the "tourism tax" is reasonable mainly depends on its purpose, and whether the "tourism tax" used for infrastructure construction, environmental protection, provision of public services and other purposes is reasonable.

He believes that the main reason for levying tourism tax is that the government should provide public services for inbound tourists. The original intention of tax increase is to balance the interests of local people and foreign tourists in the provision of public facilities and services.

"It turns out that the public services of a country or city are mainly aimed at local residents, and the improvement of public infrastructure comes from the taxation of local residents. In the case of a few foreign tourists, there was no conflict. However, with the increase of foreign tourists, the existing public facilities and services can no longer meet the needs of foreign tourists, so the increase in tourism tax is to provide better public services to foreign tourists. " He explained, "Especially for underdeveloped countries and regions, such as Myanmar and Malaysia, the local economy depends on the development of tourism, but due to the lack of national financial capacity, it is necessary to levy a tourism tax. "

He also pointed out that the rationality of taxation lies in the fact that taxpayers are now enjoying services. It is unreasonable if some countries and cities use this money for local tourism promotion and marketing or publicity of international competitions.

In addition, Liu Simin analyzed that "tourism tax" has become a new international trend, which has no substantial impact on China tourists. First of all, the "tourism tax" introduced by various countries is aimed at all inbound tourists, not just China tourists, so it is not discriminatory. Secondly, tourism tax accounts for a relatively small proportion in the cost of outbound travel, and the acceptance of China tourists is generally high, so it will not be one of the important considerations in choosing outbound travel destinations.