welt.de
German Tourism Taxes Surge in 2025
German towns significantly increased their tourism taxes in 2025, with Bad Münstereifel leading at €3 per day due to budget constraints, while Spiekeroog tops the list at €5.50, highlighting a north-south disparity in rates and sparking concerns among tourists.
- How do the Kurtaxe rates vary geographically in Germany, and what factors explain these differences?
- Many German seaside and island resorts show the highest Kurtaxe rates. Spiekeroog charges €5.50, while others like Hürtgenwald (€5) and Koserow (€3.65) also implemented substantial increases. This pattern reveals a geographical disparity in taxation, with northern areas exhibiting higher rates.
- What are the most significant changes in German tourism taxes in 2025, and what are their immediate impacts on travelers?
- Germany saw significant increases in its local tourism taxes (Kurtaxe) in 2025, with some towns doubling their rates. Bad Münstereifel leads with a €3 tax, a €2 increase, driven by budget shortfalls. This rise brings many towns in line with already high-tax areas like Tegernsee and Garmisch-Partenkirchen.", "Many German seaside and island resorts show the highest Kurtaxe rates. Spiekeroog charges €5.50, while others like Hürtgenwald (€5) and Koserow (€3.65) also implemented substantial increases. This pattern reveals a geographical disparity in taxation, with northern areas exhibiting higher rates.", "The rising Kurtaxe, coupled with its often meager return in services for tourists, is a growing point of contention. The exemption from inclusion in package holiday prices exacerbates the issue, leaving tourists unexpectedly burdened with extra costs. This trend could discourage tourism in affected areas and fuel demand for transparent pricing practices.", Q1="What are the most significant changes in German tourism taxes in 2025, and what are their immediate impacts on travelers?", Q2="How do the Kurtaxe rates vary geographically in Germany, and what factors explain these differences?", Q3="What are the broader implications of the rising Kurtaxe, considering both tourist perspectives and local government revenue needs?", ShortDescription="German towns significantly increased their tourism taxes in 2025, with Bad Münstereifel leading at €3 per day due to budget constraints, while Spiekeroog tops the list at €5.50, highlighting a north-south disparity in rates and sparking concerns among tourists.", ShortTitle="German Tourism Taxes Surge in 2025")) Führung der Prozente-Hitparade. Besonders ärgerlich: Trotz Endpreisverordnung muss die Kurtaxe dank einer Ausnahmegenehmigung nie in die Reisepreise eingerechnet werden. Selbst wer bei Dertour oder TUI eine Pauschalreise bucht, muss für die Kurtaxe am Urlaubsziel oft noch mal das Portemonnaie öffnen. Allerdings sind Veranstalter und Vermieter verpflichtet, im Prospekt auf die zusätzlichen Kosten hinzuweisen. Dass es auch ganz ohne geht, beweisen ein paar kleine gallische – äh, thüringische Orte: Suhl, Nordhausen, Gotha und Apolda verzichten auf eine Bettensteuer und werben ganz offensiv mit diesem Vorteil. Auch die Großstadt München verlangt keine, allerdings nicht freiwillig. Der Freistaat Bayern hat es ihr durch eine Änderung des Kommunalabgabengesetzes 2023 untersagt. Der Grund: Eine solche Steuer schrecke Gäste ab. Neben eigenen Recherchen diente holidaycheck.de als Quelle. Aufgeführt sind stets die Abgaben pro Urlaubstag in der Hochsaison. Für begleitende Personen, Kinder und in der Nebensaison gelten oft geringere Werte.
- What are the broader implications of the rising Kurtaxe, considering both tourist perspectives and local government revenue needs?
- The rising Kurtaxe, coupled with its often meager return in services for tourists, is a growing point of contention. The exemption from inclusion in package holiday prices exacerbates the issue, leaving tourists unexpectedly burdened with extra costs. This trend could discourage tourism in affected areas and fuel demand for transparent pricing practices.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The article is framed around the negative impact of Kurtaxe increases on tourists. The headline and introduction emphasize the increases and the 'Ärgernis Nummer eins' (annoyance number one) status of the tax. The use of words like "aufschlag" (surcharge), "zugelangt" (grabbed heavily) and "Zwangsobolus" (forced levy) contributes to this framing. While the article does mention counterarguments (benefits included in some taxes), the overall emphasis on price increases shapes reader perception towards negativity. The presentation of a "Kurtaxen-Hitparade" (Kurtax ranking) further underscores the competitive aspect of price increases rather than focusing on services provided.
Language Bias
The article employs language that tends to portray the Kurtaxe negatively. Words and phrases such as "Ärgernis Nummer eins" (annoyance number one), "zugelangt" (grabbed heavily), and "Zwangsobolus" (forced levy) are emotionally charged and contribute to a negative perception. The use of "klamm" (tight) to describe the Kassen (cash reserves) is also emotionally colored. More neutral alternatives could include describing the increases as "adjustments," instead of "surcharges." The description of the tax as an 'annoyance' can be replaced with a more neutral phrase, such as 'additional cost'.
Bias by Omission
The article focuses primarily on the increase in Kurtaxe across various German locations, providing specific examples of price hikes. However, it omits a detailed discussion of the services and amenities provided in exchange for the tax in each location. While some examples of services (e.g., free bus use, access to beaches) are mentioned, a comprehensive comparison is lacking, potentially leading to a skewed perception of value. The article also lacks discussion of the economic justification for these increases beyond mentions of "klamm" (tight) Kassen in Bad Münstereifel and general statements about the tax's revenue-generating function. This omission prevents a full understanding of the municipalities' financial situations and the necessity of the increases.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a somewhat simplistic view of the Kurtaxe, framing it primarily as an annoyance for tourists. While it acknowledges some benefits like free public transport in certain areas, it doesn't fully explore the complexities of balancing tourism revenue with local needs and infrastructure maintenance. The narrative subtly encourages a negative perception without presenting a balanced discussion of the advantages and disadvantages. It presents a false dichotomy between the inconvenience of the tax and its implied lack of corresponding benefits.
Sustainable Development Goals
The article highlights significant disparities in tourist taxes across different German regions. Higher taxes in some areas disproportionately affect low-income tourists, exacerbating existing inequalities in access to leisure and travel. The lack of inclusion of the tax in package deals further disadvantages budget travelers.