Carlton green wrote:Whether there is a need for extra funds and what they will be used on I do not know, but I’m really wondering how logical it is to tax tourism. Taxing tourists surely must make a destination less attractive and that in turn typically reduces visitor numbers. Visitors bring income to places (they spend money in shops, hotels, cafes, and attractions) and without them coming businesses begin to fail and people are made redundant. Perhaps I’m missing something here but overall it seems like a bad idea for Scotland, however for Scotland to do it is a good idea for the rest of the U.K. as it helps to make Wales, Northern Ireland and England relatively cheaper.
They have been taxing tourism in France for quite a while. And I don't think it puts people off going there. If I wanted to go to Scotland I would not be deterred by an extra £50 or whatever. And if that money were channelled directly into making the place better for me to enjoy my holiday it could end up increasing my desire to go there.
I think you miss the point, I said less attractive not unattractive. Yes, some people will still go there but the marginal cost will put others off and the loss of those marginal visitors will have a financial effect. Now should the money all go into making Scotland a better place to visit and should it be spent effectively and efficiently then that might just work, but since when has any Government managed its funds that well ...
Don’t fret, it’s OK to: ride a simple old bike; ride slowly, walk, rest and admire the view; ride off-road; ride in your raincoat; ride by yourself; ride in the dark; and ride one hundred yards or one hundred miles. Your bike and your choices to suit you.
Carlton green wrote:Whether there is a need for extra funds and what they will be used on I do not know, but I’m really wondering how logical it is to tax tourism. Taxing tourists surely must make a destination less attractive and that in turn typically reduces visitor numbers. Visitors bring income to places (they spend money in shops, hotels, cafes, and attractions) and without them coming businesses begin to fail and people are made redundant. Perhaps I’m missing something here but overall it seems like a bad idea for Scotland, however for Scotland to do it is a good idea for the rest of the U.K. as it helps to make Wales, Northern Ireland and England relatively cheaper.
They have been taxing tourism in France for quite a while. And I don't think it puts people off going there. If I wanted to go to Scotland I would not be deterred by an extra £50 or whatever. And if that money were channelled directly into making the place better for me to enjoy my holiday it could end up increasing my desire to go there.
I think you miss the point, I said less attractive not unattractive. Yes, some people will still go there but the marginal cost will put others off and the loss of those marginal visitors will have a financial effect. Now should the money all go into making Scotland a better place to visit and should it be spent effectively and efficiently then that might just work, but since when has any Government managed its funds that well ...
i don't think that such taxes are aimed at making places nicer for tourists to visit. It's more likely to pay for things such as health care, where an area may a have relatively low local populations large visitor numbers put a strain on local hospitals. Also perhaps to provide affordable housing. If you go to say Devon and Cornwall the tourist industry does provide jobs. However, they are low paid and mostly seasonal where as house prices in say Salcombe and St Ives are relatively high due to second home and houses used as holiday lets.
whoof wrote:i don't think that such taxes are aimed at making places nicer for tourists to visit.
If that were to be the case then my personal view is that such a tax would be unjust to the tourists. Taxes raise money to enable services to be given back to those taxed, it’s a form of exchange. A visitor tax places an additional burden on visitors for no additional return to them? To me that would be a daft idea and it has the potential to damage Scotland’s tourist industry - the jobs in it might not be well paid but they’re better for society and the economy than no jobs at all.
Don’t fret, it’s OK to: ride a simple old bike; ride slowly, walk, rest and admire the view; ride off-road; ride in your raincoat; ride by yourself; ride in the dark; and ride one hundred yards or one hundred miles. Your bike and your choices to suit you.
whoof wrote:i don't think that such taxes are aimed at making places nicer for tourists to visit.
Taxes raise money to enable services to be given back to those taxed, it’s a form of exchange.
No they don't. If that were the case there would be no need for taxes, people would just pay for what they used.
Edit: A quick look at my local council spending and 33% of their budget is spent on schools and education. I don't have children but I contribute to this via various forms of taxation but that's not unjust.
Most other countries in Europe tax per night in hotels, typically €1-2. I can't see what the issue is. Alternatively you can increase the NI on employees, or corporation tax, or rates....which will still filter through to the cost paid by tourists.