Tarragona tourism sector rejects doubling tourist tax over housing funding
The FEHT considers the measure "deeply misguided," warning of a negative impact on the low season and proximity tourism in the province.
By Ramon Costa Giralt
••2 min read
Representació d'una taula de negociacions econòmiques amb documents financers i un micròfon.
The Federation of Hospitality and Tourism Businesses of the province of Tarragona (FEHT) has rejected the agreement between PSC, ERC, and Comuns to double the tourist tax, deeming it a measure that hinders deseasonalization efforts.
The FEHT in the Tarragona region considers the increase in the Tax on Stays in Tourist Establishments (IEET) to be "deeply misguided" and argues it specifically penalizes visitors choosing the low season. The entity states that applying the same tax in March and August does not encourage extending the season.
Tourism should not assume the financing of the country's structural problems, which have multiple causes and actors.
One of the main points of contention is the allocation of part of the revenue. The sector criticizes that 25% is earmarked for housing policies, arguing that tourism already contributes significantly to public finances and is not responsible for the housing crisis.
Furthermore, the FEHT opposes the municipal surcharge, believing it will create "confusion and imbalances" in destinations like the Costa Daurada and the Terres de l'Ebre, which visitors perceive as a single territory. They demand that different rates not be applied between contiguous municipalities.
“
"This decision comes at a time when we should be especially competitive and attractive as a destination. Doubling the tourist tax is a clearly dissuasive message for visitors."
Finally, the business sector calls for a review of the Fund for the Promotion of Tourism, which will receive 75% of the total revenue. They request greater transparency in the management of these resources and "effective" participation of the sector in defining its destination, especially to alleviate the lack of investment in key infrastructure.