Visiting New Zealand is about to get more expensive, as the country is drastically increasing the fee it charges international visitors…
In this post:
New Zealand international visitor levy increasing to 100 NZD
New Zealand requires visitors from visa waiver countries to apply for an Electronic Travel Authority (ETA) prior to travel, as is the case with many countries around the world. Not only does applying for the ETA incur a fee, but the country also charges an International Visitor Conservation and Tourism Levy (IVL), which is intended “to ensure visitors contribute to public services and high-quality experiences while visiting New Zealand.”
The IVL was first introduced in July 2019, and costs 35 NZD (~22 USD) per visitor. The cost of this is about to increase drastically — as of October 1, 2024, New Zealand’s IVL will increase to 100 NZD (~66 USD) per visitor, so that means it’s nearly tripling. Here’s how the country justifies this move:
“The Government is serious about enabling the tourism sector to grow as part of our overall goal of doubling exports in 10 years. International tourism plays a hugely important role in the New Zealand economy, with international visitors spending over $11 billion in the year ending March 2024.”
“But international tourism also comes with costs to local communities, including additional pressure on regional infrastructure and higher upkeep and maintenance costs across our conservation estate. The IVL was introduced in 2019 as a mechanism to ensure international visitors were contributing directly to these costs, the vast majority of which are paid for by New Zealand taxpayers and ratepayers.”
“A $100 IVL would generally make up less than 3 per cent of the total spending for an international visitor while in New Zealand, meaning it is unlikely to have a significant impact on visitor numbers. Increasing the IVL means we can continue to grow international tourism to support economic growth while ensuring international visitors contribute to high-value conservation areas and projects, such as supporting biodiversity in national parks and other highly visited areas and improving visitor experiences on public conservation land.”
My take on New Zealand increasing its visitor fee
In general, I of course prefer that countries have as few barriers to tourism as possible. The more of a headache and the more costly it is to visit a destination, the less appealing it is to many prospective travelers. That being said, I suspect New Zealand will have no issues getting away with this.
For one, New Zealand is a fairly high-end tourist destination. It’s not Bali or Phuket, as most people traveling to New Zealand aren’t just looking for a cheap way to party. New Zealand has so much natural beauty, and there’s no country quite like it.
If the international visitor levy is actually used for the purposes claimed — to ensure visitors contribute to public services — then I think that’s fair enough. However, is that actually how the money ends up getting spent? I dunno…
As you’d expect, the country’s tourism association opposes these changes, claiming that “New Zealand’s tourism recovery is falling behind the rest of the world, and this will further dent our global competitiveness.”
Keep in mind the tourism levy was only introduced in the middle of 2019, and months later, the world shut down due to the pandemic. New Zealand’s borders stayed closed longer than just about anywhere else in the world, so New Zealand is definitely a bit behind when it comes to its recovery.
Currently New Zealand’s tourism numbers are about 80% of what they were pre-pandemic, while tourism spending is about 95% of what it was pre-pandemic.
Bottom line
Visiting New Zealand is about to get more expensive. In addition to needing an Electronic Travel Authority (ETA), visitors also need to pay an International Visitor Conservation and Tourism Levy (IVL). As of October 2024, the cost of this will increase from 35 NZD to 100 NZD.
While that’s a drastic increase, I doubt this will materially impact the number of visitors who choose to travel to the country, given the type of visitors that New Zealand gets. Then again, if New Zealand has the goal of drastically increasing tourism spending, then I don’t think this will help…
What do you make of New Zealand’s new tourism levy?
New Zealand's economy is really struggling (do you all even know this?), so this is how they come up with tax revenue. Makes sense, I don't see why everyone is complaining.
This may affect how many Aussies pop over for a weekend trip but will affect 0 people coming from the states. If an extra $35 is going to stop you, then you really had no intention of going in the first place!
As for how the money is used, that's up to NZ. You hope it will be used to fund tourist related infrastructure maintenance but, if not, oh well.
Leaving NZ on my bucket list.
“If you are travelling on an Australian passport, you do not need a visa or NZeTA before you travel. We will normally give you an Australian Resident Visa when you arrive — but you must meet the character requirements of this visa.”
I think first countries should stop this electronic authorization crap.
Either to enter country you need visa or not.
Earlier eta was suppose to be just login and let government know someone is entering country
but no or very less fees.
As far spending this money on tourism I doubt last year during my visit saw many
trails in the parks both in south and north islands were closed, some more than
one year waiting for repair and no one is working.
This is the kind of tax governments love: the ones paying the tax have zero votes. Still, a US$62 hit won't affect many. And, for those of us who visit annually, you pay that only every other year.
I'm curious if this has the potential to have some fallout for NZ passport holders. Many visa-free agreements are predicated on reciprocity. Officially, the ESTA program allows fees to be charged by reciprocal countries, only if they are nominal and cover actual costs. By charging this tax, NZ seems to be out of compliance for ESTA
Note the (hefty) IVL is a tourism levy, so it's ON TOP OF the visa
We all know the money isn’t going to be used for what they say. This will be going to “refuge3s” and tourists will pay for it.
In the big scheme of things and extra $44 on a $1500 economy ticket ain’t gonna change most people’s travel plans…
Refugees?! Not with the conservatives in power it won't.
For November I was planning a trip to New Zealand, booked all flights and accommodation, but I am not happy with the much higher visa costs. Is it possible to apply before Oct. 1, and enter the country in Nov.?
Well if September 3 today. So if you apply before Oct1 you won’t pay the fee ♂️♂️
It is Sep 3*
Thanks for your response. I was just wondering, because with some countries' visas you only have a limited time before you have to validate the visa by entering the country
So damn funny to see people take this news and make idiotic "political" statements. LOL!
New Zealand has a huge budget black hole after profligate spending by the last 'progressive' government, and they have to plug it any way they can. Spending is being cut, & some taxes must be raised. Taxing international visitors increases revenue without further burden on NZ citizens and residents. If the bumbling imbeciles who ran the place from 2017-2023 hadn't squandered untold billions trying to turn NZ into a green socialist equity Utopia, this wouldn't...
New Zealand has a huge budget black hole after profligate spending by the last 'progressive' government, and they have to plug it any way they can. Spending is being cut, & some taxes must be raised. Taxing international visitors increases revenue without further burden on NZ citizens and residents. If the bumbling imbeciles who ran the place from 2017-2023 hadn't squandered untold billions trying to turn NZ into a green socialist equity Utopia, this wouldn't be necessary. Besides, in comparison to what the UK charges for its Air Passenger Duty, NZ$100 is nothing. It's the cost of a decent bottle of Central Otago pinot noir at a restaurant in Auckland or Wellington.
Totally Jacinda Ardern totally wrecked New Zealand. She was more interested in marketing herself for her next gig than doing the right thing for New Zealand. New Zealand is faced with many years of high tax to pay for the overspending she did in her time in government. Now she’s nowhere to be seen. She can’t even walk down the street in New Zealand any more after what she did.
This is for the people of NZ to decide, the country as a whole.
And only from an observation from the States, this will affect no one's decision to travel...travelers from the US aren't affected by this minor amount.
For heavans sake, do you really think all local taxation should be voted on by the global community??
Have you US folks not noticed local hotel taxes and fees we have to pay??
So the money that tourists spend at hotels, restaurants, and excursions isn't enough? That's essentially the government admitting they don't know how to manage a budget and they are spending beyond their means, and now the only way to get more into their coffers is to tax the tourists even more.
Your info source?
It’s a scam fee. Let’s just be honest and say so.
Important things to note:
The price of the ETA has also increased since 2019. It was originally $9 NZD when done with the app ($12 online). It's now $17 with the app, $23 online. So the total cost will go from $44 NZD to $117.
The ETA is good for 2 years, unlike the Aussie one that is good for 12 months.
The danger of any purpose driven tax is that it may not be spent for this purpose or funds previously assigned to this purpose are directed to other causes. In the end it is just one addition to a big pool of income to the government.
I enjoyed my visit to New Zealand and feel that my spending at restaurants, shops, transportation and accommodation should be considered a sufficient economic contribution.
This should help keep out the fiff raff.
Nah, Aussies still get in for free.
“A $100 IVL would generally make up less than 3 per cent of the total spending for an international visitor while in New Zealand, meaning it is unlikely to have a significant impact on visitor numbers."
This would mean that each individual visitor is spending over NZ$3,333, or US$2,000 (and so US$4,000 for a couple, US$8,000 for a family of four etc). This would be spending excluding airfare since they say it is spending "while...
“A $100 IVL would generally make up less than 3 per cent of the total spending for an international visitor while in New Zealand, meaning it is unlikely to have a significant impact on visitor numbers."
This would mean that each individual visitor is spending over NZ$3,333, or US$2,000 (and so US$4,000 for a couple, US$8,000 for a family of four etc). This would be spending excluding airfare since they say it is spending "while in" the country.
Though the fee does not apply to tourists from Australia (which is by far the largest source of tourists, double every other country combined) and many Pacific Islands, it seems pretty unlikely that the median (they said "generally", not "on average") is over US$2,000.
Also note that if each tourist is spending >US$2000 while inside the country, then each is also paying >US$300 in GST (VAT).
It seems unfair to imply that tourists are not "contributing" to the costs the national and local governments face, given that US$300 per person almost certainly exceeds by far the proportionate share of government services used by each person while in the country, including the services mentioned specifically.
Fewer people and more spending per person? Sounds like The Dream!
This kind of thinking is why Harris says she will make the rich pay then turn around and tax frequent flyer awards at an inflated business class rate. The big income and estate tax increases set for 2026 is why Trump gets a couple million Harris supporters to vote for him, while holding their noses.
This kind of tax absolutely discourages me from going to NZ for a 1 or 2 day stopover to Australia. I have done that before but won't with such high tax.
First, I'm pretty certain nobody switched to voting for Trump over the tax proposals. Most fat cat corporate types plus the car dealership base were already all-in on him because they like that he cut their taxes and want to keep taking home the big money.
Second, when/where did Harris say anything about taxing frequent flyer awards? AFAIK most of her proposals are literally only to close the loan loophole that most mega-rich rely on...
First, I'm pretty certain nobody switched to voting for Trump over the tax proposals. Most fat cat corporate types plus the car dealership base were already all-in on him because they like that he cut their taxes and want to keep taking home the big money.
Second, when/where did Harris say anything about taxing frequent flyer awards? AFAIK most of her proposals are literally only to close the loan loophole that most mega-rich rely on to fund their lavish lifestyles (something most economists have long supported), plus higher top income and corporate tax rates.
If an extra $40 USD is enough to shape your travel plans, you either (1) can't afford to travel abroad anyway, or (2) have really questionable financial judgment
Could you please leave US politics out of these discussions!!!
New Zealand's tax increase is simply politics. No rational reason to justify such increase.
Thank you for not coming to our beautiful country. If this new tax prevents toxic people from visiting, we will rejoice in a job well done by our Ministry.
and yet there was overcapacity from the US to NZ last winter; US airlines have figured out that sending planes to the S. Pacific makes sense - at least until UA dumped so much capacity into the market that they lost money flying the entire Pacific.
Air New Zealand has equally struggled to get back on its feet post-covid.
Maybe the government is simply justifying its increased taxation on the willingness of people to come...
and yet there was overcapacity from the US to NZ last winter; US airlines have figured out that sending planes to the S. Pacific makes sense - at least until UA dumped so much capacity into the market that they lost money flying the entire Pacific.
Air New Zealand has equally struggled to get back on its feet post-covid.
Maybe the government is simply justifying its increased taxation on the willingness of people to come to NZ and some airlines' inability to follow profit-motivated principles of supply and demand so New Zealand is simply shifting more of its tax burden to tourists
Wouldn't be the first time a government used tourism as a means to achieve the economic means that it couldn't achieve by increased taxation of its residents
UA dumped capacity?
Nah it was Delta.
not according to quarterly earnings statements that include quarterly capacity changes.
Our last left wing prime minister Jacinda Ardern has brought New Zealand to its knees with terrible economic mismanagement. We have no choice but to charge for things like this. Also we are getting a lot of backpackers and camper van tourists in the South Island who just want to come on a cheap holiday, freedom camping etc and dumping rubbish in our scenic areas. Someone has to pay to clean it all up after them.
Just do what Bhutan does… make everyone to get a guide. This way you instantly eliminate a lot of van campers and backpackers while creating lots of local jobs and contributing to local economy in a meaningful way.
1) Bhutan no longer requires everyone to get a guide.
2) Curtailing the freedom of movement is never appropriate, and always has unintended consequences.
Never understood the level of demand to NZ. Sure it is nice, but not enough to justify the sheer number of people that seem to be making the trip. Have been targeted for NZ-related Lord of the Rings advertising on and off, perhaps it's that?
Absolutely support this. In fact, they should make jt even more expensive. While they are at it ban selfie sticks and "influencers" in the process. They can all go to the Amalfi coast and make the people crazy there...leave the rest of the world alone.
Bitter much?
@Jacinda
Antwerp said nothing bitter, or at least to the point it could be called bitter...geez whiz
A lot of people seems to agree with this tourist tax.
I wonder how many of those are happy to pay more tax to support immigrants?
Hypocrisy is real.
Apples and oranges. A tax on tourism is a tax on visitors. A tax to support immigrants is a tax on residents.
@Watson
You're looking with the wrong perspective.
One is you want a tariff for outsider to pay to keep them out.
But on the other hand you're willing to pay to keep them in.
That's the hypocrisy.
This is actually a common-sense policy for countries whose main attraction is their spectacular natural beauty and/or unique ecological systems. Those assets need to be protected, not just because it's the right thing to do, but because that's what will keep tourists coming. Iceland should consider something similar. Most of its natural attractions are completely free - no entrance fee, and at most a minor parking fee. The facilities are remarkably well maintained, which costs...
This is actually a common-sense policy for countries whose main attraction is their spectacular natural beauty and/or unique ecological systems. Those assets need to be protected, not just because it's the right thing to do, but because that's what will keep tourists coming. Iceland should consider something similar. Most of its natural attractions are completely free - no entrance fee, and at most a minor parking fee. The facilities are remarkably well maintained, which costs money, which presumably comes from local taxes. Yet, on a trip a few years ago, I noticed that one of the more popular hiking trails had a serious erosion problem - the fragile soil simply couldn't handle the onslaught of hikers. A tourist tax could be used for things like shoring up the trail.
It will be interesting to see if this reduces the number of families or larger groups from choosing NZ. While $66 USD is not a barrier for a single traveler and $132 might be OK for a couple. A family of 4 is at $264, which is starting to be a more real cost.
True, especially for Aussies hopping the pond for a shorter vacation. $264 is a LOT for a weekend in NZ!
Australians citizens dont need an NZeTA or visa to travel to New Zealand.
Austrialian passport holders and most residents are exempt from IVL.
Australians are not required to pay the tax
Complaining about additional $65 when spending $1,500+ on flight alone plus $300+ on decent hotels is just whining. When a normal week long vacation for a couple will easily cost $7k+, anyone complaining about additional $130, should just stay home.
Oh and $130 is NZD which is ~80 USD.
How about the LAX-AKL-MEL flight that I flew with a one day NZ stopover for a preview of NZ? Would I pay $100x2? No.
I have previewed several countries then returned later but have avoided others that I was unsure of spending a week there.
Hotels are expensive - like $350 for a Holiday Inn Express. So if you afford that - $66 is insignificant in the cost of the trip.
Everyone going should make sure they spend at least $66 dollars per person less while in the country then. Have a takeout one day rather than a restaurant meal, show them that tourists arent just open wallets.
Who do you hate the endangered kakapo so much? :(
Agreed. Capitalistics have created a virus that is infinite growth.
This combined with the clout that social media affords has cost places of residents dearly. Unfortunately the behavior expectation of "i should be able to go wherever i want no matter what" has already been enforced in our conditioning.
I would love to see controlled tourism where X amount of visitors are allowed each year. I'd also love to see the abolishment of the...
Agreed. Capitalistics have created a virus that is infinite growth.
This combined with the clout that social media affords has cost places of residents dearly. Unfortunately the behavior expectation of "i should be able to go wherever i want no matter what" has already been enforced in our conditioning.
I would love to see controlled tourism where X amount of visitors are allowed each year. I'd also love to see the abolishment of the hotel industry and commercial real estate in place of a Ryokan style culture that affords locals the opportunity to truly celebrate their culture in a way that attracts only those who wish to care about learning it.
Wtf is the point of flying and contributing to the destruction of the world, just to be able to have the exact same meal or expectation you have at your home. Unchained capitalistic globalism has caused this.
@Abbi There’s this thing called “freedom of movement,” which is a fundamental human right.
It entails being able to go wherever you want, whenever you want, no matter what.
You sound like a far-left authoritarian. You probably loved the covid era!
@frrp Says a person who clearly will never go there or has any clue to what they are trying to achieve in balance so as to to not desecrate their homeland with Instagram influencers. Or perhaps you are one of them.