Traveling to the United Kingdom requires an extra step for virtually all visitors as of today, including those from the United States and European Union. While this policy was introduced for Americans and select other foreigners earlier this year, it has today been extended to those from the European Union. Let’s take a look at all the details.
In this post:
UK rolls out widespread Electronic Travel Authorization (ETA)
Prior to 2025, travelers from many parts of the world were able to travel to the UK without pre-registering, thanks to a visa waiver program. However, that has now changed, because effective immediately, virtually all foreign visitors (with the exception of those from Ireland) will need to apply for an ETA prior to visiting the UK.
Note that while this was initially also supposed to apply to international transit passengers, that’s no longer the case, so those staying in international transit don’t need to apply.
Prior to 2025, this was already in place for those coming from select countries in the Middle East, like Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates. Then as of January 8, 2025, this was extended to travelers from many parts of the globe, including the United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, Singapore, South Korea, and more. Then as of April 2, 2025, this has been extended to visitors from the European Union.
While the fee for this ETA was initially £10, the price is increasing to £16 as of April 9, 2025 (presumably due to the drop in revenue of not charging transit passengers for this). Each ETA is valid for multiple entries across two years (assuming your passport doesn’t expire in that time period), with no stay being longer than six months. It can take three working days for an ETA to be approved, though in many cases they’ll be approved faster than that, within minutes or hours.
The process of applying for an ETA should be done through the UK ETA app (which can be downloaded in the app store), and requires providing your passport information and contact details, uploading a photo of yourself, answering questions, and paying a fee. However, if you’re not able to download the app, the process can also be done through this website.
Officially, these kinds of pre-travel authorizations are intended to give the country a better understanding of who is arriving at the border, to potentially stop any high-risk travelers in advance.
This is annoying, but not a huge deal
The United Kingdom is hardly the first place to require an ETA for travelers from visa waiver countries. It’s something the United States has required from visa waiver country visitors for years, and for that matter, the European Union is rolling out a similar initiative in the near future (though there’s no official launch date, as the program has been delayed).
£16 isn’t a huge amount of money, and it’s even valid across multiple entries. It pales in comparison to the UK Air Passenger Duty that passengers pay.
However, there’s no denying that it’s mildly annoying to increasingly have to pay these fees and fill out forms before travel. Sometimes travelers forget to do this in advance, and that can cause some serious issues, especially when an instant approval doesn’t come through.
Bottom line
The United Kingdom has rolled out an electronic travel authorization requirement for virtually all travelers from visa waiver countries. This can be done by downloading the UK ETA app, and then completing an online form in advance of travel, and paying a fee of £16 (£10 through April 8, 2025).
The rollout of this is now complete. Those from the United States and select other countries had to start applying as of earlier this year, while it has now also been rolled out for those from the European Union. While this isn’t a huge deal, it’s just another minor inconvenience that travelers headed to the UK will have to deal with.
What do you make of the UK rolling out an ETA requirement on a widespread basis?
The UK is going bankrupt. First they raised air passenger duties on economy and business flights, and now they're adding this fee. Just another step in the long line of poor steps for this fledging once first world nation. It's sad that a once mighty global empire now has a GDP less than the state of Alabama, which itself is the laughing stock of America, and now they need to do this to shore up their bad policies and misguided plans for destroying the country.
Where are you all pulling these numbers from? Out of your ass? What's next, all of UK and Europe has less GDP than Albuquerque, New Mexico?
Even if you just did a 2 second search or asked ChatGPT to verify these absurd claims, you'd know it's not remotely true. UK has $3.381 trillion USD in 2023. Alabama doesn't even have 1/10th of that. Only California has a larger economy at $3.9 trillion (but who knows...
Where are you all pulling these numbers from? Out of your ass? What's next, all of UK and Europe has less GDP than Albuquerque, New Mexico?
Even if you just did a 2 second search or asked ChatGPT to verify these absurd claims, you'd know it's not remotely true. UK has $3.381 trillion USD in 2023. Alabama doesn't even have 1/10th of that. Only California has a larger economy at $3.9 trillion (but who knows how long that lasts since Trump really likes to mess with them), and Texas is in second place but does not have more than the UK.
Thank you, David. Matt H - your claims are way off base. The UK isn't bankrupt - it's still the 6th largest economy in the world at about $3.4 trillion. Alabama's GDP is only around $250-300 billion, so that comparison is completely wrong. While the UK has raised some taxes like air passenger duties, that's just normal fiscal policy, not a sign of economic collapse. The whole thing reads like an exaggerated rant rather than...
Thank you, David. Matt H - your claims are way off base. The UK isn't bankrupt - it's still the 6th largest economy in the world at about $3.4 trillion. Alabama's GDP is only around $250-300 billion, so that comparison is completely wrong. While the UK has raised some taxes like air passenger duties, that's just normal fiscal policy, not a sign of economic collapse. The whole thing reads like an exaggerated rant rather than an accurate economic assessment.
[1] World Bank Data, "GDP (current US$)," https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.CD
[2] IMF World Economic Outlook Database
[3] U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, "Gross Domestic Product by State," https://www.bea.gov/data/gdp/gdp-state
[4] HM Revenue & Customs, "Air Passenger Duty guidance," https://www.gov.uk/guidance/air-passenger-duty
I think he meant GDP per capita, which is more relevant for the individual person.
ETA is annoying and a huge deal. It is bad for travel/tourism. UK will feel the pinch.
ETA won't have no impact. It's a simple form and a fee that's nothing in terms of the overall trip cost. Anyone who wants to come to the UK will still come. The decision to start requiring passports for EU citizens (no longer accepting IDs) poses much larger barrier and had much more impact than ETA.
Congratulations, UK. You've given us another reason not to visit or transit Heathrow. Heathrow is unpleasant anyway, London is overpriced. I'll rather overfly the UK and spend my time on the Continent.
It’s Liberation Day in the UK!
The UK air passenger duty fee is a lot also// WE do not charge that in the US!!!!
Wrong, the US charges $21 (at the current exchange rate), I pad that two weeks ago. That is ... £16.10
The US is treating the United Kingdom very unfairly. Well 10p unfairly.
This article is mainly covering that UK has implemented any ETA program and this compares to US ESTA program.
What Dee mentioned is the UK APD. This does not line up with any air transit tax that the US charges. The APD is based on the distance of the flight and the class of service and at the top end exceeds £600.
This has nothing to do with the "European Union," as it also applies to countries like Switzerland. Europe is not the same as the European Union, something even the operator of a US blog should know.
He's not gonna list every single country this applies to, is he? The EU extension is relevant to quite a lot of readers, I imagine the blog's Swiss readers make up much smaller part of the audience. 450 millions vs 9 millions...
I'm good with not going to the UK. Hatethrow is a mess and the UK is a CF. Sorry, not sorry, but the sun has set so get off your high horse.
Right, so throw Scotland and Wales under the bus simply because you hate Heathrow? .... *eye roll*
Scotland explicitly voted to remain part of this mess not so long ago.
We need to retaliate immediately, it is simply unfair. Any UK visitors should be required to pay a tax to enter the US going forward, all they do is steal and allow illegal immigrants into our country.
Ever heard about ESTA?
I never understood, Do we really need to come with new terminology
ETA, ESTA, NZeTA, eVisa...
Why not just call them Visa and avoid confusion ? Only in this case it is applied using internet and it can be deliver in few hours to few days.
Visa is usually used to refer to the actual, annoying thing, where you have to journey to an embassy, submit a lot of documentation, and have a decent chance of rejection for sometimes unfathomable reasons.
Most ETAs are largely a formality (I suppose it gives the country time to run the person through more databases/some AI system than on demand at the border); generally people don't need to submit nearly as much info and aren't likely to be rejected.
The last sentence very much makes it not a visa. It's just a form to fill out and you usually get the authorisation within minutes. Not even comparable with the actual visa which requires travelling to some location, going through an interview, having someone decide whether you're worthy of entry, and then waiting days or weeks for that visa to be issued.
If you consider ETA a visa, you are clearly very lucky for never experiencing the actual visa process.
They are extremely similar to some eVisas where you just pay a fee, but the biggest difference is for Visas you are barred from entry until you fill out the visa and somebody approves it. Most of these ETAs approve you within the first 10 seconds of being submitted without any human ever going through the application. It's only if the AI system flags you or your country is 'high risk' when you start having problems.
Many comments about the where the state of the USA is right now, understandably, but this - and the EU waiver - were in the works for years. That said, as a dual US-UK citizen...it doesn't impact me, but it's about dang time. The US has been doing this for years. On the other hand, the taxes of flights out of UK airports - especially on J fares - are so astronomically high nowadays, I...
Many comments about the where the state of the USA is right now, understandably, but this - and the EU waiver - were in the works for years. That said, as a dual US-UK citizen...it doesn't impact me, but it's about dang time. The US has been doing this for years. On the other hand, the taxes of flights out of UK airports - especially on J fares - are so astronomically high nowadays, I avoid flying out of British airports on my trips to the isle, hopping over to AMS to get back to the States (and enjoying a few days of stroopwafels in the process).
Straight out of Trump's disastrous "reciprocity" playbook. I prefer when the US had allies, but if this is the way the US wants to play, good for the UK to finally tax Americans traveling there the way America taxes British travelers.
Yes, I Do firmly think that MAGA's policies are hurtful to America as a form of shooting yourself in the foot, and this is just a practical example of the fallout.
This isn't a reaction to MAGA policies, this is a policy many countries are rolling out and applying to a huge swath of international travellers.
It WOULD be a nice sight if all the (ex-)allies could get together and craft a personalized ETA for Americans only (since, as they like to constantly remind us, even in this very comment section, how they're so rich and exceptional), that costs $50 for a 30-day ETA, that would be fun.
I’ve been rerouted in the past through LHR, like a last minute cancellation or overbooked scenario. Now that won’t be an option unless I proactively get their visa (UK is rarely my final destination)… which means I’ll probably avoid these routings all together.
"Note that while this was initially also supposed to apply to international transit passengers, that’s no longer the case, so those staying in international transit don’t need to apply."
Literally the second paragraph.
does it mean that with this authorization I do not need to see a UK border agent, but just go through e-gates? Thank you.
Of course not.
If you are eligible for the e-gate originally, then yes.
If you are not eligible for the e-gate originally, then no.
This is just an extra step for most foreign nationals who are entering using Visa Waiver (and only if they're eligible for visa waiver to begin with).
@David. Thank you. What would be an eligibility for e-gate use? I have both a US and an EU passport. Thank you
@Daniel B.
Both US and EU passports are eligible for e-gate use. But go through the e-gates with the passport you applied for the ETA with, DON'T apply for the ETA with one passport and then try going through the e-gates with the other passport.
@Jones. Thank you for the clarification!
USA gets to experience the pain of the (almost) entire rest of the world trying to enter the USA, and of course Americans whine about it.
ESTA is the least of the problems when it comes to entering the US. The crazy CBP operating seemingly outside of any laws is the real issue, not seen anywhere in the civilised world.
Took them only 3 months to coerce everyone an extra 60%.
@Eskimo
Because they have to find the money to fill the empty Treasury coffers that the Tories looted.
What they should do as well, is go after people like Michelle Mone, a Conservative Tory peer, who defrauded tax payers to the tune of over £200M as part of the COVID PPE looting of the Treasury.
Easy process to go through enough. Until it comes to payment. The $10 or pounds magically turns into about 70 to eighty. I immediately exited. Is this a scam or money grab???? It doesn't look like I'm going to Scotland.
You were on the wrong website or page. I did the same thing before finding the right website or page and paid £10 before it went to £16. Try again, Scotland is worth it.
Did you try to use a second-party's website, where they added on their fee? Folks, be carefult to get the official, government websites for these. I just did a Google search. First two sites were sponsored sites. The first not sponsored was the gov.uk site.
Bad for tourism.
If 16 pounds is gonna to make or break your UK trip, then I'm guessing UK won't cry about losing those tourists.
@David
Seriously.
I am not sure its about 16 pounds its the extra planning specially you travel with family.
I am fine to pay 16$ per person when exit out of immigration but donot ask me to scan documents and upload and work thru website not working, credit card didn't go thru and other tech issues.
Recently applied for eVisa of a country where they ask photo of exact size, exact dots per pixel, file...
I am not sure its about 16 pounds its the extra planning specially you travel with family.
I am fine to pay 16$ per person when exit out of immigration but donot ask me to scan documents and upload and work thru website not working, credit card didn't go thru and other tech issues.
Recently applied for eVisa of a country where they ask photo of exact size, exact dots per pixel, file size less than 1 mb blah blah and they promise eVisa will be deliver in 3 days. Still waiting after 10 days end up cancel trip.
@Xal
I used the app. Admitted I remember there being some annoyances, but the photo was also taken in app (without any need to specify anything). I did not apply until right before my flight to London, but the application went from "processing..." to "approved" in literally 1 min (still have the e-mails and time stamp).
I suspect non-app applications are more likely to be sent for manual processing, hence why the UK ETA website strongly recommends using the app.
Absolutely David, the UK will be a lovely place to live in once again when all of the tourists and illegals go home …. taking the looney left wing Labour Party membership with them too.
IATA really needs to fix this. It's getting to the point where every country is requiring some form of electronic visa, primarily as a revenue generating exercise. It makes it hard to schedule last-minute travel (particularly business travel) without speculatively buying e-visas in advance. What's more, there is very little information asked that isn't already provided during the ticket purchasing process and procedures already exist to deal with passengers who aren't cleared, since these were...
IATA really needs to fix this. It's getting to the point where every country is requiring some form of electronic visa, primarily as a revenue generating exercise. It makes it hard to schedule last-minute travel (particularly business travel) without speculatively buying e-visas in advance. What's more, there is very little information asked that isn't already provided during the ticket purchasing process and procedures already exist to deal with passengers who aren't cleared, since these were developed for watch lists.
There are already procedures in place to share passenger data with governments. There are already procedures in place to deny boarding to passengers who aren't cleared. If countries want to add on an extra immigration tax, they should just include it in the ticket price and do whatever checks they would like at the time of booking.
It is nothing to do with IATA, and is the same if you arrive by train, boat or on foot.
Not only are people entering not just entering by flight, different countries require different information (and pictures, and sometimes only via their own secure mobile app, such as UK). It's almost impossible for all airlines (or even major flag carriers) to do that at the time of booking.
This is not a visa, under normal circumstances there isn't need to wait until someone manually processes you. My ETA was approved in 5 minutes, and if I wanted, I could literally fly out on the same day.
Europe has been mooching off their American taxpayer for their security needs. Yet they feel comfortable putting their hands in our pockets for another tenner. Not sure how that is acceptable to even one American. UK has some nerve implementing this.
How have they been mooching off the American taxpayers?
Also, this is a reciprocal payment to what the US charges for ESTA waivers, it isn't all of Europe.
At least we should mandate a ban on trumpmuskvance supporters.
The US has had an ESTA policy for almost 20 years . Meanwhile Americans have been able to travel without any barrier. There were also many students who overstayed and worked illegally, especially in the UK, where there was no exit immigration.
It is also generally significantly easier for Americans to cross the border in Europe/UK than vice versa. Although in my experience...
At least we should mandate a ban on trumpmuskvance supporters.
The US has had an ESTA policy for almost 20 years . Meanwhile Americans have been able to travel without any barrier. There were also many students who overstayed and worked illegally, especially in the UK, where there was no exit immigration.
It is also generally significantly easier for Americans to cross the border in Europe/UK than vice versa. Although in my experience I never had any issues entering the US, that is generally not the story many thousands people have.
People from the UK should think more deeply about what’s important to them. For better or worse, the US is the richest country in the world. We could literally zero out our tourism industry and we would barely notice. That is… not the case for the UK.
I fully agree the US ESTA is as dumb as this one. However, I don’t think pure retaliatory logic should dominate here. Like it or not, the UK needs foreigners more than the US.
It depends how one defines richest country in the world.
Yes but the US is 36 trillion in debt.?
The US is number 11 if you go by GDP per capita. In no recognized metric are they number one.
What kind of MAGA idiot thinks the USA somehow can take on the entire world alone? The USA is the strongest nation in the world precisely because it leverage it's strength to build a powerful international alliance. It's literally the oldest play in the book, and a damn effective one. Now the US is pissing it all down the drain because it thinks everyone is trying to "rip them off".
Here are some numbers: Tourism...
What kind of MAGA idiot thinks the USA somehow can take on the entire world alone? The USA is the strongest nation in the world precisely because it leverage it's strength to build a powerful international alliance. It's literally the oldest play in the book, and a damn effective one. Now the US is pissing it all down the drain because it thinks everyone is trying to "rip them off".
Here are some numbers: Tourism accounts for about 2.4% of the nation's output, while Americans account for 20% (if we're being generous) of travelers, and the pompous MAGA crowd a even smaller fraction of that, so it'll do plenty fine without you folks. USA travelers make up 7.1% of the travelers to the EU, and even less to Asia.
If the entire world would just impose an extra large $50 30-day visa to Americans alone, it would be a fine day indeed.
Cash grab from a broke country.
This says it all:
Year | UK GDP Per Capita | US GDP Per Capita
2005 | 50,397 USD | 48,050 USD
2022 | 48,866 USD | 81,695 USD
It's really sad to see Europe not keep up with the USA in terms of economic growth, and many don't see how far behind they've fallen. If you consider the services many European countries offer, most likely...
Cash grab from a broke country.
This says it all:
Year | UK GDP Per Capita | US GDP Per Capita
2005 | 50,397 USD | 48,050 USD
2022 | 48,866 USD | 81,695 USD
It's really sad to see Europe not keep up with the USA in terms of economic growth, and many don't see how far behind they've fallen. If you consider the services many European countries offer, most likely had a higher standard of living than the US in early 2000s but no more. Sad to see what used to be the example most US states would strive for fade away.
Most likely if they were still in Europe they would be much better off than those figures indicate. Brexit was a catastrope for Britain.
@glenn t — Germany and France's GDP per capita growth is as sluggish as the UK's, even worse.
Yes but need to see alongside these figures the cost of living which has spiked in USA an eye watering amount. It’s a total rip off what consumers pay there now for rent, food, healthcare etc etc. whilst of course the UK have seen increases, it’s nothing in comparison. And of course only going to get much worse given the Trump Tariffs Americans will soon be paying….
First country to demand a photo for this type of authorisation.
Should I look extra-white to move things along smoothly?
At last - revenge for those damned ESTAs !
I applied for my Visa waiver on Monday. Even though it couldn't successfully read my chip or make a face scan, despite multiple attempts, I was approved in minutes.
Used their app just before Xmas and was approved within ~30m.
I was pleasantly "shocked" by a govt process for once.
Uk gov online services, is usually very efficient. Even filing my tax returns was a breeze when I lived in the UK
Do they have a fee exemption - like the European ETIAS?
"Applicants who are under 18 or over 70 years of age are exempt from this payment."
No. You have to pay: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/apply-for-an-electronic-travel-authorisation-eta
I don’t care about the fee I just hate the abhorrent process
I’ve been coming for 30 years to the uk
They had plenty of time to photograph me look at my passport fingerprint me whatever in case they think I’ve gone criminal on them
Can’t they find a better way without wearing down my battery and hogging phone storage?
I just opened the app and received this message: "Sorry this service is busy. You currently cannot apply for an ETA on the app. Please try again later...."
Try the website. Seems to work okay.
I don’t care about the fee but if it’s for everyone why can’t they just add it to the ticket price
You would still need to go through the process of applying for the waiver so the UK Visa & Immigration can collect your passport information and photo.
Presumably because UK citizens wouldn't be very keen on paying for a visa just in order to return home.
Because it doesn’t apply to UK and Irish passport holders.
Would you like to pay on every ticket to the UK over the next 2 years, or just once as you need to now?
No-brainer really.
The UK is getting tougher on friendly countries (US, Canada, Australia, NZ, Japan, Singapore, Korea, etc.) than they are on British Islamist grooming gangs in their declining lower to mid tier cities. They see a need to protect themselves from outsiders visiting from allied nations, but they can't protect poor young British and Indian girls from rape gangs. What do you honestly expect other than more incompetent bureaucracy with a government that is devoid of...
The UK is getting tougher on friendly countries (US, Canada, Australia, NZ, Japan, Singapore, Korea, etc.) than they are on British Islamist grooming gangs in their declining lower to mid tier cities. They see a need to protect themselves from outsiders visiting from allied nations, but they can't protect poor young British and Indian girls from rape gangs. What do you honestly expect other than more incompetent bureaucracy with a government that is devoid of imagination? It's nothing more than an increase to the already laborious government processes and an attempt to generate extra IT consulting services.
Firstly, if this was really a reciprocity measure as some mention in response to ESTA (not a fan of this, by the way, as the US should have freer movement with friendly, likeminded countries), why did the UK not muster up the confidence to do this in year prior? ESTA has been around since George W. Bush was still in office. Also, why not focus on rampant illegal migration more than law abiding, good faith folks wanting to visit? Brexit, poorer public services, and changes to VAT refund policies have made things bad enough for tourism in the UK. Why not make things easier rather than shooting yourself in the foot? It's a shame the EU is also following this silly bandwagon (albeit delayed since it was first proposed in 2016!).
Have you been huffing glue??? Oh no, you have just been listening to the racist emerald mine inheritor. Imagine using this to go off about this. And actually I don't think privileging white people is good at all, because most civilised, good and decent people do not think white supremacy is good.
I think he has been huffing something stronger than glue, if we are being charitable. Or maybe he is just a racist himself.
It’s a travel blog not a political soap box.
But government polices can affect travel, no?
Yes, government policies can certainly affect travel. However, that's not what you have posted. What you have posted here is racist misinformation created by tech oligarch who is hellbent on converting the wealthiest nations in the world into his own white, Christian nationalist playgrounds.
I loathe Trump and Musk, and don't believe either of their opinions should be taken with anything more than a grain of salt. I'm also not a Brexiteer. Far from one. That said, the UK has a lot to answer for as to why young girls were not protected. Where were the police, the social services, the courts, local councils, and the governments of both Conservative and Labour? We need to put political correctness aside...
I loathe Trump and Musk, and don't believe either of their opinions should be taken with anything more than a grain of salt. I'm also not a Brexiteer. Far from one. That said, the UK has a lot to answer for as to why young girls were not protected. Where were the police, the social services, the courts, local councils, and the governments of both Conservative and Labour? We need to put political correctness aside and hold those complicit accountable. And for those mentioning that this is irrelevant to travel, I believe that greater public safety and cracking down on gangs is in the interest of small to mid tier UK towns in the North and Midlands that need to attract more business and tourism. Will people want to visit towns like Rotherham if women's safety is well below standard? I don't think so.
You think too much.
UK did this because we stole their prince.
You can keep him!
Well said CC, ‘arry Hewitt deserves his ‘c’ list bolter and Great Britain is better off because of their absence.
And we are happy to keep Prince Harry. Best thing that has come out of the UK in a month of Sundays. The UK is not a hopeless country after all.
If the UK wants to implement a visa waiver fee, they can have at it. It's their country. The USA and many countries do the same. I don't see what the whining is all about.
Right, he was a prince! Went Hollywood for the woman he loves. There is precedent for that in the UK.
Time to get off the drugs and log off for the day, Elon.
is that Marjorie Taylor Greene ? Moron
It’s also noteworthy that US citizens can use the E-Gates without any pre registration other than ensuring you have the ETA, unlike the US where passengers who don’t have GE have to download an app, upload information etc.
Most people seem to be approaching this the wrong way. I'm in favour of paying a tenner if it basically eliminates the risk of getting interrogated by a border policeperson on a power trip or, worse still, sent back to wherever I have arrived from.
A few years ago, a relative was denied entry to Spain despite having all their paperwork in order - they were even detained somewhere for a couple of days before being flown back. It wasn't a fun experience.
@throway...
Having an ESTA does not eliminate you being questioned by border control.
The UK makes it very clear. Getting approved for an ETA, does not have anything to do with admissibility.
I know the small print, it's the same everywhere. You're absolutely right in theory.
In practice, however, an evisa creates an audit trail confirming your eligibility to enter the country and lets everyone get on with their day.
The culture in many public sector roles is one combining limited decision-making autonomy with a tendency to point fingers whenever things go wrong. The vetting not only means officers carry a much smaller risk of...
I know the small print, it's the same everywhere. You're absolutely right in theory.
In practice, however, an evisa creates an audit trail confirming your eligibility to enter the country and lets everyone get on with their day.
The culture in many public sector roles is one combining limited decision-making autonomy with a tendency to point fingers whenever things go wrong. The vetting not only means officers carry a much smaller risk of facing consequences for letting the 'wrong' person in, but it also creates a de facto need to have good reasons for denying entry to anyone who's been confirmed as eligible by their colleagues.
It's the border control equivalent of defending a legal case with a criminal standard of proof ('innocent until proven guilty') as opposed to a civil one ('balance of probabilities').
Very sick of this silly bureaucracy and barriers being introduced everywhere in the world. Not to mention the expense, it's not a lot on its own but it adds up incrementally and that's on top of everything getting constantly more expensive.
My, Oh my!
Such a lot of fake news and foul language posted herein …. so much for Ben’s plea for moderation, it would appear to have provoked quite the opposite reaction.
You forgot to criticize all those people who commented.
"All of these are from people who have little knowledge of UK.
They appear to have little or no knowledge of east/west transcontinental air travel in any cabin class.
Furthermore, have no respect for a world renowned airport rating organisation.
Many of the comments posted are worthless to anyone expecting a common sense opinion from supposedly seasoned travellers.
In essence, one appears...
You forgot to criticize all those people who commented.
"All of these are from people who have little knowledge of UK.
They appear to have little or no knowledge of east/west transcontinental air travel in any cabin class.
Furthermore, have no respect for a world renowned airport rating organisation.
Many of the comments posted are worthless to anyone expecting a common sense opinion from supposedly seasoned travellers.
In essence, one appears to be reading occasional coach class comments from some who are unlikely to have travelled beyond their national borders."
Enjoy your only way to fly DEN to LHR while worshipping Skytrax.
Will you apologize for Brexit too?
Good. USA has been ripping off the world with ESTAs. And have inflicted damage and distraction from Vietnam in the 70s to Gaza today. Get a taste of your own medicine. And if this means fewer Americans travelling, good!
Thank you for admitting what horrible things you have done, Ms. or Mr. USA. Now stop blaming the United States, the country.
Sorry @USA, this new fee will not stop Americans travelling. After they have their moan about it, and proclaim it's a liberal/communist /Biden did it conspiracy, will get on with it and book their flight to blighty.
My relatives are arriving in the UK on December 30th. They will be here until Jan 13th. Do they still require an ETA?
The US has been charging everyone for an ETSA for you. Don’t see how you can all turn around and complain….
Two wrongs don't make a right. And many of us find the US requirement to be nothing more than a money grab too.
ETA is required on entry, not exit. If you are in the country when the requirement is imposed, you are ok unless you leave and attempt to re-enter.
I notice there is no android version of the app
Uk is the country of fees in a so inconvenient currency that makes every little fee a pain
12 euros for literally nothing, added for ex to 7 euros to book the entry in the already paid priority pass lounge + at least 5 euro coffee when you arrive in uk if you don't have a McDonald near
what a sad joke
way better the US with a dollar that at least give a discount to the not so wealthy EU travelers + every cheap thing that US have (fast food, gasoline, etc...)
Depends what you’re into. If you want McDonalds coffee and cheap petrol, you’re much better off in the USA.
If you want culture — eg, entry to national museums and galleries all over the country — then you’re better off with the UK (isn’t it about $25 for just one ordinary ticket to the Met Museum NY now? Whereas it’s free entry for everyone to the UK National Gallery, the Tates, British Museum, and...
Depends what you’re into. If you want McDonalds coffee and cheap petrol, you’re much better off in the USA.
If you want culture — eg, entry to national museums and galleries all over the country — then you’re better off with the UK (isn’t it about $25 for just one ordinary ticket to the Met Museum NY now? Whereas it’s free entry for everyone to the UK National Gallery, the Tates, British Museum, and dozens of others).
But I’d be surprised if anyone took the price of just one item and decided on that basis whether or not to visit a country. There are plenty of good reasons to visit the US; and plenty of good reasons not to visit the UK.
I applied for 3 ETAs today for my family. Although the pictures of the applicants and passports were a little finicky, it took 30 minutes to get all 3 done. The ETAs start from January 8, 2025 and are valid to January 7, 2027.
Paying a fee to participate in a visa waiver program = discounted visa fee. Euphemism
One more reason to avoid UK. They have the costliest fees as it is (airport departures). Singapore is also getting awful with fees and taxes. Mexico is also ridiculous with arrival fees.
Gee whiz folks, the money grab thing is such a red herring. As of 1 April 2025, the Air Passenger Duty added to you flight out of the UK is £90 for seats with a pitch under 40" to places like the US. Want to raise more money? Do you set up an elaborate ETA system that charges £10 per person per 2 years. Or, do you increase the APD to, say £93 (or £95 or £100)? What idiot does the former, when the cost of the latter is effectively hidden in the airfare?
Just one more step back from seamless travel. And why do seemall of the guys doing those online sites seem to be so eager on making things as difficult as possible?
Exactly. To be clear, I also fault the US for putting ESTA in 2007. It just defeats the purpose of us being free and open countries with strong relationships.
I would argue that the thousands of UK young men that go on drunken vacations that the UK exports every year is more of a risk.
No need to be sexist. We export loads of drunken and often violent women, too.
But don’t worry, we also keep plenty of stocks of both in the country.
Good, finally payback for ESTAs.
Big deal. When I went to America over a decade ago, I had to pay AND it had to be a credit card, which I didn't have so had to get a friend to do it. Why can't we do the same thing as you do? Stop whining.
The US does it to the EU, the UK and EU will soon mandate it for US citizens. The west is taking a huge step backward!
Meanwhile China and Russia are laughing and winning and they have an oligarch now doing their bidding!
What is hilarious about the UK's ETA is that, at present, the passports of departing pax are hardly ever checked! I wonder if this will finally change?
They don't care when you depart.
What more can they ask, how many pints you drank in UK?
They already have what they need when you entered. By the time you depart they would have access to your tax records and bank accounts if they wanted to.
Why would it?
The US don’t check passports of departing passengers either. I guess they use airline records to ascertain visitors didn’t overstay and have actually left the country.
Exactly this. Passport checking on exit is delegated to the airlines (it is on entry too: if a passenger is refused entry to the UK because, for example, their passport is not in order, it is the airline that has to pay to deport them).
Strange headline, Ben. Of course “foreign visitors “ includes the US.
Foreign means not from the UK in this context. Do you think foreign always means non-US?
Thank God for (some) middle eastern airlines, I don't have to transit through Europe.
Instead you have to go to middle eastern countries, lols.
If you go via Europe nearly all airports are done in a way you transit without entering the country, so no need to pay. If you rather fly Emirates et al do so but no need to make up wrong reasonings.
And good luck being stranded in Dubai without EU 261.
For anyone flying into or through Heathrow, UK govt should honestly pay the passengers for the pain. Last time we had to wait > 2 hours for our luggage.
Please don’t transit via Heathrow. It’s anyway a miserable experience for you because it’s so overcrowded and poorly-run, but your plane is also pouring out emissions over densely-populated central London.
The financial benefits of transiting largely go to Spanish-owned “British” Airways, or the airport operator (which is owned by a consortium of companies from Spain, Qatar and Canada). The UK gets the pollution and congestion while the profits go overseas.
what a bunch of entitled people. you do not have the right to enter the UK or any other country just because you have a US passport. they get to set the rules and if you don't like them, then don't go and stop whining
Why is the UK charging American citizens in the name of "border security" when so many have come on boats across the Channel illegally? If anything, Britain has done anything but cut illegal migration. Virtually no one from US, Canada, Japan, Australia, and other countries would deliberately try to abuse the UK's immigration laws to claim asylum. It just seems like Britain joining the bandwagon of other countries enforcing electronic verifications, which just ends up...
Why is the UK charging American citizens in the name of "border security" when so many have come on boats across the Channel illegally? If anything, Britain has done anything but cut illegal migration. Virtually no one from US, Canada, Japan, Australia, and other countries would deliberately try to abuse the UK's immigration laws to claim asylum. It just seems like Britain joining the bandwagon of other countries enforcing electronic verifications, which just ends up giving the keys to more inefficient bureaucracies in a travel process that was once seamless and efficient.
I know I sound outdated in this day and age, but part of what makes free and open societies great is that we have seamless movement of people between our nations. Britain shares good relations with the countries on the ETA list, so why not reward visitors from those nations? Isn't that the purpose of those e-gates at Heathrow, which has allowed me much quicker entry into the UK? Of course we should take border security seriously and punish those who break the law, but we shouldn't put aside common sense in the name of shortsighted security measures.
They can do whatever they want. It's their country.
If they were really interested in doing this in the name of national interest (presumably their intention), may I ask why they did not think of doing this earlier? And as I said, how do you defend penalising travellers from friendly countries (99% of whom abide by the law), while giving a pass to those entering the country illegally across the Channel? It seems like the British government is not getting priorities right.
More...
If they were really interested in doing this in the name of national interest (presumably their intention), may I ask why they did not think of doing this earlier? And as I said, how do you defend penalising travellers from friendly countries (99% of whom abide by the law), while giving a pass to those entering the country illegally across the Channel? It seems like the British government is not getting priorities right.
More ludicrous is adding those connecting. There's almost no threat to UK's borders by those using UK airports (most likely Heathrow or Gatwick) to connect onward. Britain has already repelled enough due to a change in VAT refund policy. Are they just trying to push more away? I thought growth was of paramount importance to the government.
Yeah, my state once required I send in proof of insurance coverage for my licensed vehicle, while making no such request of those who don't register their vehicles. And, they make me take an eye test and pay a fee every 4 years for my drivers license. They require that of unlicensed drivers.
@jay:
It's not about border security it is about revenue collection. I listened to the UK PMQ several months ago when the budget was presented, The Tories mismanaged the economy and left billions black hole. The UK is falling apart, but they can do what they like. What I find fascinating is that they don't give a pass to anyone from commonwealth countries. I don't see the purpose of that bloc.
Oh, don’t worry Jay, you barely sound outdated at all!!
More or a racist / bigot / xenophobic vibe? Maybe. But, unfortunately, on this day and age this is a bit of a trend.
The US have required ESTAs for the UK for years. Why should the UK not require the same?
To be clear, frrp, I do also blame the US for this trend of electronic verifications. Shouldn't the US, as a measure of goodwill, be trustworthy of friendly and likeminded nations? We should be making it easier for people in those nations (US, Canada, UK, EU, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, Korea, Singapore, etc.). Have we learned nothing from 2 World Wars?
What a brainwashed hypocrite.
Just because some one sets a rule doesn't mean we can't complain about it. If you don't like people whining, then stop reading and go away.
I get that if its about retaliation and only US Citizens.
Looks like they are charging this to Europeans and other countries.
Will you need to get one if youre only transiting through LHR?
Unfortunately yes.
But BA and others are campaigning for a change.
No huge deal? I see it different. Covid is over bit these authorization soreading like infection. Eu,Uk,Korea,japan,Singapore... Im sick of it.
then don't go. it's as simple as that. you are a guest and you don't get to set the rules oh how/when you are allowed to visit.
Another brainwashed hypocrite.
Stop apologizing and defending stupid rules.
The reason people call out is because it's stupid.
Just because some bureaucracy tells you to do something you take it as commandment?
Did you in your life never broke any rules?
Same things happen in the land of the free. Where you're not really free but the propaganda works.
Where did he say he took things as a “commandment” and “never broke any rules”?
Another reason not to visit a has-been Euro backwater with a lower GDP per capita than Mississippi. At least Mississippi has good food.
if you like deep fried food that Jackson airport perpetually stinks of
Deep fried fish and chips doesn't stinks in London.
But LHR perpetually stinks of Aerob13a, a pedophile poop reader.
The idea that the US is better than europe is quite laughable.
It has to be done through an app? What about people who don't own smartphones (Like me)? Apparently, there are directions for those who can't use the app on the link:
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/apply-for-an-electronic-travel-authorisation-eta#apply-for-an-eta
Americans have absolutely zero reason to complain. Taste your own medicine.
Two wrongs don't make a right
@Ben, what does this mean? "It pales in comparison to the UK Air Passenger Duty that passengers pay (though there’s no official launch date, as the program has been delayed)."
The APD's been in place for a while, so what program has been delayed?
Biden should negotiate with the UK to have a reciprocal fee waiver. He should threaten them that Trump will punish the UK if they don't agree.
The reality is that the cost of implementing this is probably far greater than any monies they obtain after. So, for those who are complaining it's a money grab, I doubt it. The sheer cost of management and tech will be exorbitant. Which leads me to believe this is, in fact, an attempt to better manage who is coming in and out of the country.
As a side note. I decided to enroll tonight and get it over with as I am regularly going back and forth to the UK. I'm glad I did not wait until a few days out. The biometric scan will just not work on a U.S. passport. That's fine, it says you can skip after a few tries in lieu of answering further questions. Eventually you will get to the taking a photo of yourself...
As a side note. I decided to enroll tonight and get it over with as I am regularly going back and forth to the UK. I'm glad I did not wait until a few days out. The biometric scan will just not work on a U.S. passport. That's fine, it says you can skip after a few tries in lieu of answering further questions. Eventually you will get to the taking a photo of yourself moment. I followed all instructions as to lighting and background and it refused the photo three times with an eventual message to start over or go online.
This is going to be a nightmare for many. Honestly, I don't care about the process. But given IT in the UK this will become a headache for them in ways they never imagined.
If they have an app like the updated Australia version, I found the picture taking troublesome until I figured out how it works. Not necessarily intuitive, but eventually got the green light.
I struggled with a similar issue when applying for Singapore’s e-thing. Turned out the RFID chip in passports is deliberately weak (so villains can’t easily clone it), but if you have a cover on your iPhone that can be enough to prevent the chip being read.
After a frustrating half an hour, I took the cover off and it worked immediately. YMMV…
Not necessarily. In 2024 the uk had nearly 40 million visitors. So they would collect 400 million pounds per year. While the software development is steep up front is mainly a 1 time dev cost. Considering most countries have incredibly bad software using devs from India and having estimated tech projects for decades, their system to implement the software is definitely less than 10 million. More if those Indian outsourcing companies need more kick backs....
Not necessarily. In 2024 the uk had nearly 40 million visitors. So they would collect 400 million pounds per year. While the software development is steep up front is mainly a 1 time dev cost. Considering most countries have incredibly bad software using devs from India and having estimated tech projects for decades, their system to implement the software is definitely less than 10 million. More if those Indian outsourcing companies need more kick backs. The cost of maintenance is probably the highest cost. But there is a limited real time factor to this infrastructure and I just don't see any complicated redundancy so at its current fee, I suspect the uk would still be in the profit. And like most organizations nobody cares or knows how to implement security so they probably spent next to nothing on it. And like most systems of this nature the 10 pounds is obviously their introductory fee so that few will complain. Remember the days of $5-$10 hotel resort fees that are now starting to push $50. We should see the same with this fee over the years. That much I guarantee.
My reasonable proposal has no chance in this political environment, but I'll propose it anyway. Australia, New Zealand, the UK, Shengen, the US sign a pact. Each time I get a new passport, I can go to the "Shared ETA" site, pay a reasonable fee (say $100-$200), and get, if accepted, an ETA for all the above that lasts for the life of that passport.
$100-200 is not reasonable. It should be free among the US, UK, Portugal to Germany plus Scandinavian countries. Poor countries like Romania should not be included.
I'd happily pay $200 per "passport cycle" (8 to 9 years) to only have to do the application only once as cycle. But, in my world, you could opt into the every 1, 2, or 3 year cycle depending on country/region. To each.....
It's a visa.
If you think a "Shared visa" that works globally can exist.
Last for the life of passport is also stupid.
ETA is a money grab scheme. Since they can't make money off of visa waiver visitor. They'll just create a visa that isn't called visa.
No not a visa, an ETA. Not global, but among agreeing nations. If the want to grab money, they can increase the already high tax placed on flights out of the UK. It's easier and provides more revenue by increasing the tax on UK flights to non-European cities by a pound or two than charging €10 per person per 2 years.
UK needs the money, they are broke. Whatever little they had, they gave it away to weapons companies to supply weapons Ukraine and lsrael, in other words siphoned off.
Good insight Ivan. How’s the winter treating you in Moscow?
Sergei you must know it.Why you ask? Its bitter cold
They’re broke because of stupid Brexit so they want to make foreigners pay for it
This fee is preposterous. Just nickel and diming tourists. For this reason i would avoid UK.
Frankly, good. Because the $21 the USA charge for an ESTA is a lot more than the £10 the UK is charging. And because your airports have the most ridiculous way of handling transit passengers you've got to pay even if you don't leave the terminal, so doing the same here balances things out.
And you introduced the ESTA in 2007 so just stop complaining and pay ten quid.
Except the US tax payer pays for your security.
No one asked for the U.S. to be the wannabe global police force lol
I say that as an American citizen lol
Hilarious. You think UK airports security is not funded by taxes?
Yankee exceptionalism to the extreme.
Stay at your gun infested shithole and don’t visit.
@Manny - then don’t got to any EU country, Australia, New Zealand, etc as they have similar processes and costs (and the US has had for visitors from those countries since 2007). Get over your self. It is a minor cost and minimal inconvenience. God help you if you actually travel to a country that requires a Visa. You would be clueless
I don't see these small fees reducing any country's debt. The U.S. ESTA fee of $21 hasn't paid off any national debt. This low fee may be charged to cover the cost of administering the program, computers, software, etc. The UK taxpayers should not have the burden of this expense, just as the taxpayers of the U.S. should not have the burden of paying for the Visa Waiver Program/ESTA, and therefore charge a fee.
...I don't see these small fees reducing any country's debt. The U.S. ESTA fee of $21 hasn't paid off any national debt. This low fee may be charged to cover the cost of administering the program, computers, software, etc. The UK taxpayers should not have the burden of this expense, just as the taxpayers of the U.S. should not have the burden of paying for the Visa Waiver Program/ESTA, and therefore charge a fee.
Hopefully the use of these programs help to streamline the entry process and allows non-criminal types a faster and smoother entry upon arrival.
For the record, visitors already pay quite some taxes directly (e.g. on goods and services) and indirectly (by supporting the economy).
In other words, visitors are taxpayers as well.
@Jerry Wheen -- It would be nice if the taxes on goods and services, paid directly and indirectly, was enough. Tourist do pay hotel taxes, sales taxes, etc. But based on my 1040, along with my property taxes to pay for police, fire, schools, and other services that all of us benefit from, the taxes on these goods and services are not.
While I understand some may feel that the government should not profit...
@Jerry Wheen -- It would be nice if the taxes on goods and services, paid directly and indirectly, was enough. Tourist do pay hotel taxes, sales taxes, etc. But based on my 1040, along with my property taxes to pay for police, fire, schools, and other services that all of us benefit from, the taxes on these goods and services are not.
While I understand some may feel that the government should not profit form these fees, and I agree, they should at least cover the cost of administering them.
US ESTA fee isn't there to make money (yet). It's enough to cover the cost of surveillance of visitors who wouldn't need a visa but something as close to a visa as possible.
It's a visa.
£10 is not a problem. The fact they can deny this "non-visa" if they don't like something is the problem.
So, we parole a Charles Manson type and they shouldn't be able deny the ETA if he applies and pays? When you look at ETA-type programs, I suspect we find that those who are rejected would have been turned away (if all history is known) at entry attempt at a higher cost ($ and hassle) to all. If, say, 5 out of 10,000 who'd arrive in pre-ETA days arrive and get rejected, and 4 of...
So, we parole a Charles Manson type and they shouldn't be able deny the ETA if he applies and pays? When you look at ETA-type programs, I suspect we find that those who are rejected would have been turned away (if all history is known) at entry attempt at a higher cost ($ and hassle) to all. If, say, 5 out of 10,000 who'd arrive in pre-ETA days arrive and get rejected, and 4 of those five get rejected for the new ETA, you now have to turn around 20% of the old number. That means 4 of 10,000 travelers avoid that crush of arriving and being put on a plane back home.
The issue with ETA is all those intrusive questions no different than a visa application.
The other issue is being denied ETA. Most will never tell you the reason. If you get turned away at the border, they will give you a reason.
And your last part is the irony.
"avoid that crush of arriving and being put on a plane back home."
If you're trying to hide something then you should be...
The issue with ETA is all those intrusive questions no different than a visa application.
The other issue is being denied ETA. Most will never tell you the reason. If you get turned away at the border, they will give you a reason.
And your last part is the irony.
"avoid that crush of arriving and being put on a plane back home."
If you're trying to hide something then you should be expecting "that crush".
If you're honest and just a good faith visitor "that crush" is because you're wrongfully denied.
Is that also necessary if you are a European Passport holder?
Yes, unless it's Irish - EU passports get included a bit later this year.
There are "Visa on arrival" and "e-visa" schemes that are practically the same thing as this, which is why people do think of this as a visa in disguise. Even if it isn't the full process of a normal visa, there is no denying that these electronic travel authorizations are against the spirit of what visa-free travel was all about.
Specially because for many people for decades travel to many of these countries was...
There are "Visa on arrival" and "e-visa" schemes that are practically the same thing as this, which is why people do think of this as a visa in disguise. Even if it isn't the full process of a normal visa, there is no denying that these electronic travel authorizations are against the spirit of what visa-free travel was all about.
Specially because for many people for decades travel to many of these countries was seamless, and with the introduction of things like E-Gates even more convenient...
Visa free travel does not mean: show up with a valid passport and we'll let you in for sure. Some Americans with DUI convictions find that out trying to enter Canada. Why does moving part of the screening to prior to arrival violate the spirit?
@Shiki = 100% correct.
@Dave W - sorry, no cigar.
Dave - what you describe as 'Visa free' is actually (and legally) 'Visa Waiver'. Originally, the purpose of Visa Waiver was provided as a 'courtesy' to a country's allies and where the rate of 'over-stays' from Visa Waiver countries were minimal.
In the USA, Visa Waiver status was originally extended to - IINM - 27 countries out of approx 214 global nations (some 13%)...
@Shiki = 100% correct.
@Dave W - sorry, no cigar.
Dave - what you describe as 'Visa free' is actually (and legally) 'Visa Waiver'. Originally, the purpose of Visa Waiver was provided as a 'courtesy' to a country's allies and where the rate of 'over-stays' from Visa Waiver countries were minimal.
In the USA, Visa Waiver status was originally extended to - IINM - 27 countries out of approx 214 global nations (some 13%) and was 'free' of charge. As a traveller, you still had to fill in an I-94 form on arrival, ensuring that you did not have certain criminal convictions or were guilty of 'moral turpiture' to ensure the integrity of yhe Immigration monitoring. Answering 'Yes' to these two points (among others) would see you turned around at the US entry point and repatriated.
You ask the question "Why does moving part of the screening to prior to arrival violate the spirit?" Its a widely accepted experience statistically, that 99% of Visa Waiver travellers present no problems at Immigration, on entry. By moving to ETA's, the system does become more efficient for inbound processing.
However. the issue here - and the violation of 'spirit' - occurs when you start CHARGING visitors to your country for a service which was previously provided 'free of charge' as a courtesy. In fact, charging for an ETA abrogates the responsibility of the 'host' country and its security protections for its population .. by transferring the cost of security, which is borne by tax-payers and government funding to a 'user-pays' mentality. The whole benefit of encouraging tourism and 'local spend' in a country ie: accommodation, transport, entry fees to attractions, dining, consumer spend etc is to benefit the 'host' country by gaining foreign external revenue ... at minimal costs.
Think of it this way : You invite your six best friends to a cocktail party, where you provide canapes and drinks at your cost (hospitality) VS inviting the same group, providing the same canapes and drinks ... and then asking them to pay $70 per head to cover your costs (not hospitable).
Please note that Thailand is also about to introduce a country-wide ETA - but in their case, it will be provided FOC Free of charge, to almost all categories of visitors. That - my friend - does not diminish Thailand's control of immigration, does not place an impost on visitors to the country, does not alienate visitors - and ensures greater Immigration efficiency. That is the TRUE sense of maintaining the philosophy of Visa Waiver and its intent. Compare that with Brazil's changes to Visa Waiver announced some 6 months ago - and roundly criticized by almost everyone on OMAAT. A 'true' backlash.
So, you get your feathers ruffled over a £10 for two years charge? Whatever money the UK collects for this, they could collect through fees added to airfares. But, that would shift a large proportion to frequent travelers. They choose to do it per person, a fairer match of cause and effect. Despite the grumbling here, it isn't about the money. I may have missed some of your points because of the length of your reply.
@Dave W.
They could collect £10 at the border and stamp a 2 year entry permit on the passport or record it electronically.
And people with DUI getting turned away at the Canadian border rightfully deserves it.
It's your duty to do your due diligence before travel. Same as going to a country that requires visa (ETA) but never applied for one because you don't know.
@Dave W.
No, I didn't "get my feathers ruffled' at all. The cost is somewhat inconsequential. What you fail to understand is the concept of 'principle' here.
Question: When is a free Visa Waiver NOT a free Visa Waiver?
Answer: When its taken away and replaced by a faux chargeable 'visa'.
What you ignore is that this action presents a *precedent*, which most other countries tend to follow. With some 214 possible...
@Dave W.
No, I didn't "get my feathers ruffled' at all. The cost is somewhat inconsequential. What you fail to understand is the concept of 'principle' here.
Question: When is a free Visa Waiver NOT a free Visa Waiver?
Answer: When its taken away and replaced by a faux chargeable 'visa'.
What you ignore is that this action presents a *precedent*, which most other countries tend to follow. With some 214 possible global countries, imagine if every one of them applied this same action, each at $20.00? Get your calculator out.
For true frequent travellers, it's already hard enough for many people to keep track and manage 7-10 ETA's. Imagine for a minute, how that affects business people that are required to travel to many countries each year. Or worse, a leisure visitor who might have family spread right across the globe? Or even a curious 'explorer' or retiree? It becomes a significant government-induced nightmare. And lets not kid ourselves here - each country has its own peculiar requirements. Nothing is uniform.
If you plan on transiting the UK and arrive on one ticket and depart on a different ticket*, you are liable to pay the horrendous UK airport tax, which is even higher if you travel in a premium cabin.
Combined with the new Visa Waiver Fee and mediocre transit facilities in UK airports, it will make transiting the UK a rather expensive and unpleasant proposition.
* Example:
CGN-LHR on Eurowings ticket
LHR-YYC on...
If you plan on transiting the UK and arrive on one ticket and depart on a different ticket*, you are liable to pay the horrendous UK airport tax, which is even higher if you travel in a premium cabin.
Combined with the new Visa Waiver Fee and mediocre transit facilities in UK airports, it will make transiting the UK a rather expensive and unpleasant proposition.
* Example:
CGN-LHR on Eurowings ticket
LHR-YYC on Air Canada ticket
The only exception for airport taxes is when inbound and continuning flights are on the same booking locator (e.g. CGN-LHR-YYC on the same BA ticket).
For your own sanity, please don’t transit via LHR. It’s a miserable hell-hole, and the more people who use it the worse it gets.
Use AMS or somewhere that’s designed for transiting. Anywhere but LHR.
What happens in the case of transiting passengers? Do they still need to do this?
Yes, insanely (but Heathrow is lobbying against this)
Same as passengers transiting the US.
So going from one plane to another needs this?
Yes. Transiting requires this. It’s exactly the same as the USA has done for nearly two decades (although almost no US airports have the option of a sterile airside transit).
The solution is in your own hands: don’t transit via LHR (which is anyway a miserable experience).
This is dumb. US should drop ESTA instead and allow unrestricted travel between the US and UK.
The 10 GBP is irrelevant. It's the potential disaster that awaits some people who forget to do it. They should at least allow for "ETA on Arrival" where you pay 100 GBP and sit in a room while they process it. That can avoid worst-case scenarios.
Or you guys can get organised and get your travel documents in place in advance. You won't get to the "wait in a room with cash at LHR" scenario anyway, you'll be denied boarding at your departure airport. In fact you can't check-in - even online - without the ETA in place.
I'm not the one who's gonna get screwed by this. But I have something called empathy for other people. And obviously if they had some sort of "ETA on Arrival", you wouldn't get denied boarding.
"US should drop ESTA instead."
Never going to happen. We will only prevent (spy) more under the terrorism excuse because we can.
Sincerely,
PATRIOT ACT
If Donald Trump were still President, the UK would not have *dared* to do this--NOT!
Your people don’t travel much anyway so what are you yapping about? you are literally talking out of your ___ for no reaso
How so? We charged 21USD so where is the leg to stand?
We should stop supporting the defense of countries that nickel and dime us. You cannot live safely on the American taxpayer money and than turn around and nickel and dime that same taxpayer. Just not fair. At the very least American taxpayers should have a free and visa free entry into all European nations it protects. Period!
Agreed. And same should go for the US, which applies ESTA requirements on many allies and partners, including Europe!
If UK was paying for our defense needs, I would agree. But the America taxpayer spends a lot of money for protection of the European nations and gets nothing in return. Now they are nickle and diming us. Not acceptable.
UK spends more than 2% of its GDP on NATO.
With US being the only country to ever trigger article 5 of NATO treaty, I expect that ESTA requirement will be withdrawn for all NATO countries :)
I disagree this is a money grab. It is way cheaper and easier to add, say, £3 to the airline fee per passenger-flight out of the UK to destinations outside Europe than to charge £10 per traveler every two years given the cost to implement and maintain this system.
The renewed Trump era of Isolationism sees your pipedream on the scrapheap, @Manny!
Your lot have voted for a sh!tstorm beyond your wildest nightmare, so springclean the bunker and buckle up!
They should have looked at Singapore. You pre-register and flash through the airport in no time.
The Malaysian also have this registration thing but have not yet figured out how to integrate it to the immigration system and one still spends minutes with an officer doing all things on his keyboard, after having stood in line for ages.
I passed a few times through NZ earlier this year and it was breeze.
...They should have looked at Singapore. You pre-register and flash through the airport in no time.
The Malaysian also have this registration thing but have not yet figured out how to integrate it to the immigration system and one still spends minutes with an officer doing all things on his keyboard, after having stood in line for ages.
I passed a few times through NZ earlier this year and it was breeze.
UK immigration has usually long lines. If this ETA thing allows you to breeze through the auto-gates it would be an improvement - provided they place plenty of them. And ideally fast working auto-gates like Singapore, Indonesia. The auto gates in Amsterdam are crap and often not even working.
UK eGates can be used by passport holders from several countries already.
It will soon cost you £10 to do literally the same thing at same speed.
PRO tip; Standing in line waiting for an officer still will not get you a passport stamp.
Having to fill out paperwork ahead of time, take a photo of yourself to submit etc. is not "the same thing at the same speed." Also, Singapore requires pre-registration too, although the UK version sounds more cumbersome.
Why this obsession with getting a passport stamp?
@Dave W: Same reason as why the obsession with taking selfies?
Let’s all thank Australia for making this mainstream
Yes, who doesn't love breakdancing and money grab scheme disguised as fake visa.
At least NZ and the UK let you do it every 2 years and Schengen will be 3. Give me an option to, at a higher rate, of course, register a new passport for the life of than passport. The system can still (and probably does) check me at least annually on multi-year ETAs.
Ever since their vote to leave EU the country has gone completely crazy! Poor Isolationists.
Brexit was MUKGA.
Wait till we get another MAGA.
Quickly get a 10 year visa to China.
It's going to cost $2000 soon.
What about dual citizenship? USA and Germany? What will we do ?
Pay double?
You'll choose the passport of the country you want to protect you in the UK (and then act accordingly).
@henare: You are not protected by a passport but by a citizenship, and you are protected no matter what document you used for entry. E.g. dual national of US/Germany can still apply for consular protection of Germany even if they entered on their UK passport.
With this change will the automated egate works like today when you arrive in Heathrow.
Yes, they will. They will just check that you have the ETA as part of the other checks they do today.
Does this include transit pax?
I hope the next admin comes to some truce with UK and Europe on a visa fee waivers reciprocally. Just seems sort of silly given how much more money is generated by the tourism underlying the travel.
"The Foreign Office loves foreigners but the British people want you to be nasty to them."
-Bernard Woolley (Yes, Minister)
Yeah, I'm also wondering if transit pax have to pay this. Anyone knows?
Yes, insanely, the current proposal INCLUDES TRANSIT
Good, the US has been ripping off the rest of the world with ESTAs for years.
Is this ETA going to be required for travelers who are simply transiting the UK (e.g. connecting at LHR)?
Unfortunately yes, as of right now. A truly insane component of this plan that will kill Heathrow as a transfer hub. The airport is lobbying like crazy against it.
It wont affect LHR as a transfer hub at all.
It's certainly a non-zero burden, but I don't think an £10 process is going to "kill LHR as a transfer hub".
Welcome to 2024. One reply says this will "kill LHR as a transfer hub" and the other says it "won't affect it at all". Obviously both are wrong, and right. Border-thickening is an unfortunate trend in the brave new world, where so many xenophobic voters need coddling.
Right now, yes. But I expect it to eventually go away once British Airways and Heathrow win the battle. There is a precedent - after Brexit, the EU required a transit visa from those who were not UK citizens but lived in the UK with a residence permit. Exemption was given to those who had a Schengen, US, Canada or Japan visa. Lufthansa & other European carriers finally prevailed and from late June this year,...
Right now, yes. But I expect it to eventually go away once British Airways and Heathrow win the battle. There is a precedent - after Brexit, the EU required a transit visa from those who were not UK citizens but lived in the UK with a residence permit. Exemption was given to those who had a Schengen, US, Canada or Japan visa. Lufthansa & other European carriers finally prevailed and from late June this year, those with a UK residence permit could transit a European airport without a transit visa. There is a small list of countries whose citizens still need a transit visa even if they are UK residents.
I was reading today that France and the Netherlands no longer require a transit visa for residents in the U.K. who are not citizens or EU residents.
Poor, inconvenienced first-worlders.
Right?
I offer everyone a box of tissues.
This is nothing but a visa in disguise. NZ which is raising their fee has a similar “travel authorization” as does Australia, both of which are quite pricey. US has it and there is a nominal charge there.
All they’re doing is getting rid of a “visa” while adding this authorization with a fee tacked on. It’s nothing but a revenue raising measure.
If you think filling out a form with simple questions online and getting approval within minutes is a "visa in disguise", you clearly never applied for an actual visa.
Eh - the process for "real" visas really varies - it can be a lengthy process or a simple one. I've gone through both (China, Kenya, etc.)
@Samo
I just love comments like this. It shows how someone who travel to 2-3 places in their life have the rest of the world generalized.
Very American of you.
If you think filling out a form with simple questions online and getting approval within minutes is a not a "visa", you clearly never applied for an actual visa "on arrival".
And I'm not talking about visa exemption countries.
@Eskimo: I'm European and went through the process of obtaining proper visa multiple times in my life (incl. US visa back in the day when it was needed for me). Trust me, ESTA was a major improvement compared to that and certainly didn't feel like another visa :)
If you're going to charge me a Tenner for a fake visa, at least give me a bloody stamp on my passport.
And you can shove the rest of my expensive APD up your arse.
Stamps are going away. Passports will soon be gone as well. As will cash. All better to track you with.
UK continuing to shoot themselves in the foot, as usual. First they discouraged people from spending their money there when they stopped accepting EU ID cards (school trips from the EU basically disappeared altogether), now they're adding even more annoying red tape. While the former is much more inconvenient than the travel authorisation, one has to wonder why are they so keen on discouraging tourists from coming.
And yes, I know about ETIAS, but EU...
UK continuing to shoot themselves in the foot, as usual. First they discouraged people from spending their money there when they stopped accepting EU ID cards (school trips from the EU basically disappeared altogether), now they're adding even more annoying red tape. While the former is much more inconvenient than the travel authorisation, one has to wonder why are they so keen on discouraging tourists from coming.
And yes, I know about ETIAS, but EU can afford that and it's not like Brits have dozens of places on the continent they can go without it, like EU citizens do.
Going by the hoards of school children from France and Italy in London, those school trips haven't disappeared at all as much as I'd like them to!
Where is Buttigieg when you need him? He should get off his butt and pressure the British to fee exempt Americans. If they refuse, Kamala should punish them.
The US can be except as soon as the UK is excempt from ESTAs.
The UK's new fee is $13, whereas the US charges British citizens a $21 ESTA fee, and has done for many years.
Maybe the US should be "punished" by your logic?
So it’s ok for yanks to apply an ESTA fee but not ok for the UK to finally reciprocate?
The US federal government is wrong but 2 wrongs don't make a right. There should be freedom of movement and no fees between civilized countries, like the EU countries, EFTA countries, UK, Canada, USA, Japan, Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, Australia, NZ, Palau, Tuvalu, Marshall Islands, Micronesia.
For now, since Secretary Pete Buttigieg is the boss along with Kamala, he should get off his butt and fix things.
Because pete has unlimited time and resources so he should find a way to prioritize EVERYTHING as top priority? Nobody is going to seriously deal with this as any kind of legit issue that needs fixing.
@Icarus - what prevents you from thinking that both are wrong?
Why would you think this is within Buttigieg's portfolio? This would be a Department of State issue.
I think I have a slightly different take - the 10 GBP fee feels a little bit petty and annoying to me given that we already have to pay ~200 GBP for the privilege of flying from the UK, which is significantly higher than any other country.
It's not the cost that is a problem, it's the bureaucracy. And it's not just the form, it's the document checks that will need to be more complex at the airports, etc.
I doubt you'll be showing actual documents at arrivals. Like with USA ESTA, the passenger uploads their data to the airline ticket a few days before you fly as part as Advanced Passenger Information. The customs system has it logged against your passport anyway.....although I wouldn't want to be first in line to test it at LHR - they system will be super-glitchy for the first 48 hours guaranteed.
You mean the privilege of their award tickets?
Lol unless you don’t pay cash fares, the taxes are baked in to the cash fare, which is very reasonable. On a business class ticket, I have always seen it comparatively priced to an Air France or AA flight
It’s not like taxes go up by 800 gbp and the flight is much more expensive than competitors prices
How will this affect last-minute bookings? Will airline booking flow require "your ETA number" to book? Suppose you're transiting through Europe enroute home to North America. You get hit with IRROPS or you just change plans (AF downgrades you from La Première) and decide (2 hours before the flight) to go thru LHR instead.
It's all very well for advance-book people to minimize this as no big deal. But it has the potential to badly...
How will this affect last-minute bookings? Will airline booking flow require "your ETA number" to book? Suppose you're transiting through Europe enroute home to North America. You get hit with IRROPS or you just change plans (AF downgrades you from La Première) and decide (2 hours before the flight) to go thru LHR instead.
It's all very well for advance-book people to minimize this as no big deal. But it has the potential to badly disrupt last-minuters like me.
I'm going to apply for an ETA every 23 months, never be without one, just like a passport.
Your take is likely how most people that travel with regularity to any of the major countries/blocs that require ETAs.
It is also worth noting that S. Korea had an ETA but has dropped it for US citizens. Not sure how many countries have done similar but it is worth noting those cases as much as in the opposite direction
Same if you were flying from Mexico to Europe and needed to reroute through US. It sounds like most people should be approved almost instantaneously. Regardless still a headache for travelers and airlines but should have a material impact on most people
I actually like ESTA in that regard. It gives me the "I can't enter the US" wild card in case an airline wants to reroute me through there. Normally I wouldn't be able to decline just because it's inconvenient but not having valid documents is perfectly legal justification for why I need another routing.
It affects last-minute bookings the very same way like the US-ESTA. If you are lucky, it gets approved within minutes and you can check-in. If not, it may take upto 72 hours in case of the US-ESTA … In my experience, it was mostly a few hours (like 4-6) until it got approved.