I want to visit Iceland some day and I’d rather pay their tax than pay to visit a tourist clogged Venice. So I’m not put off. Unless it’s incredibly expensive.

Think this is more about taxing companies who have been having it good with the current tax system, the tourist that are planing to come will come.

Iceland is already a pretty expensive place to visit and it’s honestly not that amazing (it’s beautiful for sure, but it didn’t stand out to me). Everywhere you go you have to pay to park and pay to camp. The food, drink, lodging, and transportation is super expensive already and a major part of their economy is built on tourist dollars. I’m curious to see how much the tax would be and how much of it goes to actually protecting their environment.

This is the best summary I could come up with:

In an interview with news agency Bloomberg last week, Iceland’s Prime Minister Katrín Jakobsdóttir said that a tourism tax could help combat the impact visitors have on the country’s climate and environment.

Companies in country’s the tourism sector are also improving sustainability, for example by utilising the circular economy and using electric vehicles, Jakobsdóttir added.

Tourism tax can both help these places to cope with the burden of tourists and discourage visitors to limit crowding.

It can be used to fund public transport infrastructure, reverse damage done by crowds, and support sustainability initiatives.

Such schemes are already common across Europe with levies in place in major cities like Paris, Berlin, Amsterdam and Rome.

Venice in Italy has long teased a visitor fee and recently set a launch date of summer 2024.

The original article contains 355 words, the summary contains 131 words. Saved 63%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

Good, tourism is way too cheap for the environmental impact, the less people travel the better for the environment.