Special Report – Exit Fee: A Revenue Lifeline for the State or a Ticking Time Bomb for Tourism?

Amid energy crises and intensifying competition in the global tourism industry, Thai tourism faces mounting pressure to undergo major restructuring. Following Surasakdi Panjreuchavalkul's appointment in the Anuthane 2 government, the sector has rapidly shifted toward high-quality tourism. The strategy is being driven through three urgent measures: reducing 60-day visa exemptions from 93 countries to 57 for better tourist screening aligned with quality goals; implementing a 300-baht Thailand Tourism Fee from foreign visitors to fund tourism infrastructure and safety standards; and collecting a 1,000-baht exit fee from Thai travelers to stem capital outflows and support the "half-per-person" subsidy program and long-term tourism funds—projected to generate up to 10 billion baht annually given that 10 million Thais travel abroad yearly.

However, the exit fee has become increasingly controversial. Deputy Prime Minister and Commerce Minister Supatchaya Sutthimanphand, who oversees tourism, has applied the brakes, emphasizing careful consideration before proceeding through the formal cabinet review process. Meanwhile, industry leaders including Tanpol Cheevaratnapon, president of the Thai Travel Industry Association (ATTA), met with tourism officials to propose alternative measures and requested postponement of the exit fee, fearing it would damage Thai travelers' mobility and reduce future international flights.

Adisak Chairatananon, ATTA's secretary general, strongly opposed the measure, urging the government to stop viewing Thais as short-term revenue sources and instead recognize them as diplomatic ambassadors and strategic national assets for international negotiations. He called for concrete implementation of Two-Way Tourism strategy to position Thai tourism as a global leader, arguing that one-directional marketing no longer suffices in today's changing global tourism landscape.

Adisak contended the measure contradicts strategic negotiating power on the world stage and creates multidimensional damage: destabilizing airline cost structures dependent on passenger load factors both ways; undermining diplomatic leverage by conflicting with open-country and visa-free policies, potentially inviting retaliatory tax measures or visa restrictions from trading partners; and hindering cross-border economic growth by increasing costs for SMEs, startups, and investors needing to travel for business meetings, trade negotiations, and international exhibitions—ultimately closing off opportunities for expansion.