Traveling to the United Kingdom will soon require an extra step for virtually all visitors, including those from the United States and European Union.
In this post:
UK rolling out widespread Electronic Travel Authorization (ETA)
As it stands, travelers from many parts of the world are able to travel to the UK without pre-registering, thanks to a visa waiver program. However, that will soon be changing, because as of 2025, virtually all foreign visitors (with the exception of those from Ireland) will need to apply for an ETA prior to visiting the UK.
This is 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. However, soon it will be expanded:
- This will apply as of January 8, 2025, for 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 will be extended to those from the European Union
Once this is rolled out, travelers will need to pay £10 to apply for an ETA, and 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. Officially, it can take three working days for an ETA to be approved, though in many cases they’ll be approved faster than that.
The process of applying for an ETA includes providing your passport information and contact details, uploading a photo of yourself, answering questions, and paying a fee.
Officially, these kinds of pre-travel authorizations are intended to give the country a better understanding of who is traveling to the country, 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 2025.
£10 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 traveler forget to do this in advance, and that can cause some serious issues, especially when an instant approval doesn’t come through.
Bottom line
As of early 2025, the United Kingdom will be rolling out an electronic travel authorization requirement for virtually all travelers from visa waiver countries. This will require completing an online form in advance of travel, and paying a fee of £10. 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?
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...
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).
What happens in the case of transiting passengers? Do they still need to do this?
Yes, insanely (but Heathrow is lobbying against this)
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.
If Donald Trump were still President, the UK would not have *dared* to do this--NOT!
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!
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 :)
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.
Let’s all thank Australia for making this mainstream
Yes, who doesn't love breakdancing and money grab scheme disguised as fake visa.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.