Welsh visitor tax plans spark anger in local tourism industry: ‘We’ll be clobbered by it’
The rugged mountains, limestone caves and spectacular waterfalls of Bannau Brycheiniog – the Brecon Beacons – attract visitors from all over the world.
Tourism is a vital part of the local economy. But local attractions say the industry would be devastated by the Welsh government’s plans for a nightly visitor tax.
“In an area like this all we’ve got is tourism and farming – there is nothing else,” says Ashford Price from the National Showcaves Centre, a visitor complex of cathedral sized caverns, winding tunnels, a dry ski slope, shire horse centre, self-catering accommodation and campsite.
“If they go on like this the future for Welsh tourism is really, really bleak. It will be an absolute catastrophe.”
Ashford Price says the local area relies on tourism
The proposed fee would be £1.25 for those staying at hotels, bed and breakfasts and self-catering accommodation – and 75p for campsites, caravan sites, and hostels.
Ashford is secretary of the Welsh Association of Visitor Attractions. In protest against the plans, its more than one hundred members closed their attractions for a day.
“Even Welsh people who live in Wales will be clobbered by this tourism tax,” he said.
“It’s quite high, there’s no reduction for children. For a family that will add roughly £35, £40 a week. If you’re staying two weeks, as many people do, it’s £70 on top of your bill. At a time when everybody’s earnings are really struggling, it’s utter insanity to put Wales at such a disadvantage.
“There will be no more big developments. We already cancelled a development for £1.5m and I know other attractions are doing the same. I don’t think the Welsh government really understands how demoralised people feel.”
Anthony Christopher
‘It’s a disaster’
In the nearby village, Anthony Christopher, landlord of the Penycae Inn, is deeply frustrated.
“I just feel like calling this government a bunch of weasels,” he said.
“We’re a small family business and all these extra taxes are taking away the will to do anything else.
“We have national insurance already – contributions are very high. VAT is very high. Now this tax is coming – it’s a disaster. We have to put this extra charge on the customers – how much more can we put on the customers? It’s terrible.”
Anthony has just converted an old school building into a 14-bedroom hotel – due to open in January.
“If I knew this was going to happen I may not have built my hotel. It’s very worrying.”
Many areas in Wales have struggled with the impact of tourism in recent years, with complaints about overflowing car parks, traffic jams, litter and even human faeces on Mount Snowdon.
Rubbish on Yr Wyddfa (Mount Snowdon). Pic: British Mountaineering Council/Tom Carrick
The Welsh government argues giving councils the power to charge a tourism tax would help pay for better local services.
“During a period of sustained austerity of the sort we’ve seen over the last 14 years, local authorities inevitably end up focusing their spend on those things for which they’ve got statutory obligations – social care, education and so on,” said Finance Secretary Mark Drakeford.
“That has meant there’s been a reduction in the amount of money available for local authorities to invest in infrastructure that makes them successful places for tourists to visit. This is a way of collecting a very small contribution from every one of us who makes a visit to be reinvested in the conditions that make for that visit to be a success.
“It’s money that would be reinvested in the tourism industry, for example, clean beaches and safe footpaths and car parks and public toilets.”
Mark Drakeford. File pic: PA
‘People simply absorb it’
The tourism industry accounts for 11% of all jobs in Wales. But an impact assessment commissioned by the Welsh government predicted that in a worst case scenario, 730 jobs could be lost in the sector if a visitor tax was introduced across the country, with an economic cost of £47.5 million. It also predicted 340 local authority jobs would be created.
Mr Drakeford insists the tax will boost tourism – not damage it.
“For those who have fears that the very modest visitor levy will put visitors off, the experience of around the world is that simply isn’t the case. There is a great deal now of empirical evidence for many places that have introduced visitor levies of this sort, not just abroad, but in Manchester, for example,” he said.
“The evidence is not just from big places like Venice, but from rural France, where there’s a levy of this sort. People simply absorb it as part of the costs of their holiday.”
Tourism taxes in cities across Europe range from around 50p to £5 a night, although businesses generally benefit from lower rates of VAT than the 20% paid in the UK.
The idea is becoming increasingly popular across the UK.
The Scottish Parliament voted through similar legislation to that proposed for Wales in July, with Edinburgh set to become the first council to start charging visitors a tourist tax of 5%.
Manchester’s £1 a night tourism levy could raise £2.8m
While some regional mayors like Andy Burnham have been calling for equivalent powers to be introduced in England, the Westminster government has no plans to do so.
But local areas can work around this through businesses coming together to set up their own schemes. Manchester’s £1 a night charge raised £2.8m in its first year and hoteliers in Liverpool are about to vote on a similar idea.
Other cities, including York and London, are also considering the option – though a plan for Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole has been put on hold after objections from hotel owners about the ballot held there.
Read more:
Cambridge considering tourist tax at hotels
Venice plans to double tourist tax after trial
Despite the backlash from local businesses, the Senedd are due to vote on the legislation in the summer.
If passed, councils will then consult with local people on whether to take up their new powers. Tourists could then start being charged in 2027.
Shares in The Magnum Ice Cream Company (TMICC) have fallen slightly on debut after the completion of its spin-off from Unilever amid a continuing civil war with one of its best-known brands.
Shares in the Netherlands-based company are trading for the first time following the demerger.
It creates the world’s biggest ice cream company, controlling around one fifth of the global market.
Primary Magnum shares, in Amsterdam, opened at €12.20 – down on the €12.80 reference price set by the EuroNext exchange, though they later settled just above that level, implying a market value of €7.9bn – just below £7bn.
The company is also listed in London and New York.
Money latest: The cheapest days to travel by plane
Unilever stock was down 3.1% on the FTSE 100 in the wake of the spin off.
The demerger allows London-headquartered Unilever to concentrate on its wider stable of consumer brands, including Marmite, Dove soap and Domestos.
The decision to hive off the ice cream division, made in early 2024, gives a greater focus on a market that is tipped to grow by up to 4% each year until 2029.
Ben & Jerry’s accounts for a greater volume of group revenue now under TMICC. Pic: Reuters
But it has been dogged by a long-running spat with the co-founders of Ben & Jerry’s, which now falls under the TMICC umbrella and accounts for 14% of group revenue.
Unilever bought the US brand in 2000, but the relationship has been sour since, despite the creation of an independent board at that time aimed at protecting the brand’s social mission.
The most high-profile spat came in 2021 when Ben & Jerry’s took the decision not to sell ice cream in Israeli-occupied Palestinian territories on the grounds that sales would be “inconsistent” with its values.
Unilever responded by selling the business to its licensee in Israel.
A series of rows have followed akin to a tug of war, with Magnum refusing repeated demands by the co-founders of Ben & Jerry’s to sell the brand back.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Sept: ‘Free Ben & Jerry’s’
Magnum and Unilever argue its mission has strayed beyond what was acceptable back in 2000, with the brand evolving into one-sided advocacy on polarising topics that risk reputational and business damage.
TMICC is currently trying to remove the chair of Ben & Jerry’s independent board.
It said last month that Anuradha Mittal “no longer meets the criteria” to serve after internal investigations.
An audit of the separate Ben & Jerry’s Foundation, where she is also a trustee, found deficiencies in financial controls and governance. Magnum said the charitable arm risked having funding removed unless the alleged problems were addressed.
The Reuters news agency has since reported that Ms Mittal has no plans to quit her roles, and accused Magnum of attempts to “discredit” her and undermine the authority of the independent board.
Magnum boss Peter ter Kulve said on Monday: “Today is a proud milestone for everyone associated with TMICC. We became the global leader in ice cream as part of the Unilever family. Now, as an independent listed company, we will be more agile, more focused, and more ambitious than ever.”
Commenting on the demerger, Hargreaves Lansdown equity analyst Aarin Chiekrie said: “TMICC is already free cash flow positive, and profitable in its own right. The balance sheet is in decent shape, but dividends are off the cards until 2027 as the group finds its footing as a standalone business.
“That could cause some downward pressure on the share price in the near term, as dividend-focussed investment funds that hold Unilever will be handed TMICC shares, the latter of which they may be forced to sell to abide by their investment mandate.”
Donald Trump has said he will be “involved” in the decision on whether Netflix should be allowed to buy Warner Bros, as the $72bn (£54bn) deal attracts a media industry backlash.
The US president acknowledged in remarks to reporters there “could be a problem”, acknowledging concerns over the streaming giant’s market dominance.
Crucially, he did not say where he stood on the issue.
Money latest: The cheapest days to travel by plane
It was revealed on Friday that Netflix, already the world’s biggest streaming service by market share, had agreed to buy Warner Bros Discovery’s TV, film studios and HBO Max streaming division.
The deal aims to complete late next year after the Discovery element of the business, mainly legacy TV channels showing cartoons, news and sport, has been spun off.
But the deal has attracted cross-party criticism on competition grounds, and there is also opposition in Hollywood.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Netflix agrees $72bn takeover of Warner Bros
The Writers Guild of America said: “The world’s largest streaming company swallowing one of its biggest competitors is what antitrust laws were designed to prevent.
“The outcome would eliminate jobs, push down wages, worsen conditions for all entertainment workers, raise prices for consumers, and reduce the volume and diversity of content for all viewers.”
File pic: Reuters
Republican Senator, Roger Marshall, said in a statement: “Netflix’s attempt to buy Warner Bros would be the largest media takeover in history – and it raises serious red flags for consumers, creators, movie theaters, and local businesses alike.
“One company should not have full vertical control of the content and the distribution pipeline that delivers it. And combining two of the largest streaming platforms is a textbook horizontal Antitrust problem.
“Prices, choice, and creative freedom are at stake. Regulators need to take a hard look at this deal, and realize how harmful it would be for consumers and Western society.”
Paramount Skydance and Comcast, the parent company of Sky News, were two other bidders in the auction process that preceded the announcement.
The Reuters news agency, citing information from sources, said their bids were rejected in favour of Netflix for different reasons.
Paramount’s was seen as having funding concerns, they said, while Comcast’s was deemed not to offer so many earlier benefits.
Paramount is run by David Ellison, the son of the Oracle tech billionaire Larry Ellison, who is a close ally of Mr Trump.
The president said of the Netflix deal’s path to regulatory clearance: “I’ll be involved in that decision”.
On the likely opposition to the deal. he added: “That’s going to be for some economists to tell. But it is a big market share. There’s no question it could be a problem.”
-
Sports2 years agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports3 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Sports3 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment3 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment1 year agoHere are the best electric bikes you can buy at every price level in October 2024