Aloha: Hawaii Plans to Hit Tourists with $25 “Climate Tax”
Potential visitors seem unwilling to pay a “climate tithe”.
The last time I reported on Hawaii, it had just been announced that the families of those who died in the Maui fire last year could receive up to $1.5 million in compensation if they choose not to sue state agencies and companies involved.
Arguably, this destruction of the town of Lahaina and the surrounding area is the first recorded “woke-caused disaster”. But instead of reconsidering the poor science and insidious social justice policies that created the conditions for this catastrophe, Hawaii is doubling down.
The state intends to hit tourists, who are a mainstay of its economy, with a $25 “Climate Tax.”
Lawmakers in Hawaii are poised to approve a $25 climate tax on tourists who visit the Aloha State in an effort to combat what they claim is an assault on the area’s natural resources.
The state, which saw 9.5 million people visit last year, is recovering from the devastating wildfires in Lahaina, Maui, which killed at least 100 people and caused damages worth around $6 billion.
The proposed tax will pay to protect beaches and prevent wildfires, state officials said.
“It’s a very small price to pay to preserve paradise,” Hawaii Gov. Josh Green, a Democrat, told The Wall Street Journal.
The bill would impose a flat fee upon hotel check-in or vacation rentals, projecting it to raise about $68 million annually. Green is betting on collecting $68 million annually.
He may be counting his climate eggs before they hatch.
The bill, HB2406, is currently working its way through committee in the state’s legislature.
Passage is not assured. Last year, a similar proposal to levy a $50 fee on tourists for access to state parks and beaches failed in the final hours of the legislative session.
After that measure, known as a ‘visitor impact’ or ‘green’ fee, failed, the governor rebranded his new proposal as a ‘climate’ fee on tourists.
Legislators are also considering an alternative measure to raise the state’s hotel tax, which is already among the highest in the nation.
Hawaii isn’t the first to consider a climate tax. Greece instituted a “climate resilience tax” for tourists that will fund disaster recovery projects in the country.
“The tax will finance post-disaster reconstruction projects following severe forest fires and floods which occurred in Greece in 2023,” the representative told TMR.
“The tax is to be paid directly in the local currency to the accommodation services provider and before the customers’ departure. A separate receipt of payment of the tax will be issued to the name of one of the customers.”
Potential visitors seem unimpressed with the climate virtue signaling.
No, but the money generated by the tax lines the pockets very well of those implementing said tax.#ClimateScam
— Robin_PD_ 🦖 (@Robin_PD_) February 19, 2024
Just a reminder, no amount of tax dollars will change the climate. #ClimateScam
Hawaii governor proposes $25 'climate tax' on tourists to protect the state's beaches and prevent wildfires https://t.co/vHsqGShBjl
— Terri (@River_City) February 19, 2024
To put it in perspective, a 10-day trip to Hawaii in June 2023 for a family of four is quoted to cost $13,493. So $25 seems like chump change.
However, as more people become aware the climate crisis is simply an excuse to redistribute their hard-earned money to bureaucrats, the less likely they are to go to places that force them to pay a climate tithe.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Now I have another reason not to visit Hawaii.
It’s over rated
The only thing that surprised me from a place that thinks Maisie Hirono is an intellectual powerhouse to represent them in Congress is that $14,000 pricetag. You have got to be kidding me.
shaking down the tourists… LOVE IT!!!!!
25 is not enough…. think BIGGER. It won’t slow down vacationers.
Heck yeah.
Make it $100 per plane seat and $10k per private jet take off or landing 🛬.
No charge for train 🚂 passengers. (Wish I remembered which politician made that comment.)
Obamalamadingdong
This is nothing. Take a look at the taxes and fees on travel and tourism operations.
The local G is getting quite a fee; the facilities just collect it, often on the D-L.
just check your rental car receipt next time you visit florida.
They always try to justify these taxes by claiming they will be used “to protect beaches and prevent wildfires” or some such ill-defined vapor ware goals. They never tell you what projects the State is going to use the money on, who is going to decide how it’s going to be spent, or exactly how these projects are going to somehow benefit the environment or stop climate change. If it doesn’t do that, what’s the point except to take money from tourists?). Of course, they will never tell you who is going to end up with the money in their pockets from these projects. Any bets on this devolving into a $100 million a year slush fund if it’s approved?
Aloha also means good bye.
I’m going to come down on the other side of this.
The clickbait reaction here arises because (in computer science terms) the term “climate” is “overloaded.” People read climate, they think climate change. But this isn’t being touted as a climate change tax, but a tax for enjoying Hawaii’s native climate (which frankly is the last remaining reason for anyone to go to Hawaii).
What if Utah established a special tax on hotels and RV parks in the south end of their state and called it a “scenic beauty tax?” Morally, I think it’s justifiable. Arizona already levies a significant tax on car rentals, but only within so many miles of Sky Harbor, and nobody says boo about it.
My only reservation – and I’m not enough of a lawyer to speak on this – is whether or not this arrangement falls afoul of any of the prohibitions in the federal constitution against states levying unequal duties on noncitizens. I’ll let someone more knowledgeable discuss that issue.
As a.thought experiment what about oil/gas producing States levying an environmental impact fee for each barrel of oil exported outside their State? How about States with oil/gas pipelines and railway and truck traffic with hazardous loads placing an environmental impact fee for each unit that crosses through their boundaries not consumed in those boundaries?
That would be a logical extension of your moral argument about assessing what amounts to a user fee for potential environmental impact.
Legally it seems shaky. Alabama tried to halt garbage being dumped from out of State Cities into private landfills and was blocked by the Federal CT.
Well, I may have been wrong. Re-reading the article, there is one place where the sponsor does talk about “an assault on the area’s natural resources,” which would make it an “environmental impact” fee. But everyplace else, it sounds more like a “tourist fee” to enjoy the “Hawaiiland Amusement Park,” which I still consider defensible.
It is applied to the Hotel room. So if a HI resident stays in a hotel, they would pay it too.
Almost every city I know has a special sales tax on hotels. Many have special taxes on tourist areas.
Sadly legal, but equally applied to residents and tourists.
How do you know their legislature intends to apply this to everyone, residents and tourists?
1) Because they know they have to.
2) Even if they didn’t have to, why wouldn’t they?
1) Not sure what they know. Their S.Ct. doesn’t think they’re bound by the constitution, why should their legislature?
2) I would guess that, like CA, they feel secure enough in their power to do whatever they want..
That’s not true. If you’re referring to the fake news that the HI court purported to overrule the 2nd amendment, or to claim that it doesn’t apply in HI, you’ve fallen for a hoax. It never said any such thing. All reports (including on this blog) that made this claim were false.
The court correctly decided that the Hawaii state constitution doesn’t protect a RKBA, despite its language literally saying that it does. That doesn’t change the fact that the federal constitution does protect it.
“What if Utah established a special tax on hotels and RV parks in the south end of their state and called it a ‘scenic beauty tax’”?
What if Texas established a special on non-citizens crossing the border without documentation and called it a “undocumented human bean tax”?
Great, until you try collecting it.
As an RVer, I’m subject to these “taxes” all the time in the form of toll roads, which in states like NJ and PA monopolize all the optimal routes designed to get through the state without spending a lot of time in them.
Per my 6:40 above, they already do this, for various instances of “they”, and “this.”
Most tourist or travel places there’s a per-stay or per-night hotel fee, for example. Restaruants, taxis and limos, access for aircraft busses trains and cars, licensing for food booze music…
There’s less direct extraction like quasi-government tourist boards, which in principle do marketing; BUT good luck getting your venue considered for any events for the local govt, or the chance to cater at any festival they’re sponsoring.
Like many taxes & fees these are ear-marked funds supposed to go to just the thing — tourism promotion for example; BUT, as we are forever finding out, money is fungible even when pad for hostages (and missiles, it turns out.)
All 50 states belong to all American citizens , this is BS
No, they don’t. Each state belongs only to its citizens. Citizens of other states are entitled to travel there freely, and to enjoy there the same privileges and immunities as that state’s citizens, and to establish residence there and thus take up citizenship. But so long as they do not do so the state doesn’t belong to them.
This entirely repudiates federalism.
But if you believe it, make sure to file for your share of Alaska’s oil-wealth payment program.
If they have budget shortfall, they could just increase the hotel Tranist Occupancy Tax, without the virtue signaling. But lefties got to virtue signal. Hawaii blue state politics are woke joke.
Sort of my point. Some idiot had to say “we’re doing this because of environmental impact.” They could have just said, “we’re doing this because a vacation here is worth it,” and what complaint would you have? Either you agree and go there, or you don’t. But to Hawaiian politicians, a socialist excuse is always more defensible than a capitalist reason.
Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) is common, because hotel guests don’t vote in local elections. It has nothing to do with the environment. Also hotels stopped providing daily housekeeping service during pandemic lockdown to protect housekeeping staff from getting covid. But covid has disappeared and many hotels haven’t resumed the daily housekeeping service, hotel guest must request by phone to front desk.
Fees directed only against tourists? Uh, discriminates against interstate commerce, maybe just a little? Despite what the Hawaii S.Ct. may think, the state is still subject to the constitution. Although democrats love to discriminate, there are some things they just aren’t allowed to do.
It’s fine, til someone decides to reverse current precedent.
Maybe if they spot the Orange Man Bad! charging a commonplace fee at his places, they’ll decide to retroactively make it illegal.
Nobody said anything about it being directed only against interstate tourists. It’s a tax on all tourists, intrastate, interstate, or international.
Have you read their draft legislation? If so, quote me the relevant language and I’ll concede you’re right.
Here is the draft legislation. This is the relevant language:
More interestingly, the bill amends the exceptions to the tourist tax, to remove “accommodations furnished without charge” (with certain exceptions). That means that if this passes, it seems to me that even if you stay with friends or family they will have to pay this tax on your room!
The beach in front of The Zuck’s and Oprah!’s place to be declared tourist attractions in 3 … 2 … 1 …
Honolulu/Hawaii is notorious for corrupt insider deals and boondoggle projects.
A premier example is the on going light rail project which has been in progress for 20 years is now estimated to cost 12.4 billion dollars. Estimated completion is expected in another 10 years.
Like most 1 party states public spending is for the purpose of enriching insiders and furthering the political agenda of the ruling party.
A classic example in policy is the climate agenda forced on HECO at the expense of safety and affordable energy.
The lefty spin is:
winds caused the fire due to
yup
climate change
they ignore the gov run utilities schools unkempt law violating inaction by lefty as the reallll cause of the fires
that deserves a
political change
Why would I want to go to Hawaii when I can just drive to and vacation in Florida and not have to pay the extra $25? Hmmmmmm….?
I went there twice as a teenager and it is a beautiful place and the weather is God damn perfect. However, being that it’s run by communist retards, I’ve never had any urge to go back.
My husband’s family lives in Honolulu. We go visit them every year… the hotel taxes have become crazy… it is usually a third of the bill. We changed from our usual hotel post-Covid because it didn’t make sense to pay $500/night and have no maid service because there is a shortage of staff.
I’ll see your climate tax and increase it.
Charge a $300 tax each way for everyone traveling to and from Hawaii. Payable to the airline, and the airline will transfer the money to the state where travel originates and terminates.
The article says “Last year, a similar proposal to levy a $50 fee on tourists for access to state parks and beaches failed in the final hours of the legislative session.” Not quite right.
Last time I went to Hawaii (5 months ago), tourists had to pay an access fee to state parks and beaches. Residents are exempt. It ran about $35 per day for our group of four.
https://www.govisithawaii.com/2021/04/20/new-entrance-fees-required-at-many-hawaii-state-parks-effective-april-19-2021/
See this legal opinion by the FL AG in 1987.
Didn’t mean to downvote you. Sorry!
Go to the Philippines, instead. It’s cheaper, just as beautiful, and the people are nicer.
Hawaii installed ugly wind turbines that provide almost no electricity but ruined the landscape and views. The cost to maintain them is more than the value of the power generated. Virtue signaling for lefties.
The $25 fee is only the beginning.
Gov. “Josh Green.” Really? LOL
Huh? What’s funny about that name? Is this some kind of racist thing? Or what?
Or are you contending that someone else is governor?!
“Green.”
No funnier than having a Progressive senator named “In-the-way.”
‘Josh’ is another word for a spoof, a joke, and ‘green’ is a word for environmental scams.
Seemed obvious. Sorry
Far from obvious. Joshua is a common first name, and Green is a common surname. There are currently two state governors named Josh, as well as four members of Congress. Congress also has two Greens and a Greene.
Tourist taxes are popular with tax grabbers because the people being taxed don’t have a vote in the levying of said tax. The only people who may care are those whose business is negatively affected…however, at $25 this seems like an under the radar grift that won’t affect tourism much (until they get greedy and start tacking on more).