Mexican money grab!

[Dug720]

With a cabin of four people, the new Mexico money grab could cost that family close to $400 extra if they have two Mexican ports of call on thier cruise. Which will be the next location in the Carribean that will follow suit?

At least you can't blame Disney for this.

 

[yowcruiser]

It has now been reported by a few outlets that implementation is delayed by 6 months.

 

[SL6827]

At least you can't blame Disney for this.

True!!!!

 

[dreamer17555]

It has now been reported by a few outlets that implementation is delayed by 6 months.

I think the later start and the fact it is reported that it is once per cruise that goes to Mexico (not per port stop for those that have multiple Mexico ports on their sailing) will help the roll out go smoother. Some will still be mad but in no time at all we will completely forget about it- it will just be part of the fare like we currently see with port fees & taxes

 

[lilsonicfan]

Seems like I should not be charged if I don’t get off. Otherwise it’s a tax for parking the ship not my personal visit to Mexico.

I've never once had the idea that port fees shouldn't be charged if the passenger doesn't get off the ship. To me it's the fee paid to the port for the fact that the ship is occupying space there for a day. Yes, I realize it's charged per passenger but it seems really crazy to me to think of it as "I shouldn't pay if I don't set foot there". You've already set foot there - by being there with the ship!

 

[Dug720]

I've never once had the idea that port fees shouldn't be charged if the passenger doesn't get off the ship. To me it's the fee paid to the port for the fact that the ship is occupying space there for a day. Yes, I realize it's charged per passenger but it seems really crazy to me to think of it as "I shouldn't pay if I don't set foot there". You've already set foot there - by being there with the ship!

The same way that if you go on a cruise for certain ports but "aren't getting off the ship" when it ports in other countries (thinking specifically of Japan cruises that go to Korea or Vietnam offered on other lines) you're still required to get a visa for countries that require them. You're on a ship docked in the country, you're considered in the country.

 

[hertamaniac]

We leave in a few weeks for our cruise going to Mexico. I can only speak for ourselves, but for each $1 added to the cruise fare via an imposed port tax/fee is one less $1 spent on the local port economy. I suspect the local Mexican eateries will feel the repercussions first as more guests will eat onboard since that has effectively been paid for.

 

[Snowwhyt]

I think that's the way of tourism tax, either you're not contributing at all to their economy if you don't get off the ship but still impact their area by means of it being a cruise ship (so ecological factors, port upkeeps, etc) or you're not necessarily contributing enough to the economy because you're only there for a short time vast majority of the in only less than 24 hours. Some places are enacting taxes to try and discourage visitors, Mexico in this case is not necessarily doing it for that.

I do think the main criticism of this tax for Mexico is the money is not being trickled down enough to the local level and being kept at the top in a greater amount.

If they are not collecting enough money to keep up the port, charge the ships more for the parking spot. The ship can roll the price into the fares. Seems the right thing to do.
If they need more money to keep up the local infrastructure to handle the influx, Include that in the parking fee. No location should suffer from the ships visiting.
But then decisions should be made. Limit the number of ships and possibly even the size of ships.
Your ship holds 4,500 and you want to offer port X that only takes 2,500? On the low season/weeks offer port X and charge high season or mid-season prices. Maximum capacity limited to 2,500 that week. Mexico can charge those ships more because it’s bigger.

I have also solved world peace and world hunger. They can be found at all waste recycling plants. Hopefully my solutions have not made it up the nose of some undeserving animal. But now this solution will be kept in the cloud, I can’t win.

 

[Snowwhyt]

The same way that if you go on a cruise for certain ports but "aren't getting off the ship" when it ports in other countries (thinking specifically of Japan cruises that go to Korea or Vietnam offered on other lines) you're still required to get a visa for countries that require them. You're on a ship docked in the country, you're considered in the country.

But if you ride the bus to the hospital and it stops at Walmart have you shopped at Walmart?
Support for Visa concept since someone can literally jump ship.

 

[Snowwhyt]

I've never once had the idea that port fees shouldn't be charged if the passenger doesn't get off the ship. To me it's the fee paid to the port for the fact that the ship is occupying space there for a day. Yes, I realize it's charged per passenger but it seems really crazy to me to think of it as "I shouldn't pay if I don't set foot there". You've already set foot there - by being there with the ship!

Meant to loop you into my response above.

But if you ride the bus to the hospital and it stops at Walmart have you shopped at Walmart? But I think it should be built into port costs for the ship and passed onto cruisers as the cost of porting anywhere.

 

[lilsonicfan]

Meant to loop you into my response above.

But if you ride the bus to the hospital and it stops at Walmart have you shopped at Walmart? But I think it should be built into port costs for the ship and passed onto cruisers as the cost of porting anywhere.

To me that is a really different example. For one thing, the bus doesn't stop in the Walmart parking lot for 8+ hours plugging into Walmart's power system and using Walmart's employees to fuel up while also not guaranteeing Walmart any business whatsoever. I recognize that this may feel like a "money grab" per the title of the post but I have no issue with countries wanting to capitalize on tourism by imposing taxes or by, in this case, not exempting cruise passengers from said taxes. Obviously I can't say whether that will ultimately be Mexico's downfall, but somehow I doubt it. Round trip US cruises have to stop at a foreign country and Mexico is one of the closest.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

If they are not collecting enough money to keep up the port, charge the ships more for the parking spot. The ship can roll the price into the fares. Seems the right thing to do.
If they need more money to keep up the local infrastructure to handle the influx, Include that in the parking fee. No location should suffer from the ships visiting.
But then decisions should be made. Limit the number of ships and possibly even the size of ships.
Your ship holds 4,500 and you want to offer port X that only takes 2,500? On the low season/weeks offer port X and charge high season or mid-season prices. Maximum capacity limited to 2,500 that week. Mexico can charge those ships more because it’s bigger.

I have also solved world peace and world hunger. They can be found at all waste recycling plants. Hopefully my solutions have not made it up the nose of some undeserving animal. But now this solution will be kept in the cloud, I can’t win.

It's pretty clear nothing is going to change your mind but you'll either pay it OR you'll stop cruising to places that charge it. You make that choice If you disagree with this tax and the way it is implements finding an itinerary that does not have a port with that is totally up to you.

But to clear up things:

1) As far as the port it's things like crew members there, ropes and ties, gangways and if tendering that also comes into play to ensure that docking area is kept up and many more things. So you say you don't want a fee assessed by a local government in the form of a tax but you're okay with the cruise ship passing on in portion a parking fee by means of port taxes and fees charged? You're going to be paying that whether you get off the ship or not so you're not really making much sense there.

2) There's ecological factors such as pollution, wildlife concerns, maybe you've heard of how strict New Zealand is with what organisms a ship carries with it into waters (they will bar a ship from entering their waters if you fail inspection), Norway is banning any ships from certain ports unless they are zero emissions. You just being on the ship is a contribution to these things. You staying on the ship is part of the problem too there because the ship is staying on the whole time...for your leisure

3) As far as limiting ships and sized indeed that is some things some places are doing around the world from either limiting size such as Venice (which now also has a day guest charge as well as an overnight guest charge for hotels and the like) where ships too large must dock outside the city (even the 600 passenger ship I was on last year was too large to dock in Venice but a Uniworld ship was able to). Amsterdam has moved their main port away from the city center. Alaska reviewed banning ships/capacity control, etc. Realistically Mexico has only a few key spots. Cozumel is probably one of the main ports.

I think it's pretty valid to be concerned about how much money is going to the local economies, because ultimately that's been the goal of many of these destinations that have done mitigations towards cruise ships, but your reasoning of not getting off the ship you're still part of the whole system whether you like it or not. Different places have different challenges they are trying to work with with respect to implementing mitigation strategies.

At the end of the day cruise elsewhere if this or any other method bothers you, unfortunately more and more places are adding these measures.

 

[Snowwhyt]

To me that is a really different example. For one thing, the bus doesn't stop in the Walmart parking lot for 8+ hours plugging into Walmart's power system and using Walmart's employees to fuel up while also not guaranteeing Walmart any business whatsoever. I recognize that this may feel like a "money grab" per the title of the post but I have no issue with countries wanting to capitalize on tourism by imposing taxes or by, in this case, not exempting cruise passengers from said taxes. Obviously I can't say whether that will ultimately be Mexico's downfall, but somehow I doubt it. Round trip US cruises have to stop at a foreign country and Mexico is one of the closest.

It's pretty clear nothing is going to change your mind but you'll either pay it OR you'll stop cruising to places that charge it. You make that choice If you disagree with this tax and the way it is implements finding an itinerary that does not have a port with that is totally up to you.

But to clear up things:

1) As far as the port it's things like crew members there, ropes and ties, gangways and if tendering that also comes into play to ensure that docking area is kept up and many more things. So you say you don't want a fee assessed by a local government in the form of a tax but you're okay with the cruise ship passing on in portion a parking fee by means of port taxes and fees charged? You're going to be paying that whether you get off the ship or not so you're not really making much sense there.

2) There's ecological factors such as pollution, wildlife concerns, maybe you've heard of how strict New Zealand is with what organisms a ship carries with it into waters (they will bar a ship from entering their waters if you fail inspection), Norway is banning any ships from certain ports unless they are zero emissions. You just being on the ship is a contribution to these things. You staying on the ship is part of the problem too there because the ship is staying on the whole time...for your leisure

3) As far as limiting ships and sized indeed that is some things some places are doing around the world from either limiting size such as Venice (which now also has a day guest charge as well as an overnight guest charge for hotels and the like) where ships too large must dock outside the city (even the 600 passenger ship I was on last year was too large to dock in Venice but a Uniworld ship was able to). Amsterdam has moved their main port away from the city center. Alaska reviewed banning ships/capacity control, etc. Realistically Mexico has only a few key spots. Cozumel is probably one of the main ports.

I think it's pretty valid to be concerned about how much money is going to the local economies, because ultimately that's been the goal of many of these destinations that have done mitigations towards cruise ships, but your reasoning of not getting off the ship you're still part of the whole system whether you like it or not. Different places have different challenges they are trying to work with with respect to implementing mitigation strategies.

At the end of the day cruise elsewhere if this or any other method bothers you, unfortunately more and more places are adding these measures.

My problem has always been in the placement of the fee. I prefer they charge the ships not the individual. I should see an increase in my fares to support the ports. I absolutely understand and support the cost of doing business for the port and ship and local infrastructure needs.
I never wanted to say they don’t deserve the money. It’s a cost of the ship and I will pay that amount happily as part of my fare even if I don’t leave the ship. But that charge placed upon me, as charge to me personally, is where I feel it’s unfair. Money grab or not.
I would avoid a trip where I had to pay a fee to where I intended to stay on the ship during a visit.
I would pay for the same fee though the cruise as a cost of doing business at the port even if I don’t get off and not have an issue.

I’m a terrible writer, worsen by my 4th concussion last summer. But I think what I’m trying to say here is my issue is semantics.

 

[lilsonicfan]

I mean, I think ultimately, it will just be charged as part of cruise fare. I can't say for sure, of course, but presumably the Mexican govt is going to want to ensure the cruiseline pays per passenger on or before arrival, not by collecting it from the individual. If you booked a cruise after the date on which this tax is enacted, you may not even really notice (unless you were comparing two identical cruises before and after the tax) because the cruise line will probably just add it in as port fees and taxes.

We did a transatlantic cruise with DCL and then a Panama Canal cruise with DCL. I noticed the port fees to be a lot higher on the PC cruise vs the transatlantic despite being similar in length, I assume b/c the Caribbean/North american ports charge more than European ports, but it did not deter me, I'll say.

 

[Dug720]

Support for Visa concept since someone can literally jump ship.

Likewise someone can say they're staying on board, but unless there's a block put on their KTTW card that alarms if they try to scan off, they could still get off in the port.

 

[Dug720]

I mean, I think ultimately, it will just be charged as part of cruise fare. I can't say for sure, of course, but presumably the Mexican govt is going to want to ensure the cruiseline pays per passenger on or before arrival, not by collecting it from the individual. If you booked a cruise after the date on which this tax is enacted, you may not even really notice (unless you were comparing two identical cruises before and after the tax) because the cruise line will probably just add it in as port fees and taxes.

Absolutely this. It's another port fee and that's 99.9% sure how it will be billed. NOT to your guest account because that would be a nightmare to transfer it from the ship to the country. And not the government having people there charging cards as people disembark.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

I mean, I think ultimately, it will just be charged as part of cruise fare. I can't say for sure, of course, but presumably the Mexican govt is going to want to ensure the cruiseline pays per passenger on or before arrival, not by collecting it from the individual. If you booked a cruise after the date on which this tax is enacted, you may not even really notice (unless you were comparing two identical cruises before and after the tax) because the cruise line will probably just add it in as port fees and taxes.

We did a transatlantic cruise with DCL and then a Panama Canal cruise with DCL. I noticed the port fees to be a lot higher on the PC cruise vs the transatlantic despite being similar in length, I assume b/c the Caribbean/North american ports charge more than European ports, but it did not deter me, I'll say.

I will say Mexico wasn't the best at collecting their existing tax, the Visittax, for Quintana Roo, Mexico. You're supposed to pay it before you leave but it was rarely enforced. Tons of warnings all over the Cancun airport to pay it but yeah with using the e-gates they didn't really check. We paid ours in line for the e-gates because we didn't want any consequences but I know my mother-in-law and step-father-in-law forgot and never paid. I think you're right that the best course of action is to include it as part of the existing fare (be it the cruise fare or as part of the taxes and port fees line item) in lieu of separating it out and having it pre-paid will be a lot in this case.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

My problem has always been in the placement of the fee. I prefer they charge the ships not the individual. I should see an increase in my fares to support the ports. I absolutely understand and support the cost of doing business for the port and ship and local infrastructure needs.
I never wanted to say they don’t deserve the money. It’s a cost of the ship and I will pay that amount happily as part of my fare even if I don’t leave the ship. But that charge placed upon me, as charge to me personally, is where I feel it’s unfair. Money grab or not.
I would avoid a trip where I had to pay a fee to where I intended to stay on the ship during a visit.
I would pay for the same fee though the cruise as a cost of doing business at the port even if I don’t get off and not have an issue.

I’m a terrible writer, worsen by my 4th concussion last summer. But I think what I’m trying to say here is my issue is semantics.

Your original comment was you didn't believe you should pay it because you didn't/don't get off the ship. Pretty much everyone would rather it just be lumped into whatever. I mean I don't care if it's part of my cruise fare or part of the port taxes and fees but I would assume no one would really appreciate it if once they boarded the ship the cruise line at that time collects the fee. It happens that way with hotels at time where they tell you this fee or tax is collected at the hotel but I'm sure many would rather it just be already included. But that's a whole different conversation than saying if I don't get off the ship I shouldn't have to pay, Mexico (or any other destination) should just figure out on their own without making me pay when I'm not leaving the ship which you repeatedly made comments like that.

 

[lanejudy]

Maybe I’m in the minority, but I just expect there to be port fees and taxes added to my cruise fare. It's listed as lump sum, not itemized. I don't know (nor do I really care) where it all goes -- how much to the port authority, how much to the city of Nassau, how much to the broader Bahamian government, etc. I'm sure the vast majority of cruisers will never notice this new fee unless they regularly cruise the same itinerary and are quite familiar with a amount previously charged.

 

[angel's momma]

We did a transatlantic cruise with DCL and then a Panama Canal cruise with DCL. I noticed the port fees to be a lot higher on the PC cruise vs the transatlantic despite being similar in length, I assume b/c the Caribbean/North american ports charge more than European ports, but it did not deter me, I'll say.

The higher port fees on the DCL Panama Canal cruises comes from the fees for going through the Canal.