Cebu Lawmaker Files Bill to Abolish Travel Tax, Citing Burden on Filipinos
Cebu City South District Representative Eduardo Rama has introduced House Bill 7367, a legislative measure aimed at eliminating the travel tax imposed on Filipinos journeying abroad. The proposal has ignited a significant debate regarding its potential effects on national funding for tourism, education, and cultural initiatives.
Rationale Behind the Proposed Legislation
Representative Rama argues that the travel tax, which currently stands at a minimum of P1,670 per traveler, imposes an unnecessary financial strain on Filipino citizens. He emphasizes that Filipinos already contribute through income tax and value-added tax, making the additional levy redundant and burdensome.
The congressman contends that this cost particularly hinders individuals traveling for essential purposes such as work, education, or personal reasons. By removing this fee, the bill seeks to alleviate financial pressures on families, students, senior citizens, and overseas Filipino workers (OFWs), facilitating more accessible international travel.
Current Allocation of Travel Tax Proceeds
Under Section 73 of Republic Act 9593, the travel tax revenue is distributed among three key agencies:
- 50 percent is allocated to the Tourism Infrastructure and Enterprise Zone Authority (TIEZA) for tourism projects.
- 40 percent goes to the Commission on Higher Education (CHED) to support tourism-related college education.
- 10 percent is directed to the National Commission for Culture and the Arts (NCCA) for cultural and arts initiatives.
Recent reports indicate that nearly P8 billion in travel taxes were collected in the first half of the previous year alone, highlighting the substantial financial contribution of this levy.
Public Response and Existing Exemptions
The proposed bill has garnered positive public feedback, partly due to a common misconception that no exemptions exist. However, current regulations exempt several groups from paying the travel tax, including:
- Overseas Filipino Workers (OFWs)
- Balikbayans residing in the country for less than a year
- Infants under two years old
- Muslim pilgrims traveling to Mecca
- Government officials on official duty
- Diplomatic personnel
- Athletes participating in international competitions
- Accredited journalists
- Sponsored students and scholarship grantees
Criticisms of Agency Performance and Fund Utilization
Despite the allocated funds, concerns have been raised regarding the efficiency and transparency of the recipient agencies. Critics point to several issues:
TIEZA has faced complaints about its Tourist Rest Area projects, which are intended to provide rest stops for travelers. Many of these facilities reportedly lack Wi-Fi signals, suffer from poor maintenance, and are situated in inconvenient locations.
CHED has come under scrutiny for leaving approximately P10 billion in travel tax funds unused for education subsidies in recent years. The agency has struggled to provide clear documentation on how these allocations have been spent on tourism-related educational programs, prompting calls for greater transparency.
NCCA has been criticized for its limited impact on cultural and arts projects nationwide. In Cebu, a major tourist destination with high travel tax collections, the agency's presence and funding initiatives have been perceived as insufficient, failing to strongly support local cultural endeavors.
Potential Consequences of Abolishing the Travel Tax
Eliminating the travel tax entirely could significantly disrupt the programs and projects funded by TIEZA, CHED, and NCCA. While these agencies may have faced criticism, they still manage various noble initiatives that would suffer from the loss of this revenue stream.
Proponents of the bill are urged to consider alternative funding sources for these agencies before proceeding with the abolition. While scrapping the travel tax may be popular among travelers, it is crucial to identify sustainable financial mechanisms to support tourism infrastructure, educational subsidies, and cultural development.
The debate underscores the need for balanced reforms that address both the financial burden on citizens and the essential funding requirements for national development projects.
