smh.com.au
New EU and US Fees Hike International Travel Costs for Australians
Australians will pay a €20 ETIAS fee to enter the Schengen Area starting in late 2026, in addition to a new $250 US fee for some travelers, increasing the cost of international travel.
- What are the immediate financial implications for Australian travelers visiting the Schengen Area and the US?
- Starting in late 2026, Australians traveling to the Schengen Area will pay a €20 ETIAS fee, similar to the US ESTA. This adds to the $250 fee for US entry for those ineligible for ESTA, increasing overall travel costs.
- How do the newly implemented ETIAS and US travel fees compare to existing systems, and what concerns have they raised?
- The new ETIAS fee, initially planned at €7, aligns the EU with other countries' travel authorization programs. Airlines for Europe voiced concern about the cumulative impact on families, despite the fee being a small fraction of total travel expenses. The higher fee follows a recent US fee increase.
- What potential long-term effects might these increased travel costs have on tourism patterns between Australia and Europe/the US?
- The rising costs of international travel, exemplified by the ETIAS and increased US fees, may impact travel patterns. While demand for European travel remains high, even extending into shoulder seasons (May and September), the added financial burden could affect future travel choices, particularly for budget-conscious travelers.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The article frames the ETIAS fee increase as primarily negative news for Australian travelers. The headline and introduction emphasize the increased cost and its impact on Australian tourists. While concerns from European travel industry groups are mentioned, the focus remains on the impact on Australian travelers. This framing may inadvertently shape public perception towards viewing the fee as an unnecessary burden rather than a necessary measure for security or operational costs.
Language Bias
The article uses some language that might be considered slightly loaded. Terms like "slugged" and "unwelcome news" carry negative connotations. While "intrepid international travellers" might be considered positive, it is a subjective assessment. More neutral alternatives could be used, such as "charged" instead of "slugged," and "new fee" instead of "unwelcome news." The phrase "big beautiful bill" is presented in quotation marks as a direct quote from President Trump, not as the article's opinion.
Bias by Omission
The article focuses primarily on the financial impact of the new ETIAS fee on Australian travelers. While it mentions concerns from European travel industry groups, it omits perspectives from the EU regarding the necessity of the fee and the allocation of collected funds. Additionally, it lacks information on the potential economic benefits the fee might generate for the EU. This omission may lead to an incomplete understanding of the overall context and implications of the ETIAS fee.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a somewhat simplistic eitheor framing by highlighting the increase in travel costs as a significant negative for Australian travelers, without adequately exploring potential benefits or counterarguments. The inclusion of Mark Trim's quote, "While there is a general 'cost of living crisis' in most major economies, if $20-30 is a dealbreaker to you then really you shouldn't be travelling anywhere," presents an oversimplified perspective that overlooks the financial realities faced by various travelers.
Sustainable Development Goals
The new €20 fee for ETIAS, in addition to other rising travel costs, disproportionately affects low-income Australians, potentially limiting their access to international travel and cultural exchange opportunities, thus increasing inequality.