A proposal to remove the country’s long-standing travel tax has been filed in the House of Representatives, with its author arguing that the levy has outlived its original intent and now works against both Filipino households and the tourism sector.
House Majority Leader Sandro Marcos said the current travel tax structure limits how families use already stretched budgets, making it harder for Filipinos to travel for employment, family obligations, or other opportunities. He said higher travel costs suppress movement and spending, reducing the flow of economic activity tied to mobility.
“When travel becomes more expensive, fewer people move, fewer people spend and fewer opportunities circulate through the economy. Lowering the cost of travel allows Filipino families to allocate their money where it matters most,” Marcos said.
The bill calls for the repeal of Presidential Decree No. 1183, which institutionalized the travel tax during the administration of Ferdinand Marcos Sr., as well as provisions of the Tourism Act of 2009 that retained fixed charges on departing Filipino travelers. Marcos argued that the policy framework no longer aligns with regional commitments, noting that ASEAN member states agreed in 2022 to gradually remove travel-related levies to boost intra-regional tourism.
“A tax that discourages travel also discourages growth. If our neighbors are opening doors and reducing barriers, we should not be holding on to policies that place us at a disadvantage,” he said.
Under current rules, Filipinos leaving the country pay a travel tax separate from airport and service fees, amounting to either P1,620 for economy-class passengers or P2,700 for first-class travelers. The Philippines remains the only Southeast Asian nation that imposes such a tax on its own citizens.
Marcos also questioned the financing model behind the levy, saying public programs should not depend on charges that disproportionately affect travelers. He said allocating funding through the General Appropriations Act would provide more predictable support while removing a disincentive to travel.
According to the Tourism Infrastructure and Enterprise Zone Authority (TIEZA), travel tax revenues are distributed with 50 percent going to TIEZA for tourism infrastructure and investment facilitation, 40 percent to the Commission on Higher Education for tourism-related academic programs, and 10 percent to the National Commission for Culture and the Arts. TIEZA has said its share supports priority projects consistent with national tourism and development plans.
Marcos maintained that scrapping the tax could help spur both domestic and outbound travel by Filipinos, benefiting sectors such as accommodation, transport, tour services, and retail, while supporting job generation and cross-cultural exchange. He said travel plays a practical role in maintaining family ties and sustaining livelihoods, rather than serving as a discretionary expense.
The measure was filed amid public criticism over calls for Filipinos to prioritize domestic tourism at a time when local travel costs have risen, in some cases exceeding the expense of trips abroad.
