Photo: RNZ / Liu Chen
The government is almost tripling the fee charged to most international tourists from $35 to $100 from the start of October.
The International Visitor Conservation and Tourism Levy (IVL) was introduced by the Labour government in 2019, with funds raised to go toward maintaining public services and tourism sites.
National at the time opposed the levy as "just another tax" but has since come round to the idea, with Tourism Minister Matt Doocey on Tuesday saying tourists should "contribute more to New Zealand".
The Tourism Industry Aotearoa (TIA), however, opposed the move, called the fee "a blunt instrument" and warned an increase to $100 would create "a significant barrier".
In a statement, Doocey acknowledged the "hugely important role" of international tourism to New Zealand's economy, but said it came with a cost to local communities through pressure on infrastructure and higher maintenance costs across the conservation estate.
The higher fee would ensure visitors paid their bit toward the upkeep of public services and high-value conservation projects, he said.
Doocey said the increased fee was unlikely to deter many people from coming to New Zealand, pointing out $100 would generally make up less than 3 percent of their total spending here.
"The new IVL remains competitive with countries like Australia and the UK, and we are confident New Zealand will continue to be seen as an attractive visitor destination by many around the world."
Australia charged a departure tax of AU$70 (NZ$76), while the United Kingdom charges varying rates of Air Passenger Duty depending on the distance of travel.
Doocey said public consultation had found 93 percent of the roughly 1100 submitters were in support of a hike to help cover tourism costs.
But TIA issued its own statement last week in anticipation of Tuesday's announcement. Chief executive Rebecca Ingram said its analysis suggested a $100 IVL could scare off as many as 48,000 visitors every year, along with up to $273m of spending.
She also pointed to the recent 62 percent increase to some immigration visa and levy charges, along with cuts to Tourism New Zealand's budget.
"We are particularly concerned about the cumulative effect of these fees, which we believe will have a material impact on visitor numbers, a vital workforce and the economic contributions they bring."
Minister of conservation Tama Potaka said taxpayers already stumped up close to $884 million a year directly on tourism and conservation.
"This money funds Tourism New Zealand, protects biodiversity within the Department of Conservation estate and provides quality experiences at the likes of Milford Sound, Aoraki/Mt Cook and the Tongariro Alpine Crossing," Potaka said.
The IVL was charged when applying for a visa or New Zealand Electronic Travel Authority to most tourists, people on working holidays, and some workers and students coming to New Zealand.
There were some exceptions, most notably Australian citizens and permanent residents, and people from many Pacific nations.
In 2022, former Tourism Minister Stuart Nash proposed the levy be hiked to $200, but was blocked by his Cabinet colleagues.
The Green Party is supportive of the increase, as long as the government can demonstrate the revenue is going towards conservation and biodiversity efforts, and not simply making up for government underfunding.
About 7 percent of the Department of Conservation's (DOC) annual funding comes from the IVL.
Greens' conservation spokesperson Lan Pham said while she was pleased National had come around to the idea after voting against it in opposition, the government also cut DOC's budget by $48m.
"The Green Party would love to see DOC funded in a way that it is actually able to fulfil its role, and be a functional agency, and then we would absolutely celebrate this additional levy supporting biodiversity assets, tracks and huts, things like that," she said.
"I think where the government is getting it wrong is they are cutting DOC off at the knees and then trying to celebrate this good idea - which is a good idea - but not when you've actually got the base chronic underfunding that this government has decided to do."