Should Hawaii visitors and residents both pay an environmental fee? More questions are back on the table.
Leave a Comment
143 thoughts on “Controversial $50 Hawaii Visitor Fee Plan Returns”
Should Hawaii visitors and residents both pay an environmental fee? More questions are back on the table.
We should do the same here in Arizona. Las Vegas should do the same as well as my home town of Massachusetts. In fact we should charge everyone in a car $50 everytine the cross state lines. Why should only one state do it?
The EU is doing this in 2023
abcnews.go.com/US/us-travelers-face-fee-enter-europe-year/story?id=85925643
I have been to Hawai’i 11 times (pre covid). The last time that I went, I took my son, Daughter-in-law and two granddaughters. The cost of airfares, accommodation, food, etc. was about 14,500 in Canadian dollars (a little over 11,000 US). That was before accommodation taxes were increased as well as visitors fees for Hanauma Bay, Diamond Head, etc. It seems like half the time that I read Beat of Hawai’i somebody is proposing a new fee, tax or restriction for visitors. I can’t speak for other potential visitors, but I find this discouraging. There are a lot of other places in the World where we can go that don’t seem to be putting up barriers to tourists.
This article brings the readers further into the Controversial World of Usage/Entrance Fee’s and possible structure of it. Any Fee’s attached due to “Climate Related Issues” should be levied upon Residents and Tourists alike. Where it becomes more contentious is Who should pay “Usage Fee’s.” Tourists certainly should pay if/when they use, however, should Residents of the State? They probably already do pay and don’t realize it. States typically charge Residents in non obvious ways, Property Owners pay by a hidden fee in their property taxes. There’s also a hidden fee on Vehicle Registration/Plates. A property owner living elsewhere gets double charged if they don’t have in State Registration Vehicles. Fee’s are often dubiously hidden.
Simply, increase occupancy taxes on guests in hotel rooms at resorts, and the like. Such taxes are levied at many locations and are particularly high in venues like New York City.
I’d rather pay a one-time fee upfront on each visit than to get hit with additional non-resident fees at every beach, etc.
We discovered Hawaii late in life, 2007, and have visited many times since. We’ve never had a bad time, loved everything.
Do you wonder why many “visitors” exhibit an attitude of entitlement and treat the islands like an amusement park? Stand by. A “Universal Visitor Fee” will be treated like a day pass to Disneyland and increase visitor expectations.
I fear Hawaii will make the same mistake that the US park Service made with Yosemite in the 1990’s. Now only the financially elite can afford to visit more than a day.
Love your stuff. Keep up the good work.
As a frequent visitor to the Islands over the past 42 years I would have no problem with a $50 per visitor fee. It’s a nothing amount of money to anyone vacationing in Hawaii and if it would help protect Hawaii I believe most travelers would agree. Of course the issue is who would do what with the money and how high could the fee go? Government will screw it up as usual. Also, residents should not pay a fee.
This fee has already been implemented in the form of the TAT (Transient Accommodations Tax) – how many (much) taxes can a government want/need? And where have all the previous tax revenues been spent? The TOT on its own is enough to address the problem so where are the TAT tax revenues being used (allocated, routed) should be the question to be answered. Why is the state of Hawaii grabbing any of this money for general fund purposes? (I found info on this in a 2016 paper available online at uhero.hawaii.edu/RePEc/hae/wpaper/WP_2016-4.pdf ). These funds should be spent on running and maintaining parks, beaches, green spaces, etc – and NOT one dollar sent to the general fund! Bottom line: plenty of revenue is already available.
What a great idea. The fee should be set high enough to keep out the undesirable element.
The money can be used to hire more government workers to enforce the rules and also used to raise salaries and retirement benefits for them. Fifty dollars sounds way too low, but I am sure it can be raised every year.
Return of Rimpac should help