And why we think visitors should too
I’ve publicly backed London’s proposed tourist tax recently. Not just because I think it’s inevitable, but because I think it could be shaped into a real success.
For a tour operator whose business depends on visitor satisfaction, this might seem counterintuitive. Why would we support a measure that makes London more expensive?
Because every single day, our guides apologise for problems that could be addressed with the £240 million the proposed tourist tax would raise.
The Problems We See That You Experience
Last week, one of our Blue Badge guides spent 15 minutes helping a family navigate the overcrowded Westminster Tube station. This week, another guide watched guests wait 45 minutes to enter the Tower of London despite having pre-booked tickets.
These aren’t occasional inconveniences. They’re repeat offenders that affect visitor experience and in turn, London’s reputation.
The numbers put meat on the bone of the situations I’ve described. The UK welcomed 42.6 million overseas visitors in 2024, spending £32.5 billion. That’s actually surpassed the 2019 levels of 40.9 million visits and £28.4 billion in spending. But here’s what’s changed, the infrastructure supporting those visitors hasn’t improved, and in many cases, it’s actually deteriorated.
And the pressure’s only increasing. VisitBritain forecasts 44.3 million inbound visits in 2025, with visitors spending £34.6 billion – that’s 103% of 2019 visit levels and 122% of 2019 spending levels. More visitors, more spending, but the same overstretched infrastructure. Our guides will continue balancing wonder with frustration unless something changes.
That shouldn’t be their job.
Why Let Me Show You London Is Saying Yes
I’ve spent the past few weeks making the case publicly for London’s tourist tax. In my LBC article, I outlined why the tourism industry should lead the campaign for this change. On LinkedIn, I explained how a well-implemented tax could be London’s salvation rather than its burden.
The response has been revealing. Some industry colleagues think I’m mad. Others quietly admit they agree, but worry about speaking up. And visitors? They’re mostly surprised we don’t already have one.
Here’s what convinced me: Paris charges up to €16 per night. Barcelona generates substantial revenue through accommodation taxes. Amsterdam, Rome, Vienna – they all do this. And their tourism industries aren’t suffering; they’re thriving because the money goes back into making cities worth visiting.
London is pricing itself at a disadvantage by not investing in visitor infrastructure whilst our European competitors reinvest tourist revenue into tourist experiences.
What The Potential £240 Million Tax Could Actually Fix
Let’s be specific about what this money should address, because vague promises about “improvements” won’t cut it.
As I outlined in my LinkedIn article, we need a dedicated London Visitor Fund – completely ring-fenced from general city budgets. Every pound collected from the tourist tax goes into this fund, and every pound spent from it must make tangible improvements. No diversion to fill budget gaps elsewhere. No vague “city improvements.” Just transparent, trackable investment in tourist infrastructure.
Immediate priorities from the frontlines:
Transport capacity on tourist-heavy routes during peak season. Our guides spend considerable time managing expectations around Tube crowding between major attractions. Extended hours could distribute demand.
Queue management systems at major attractions that actually work. Digital solutions exist; they need funding and coordination across venues.
Accessible route improvements at historic sites. Fifteen per cent of our bookings specifically mention accessibility needs. That number is growing. Right now, we’re limited by infrastructure that wasn’t designed for modern accessibility standards.
Real-time crowd data integration across attractions. Imagine our guides having accurate information to route groups away from overcrowded venues toward quieter alternatives.
Longer-term investments:
Heritage site preservation that visitors can actually see. When tourists pay to preserve history, they should see where their money goes.
Dedicated visitor support with multilingual advice. Based around major transport hubs, helping people in their own language.
Better signage connecting major attractions. Navigation shouldn’t require local knowledge, it should also highlight the many options available tube, bus, walking, and cycling.
The key phrase: “Enhanced with visitor contributions” Every improvement funded by tourist tax revenue should be clearly marked. Make the connection between payment and benefit undeniable.
How This Makes Your Visit Better
If you’re planning a London visit and reading this, you might wonder: “How does paying more improve my experience?”
Fair question. Here’s the honest answer.
You’re already paying similar taxes in Paris, Barcelona, Amsterdam, and Rome. Those cities use that money to manage the exact problems you encounter in London, overcrowding, inadequate transport, accessibility barriers, and deteriorating infrastructure.
A properly implemented London tourist tax, around £2-3 per night, would be:
- Clearly stated when you book (no surprises at checkout)
- Mandatory and consistent across all accommodation
- Transparently reported with quarterly public dashboards
- Visibly invested in improvements you’ll actually use
Most importantly, it would fund the kind of experience London should be delivering to 42.6 million annual visitors.
The Implementation That Actually Works
I’ve been clear in my public commentary: Manchester’s voluntary £1 per night charge shows us exactly what not to do. Voluntary means inconsistent. Inconsistent means ineffective.
London needs mandatory collection at the point of booking. Like airline taxes, it should be included from the start. No confusion, no resentment, no loopholes.
The money needs to go into a dedicated London Visitor Fund with complete ring-fencing and quarterly public reporting. This is critical: not general city coffers, where it disappears into existing budgets. Not vague “improvements” that could mean anything. A separate, protected fund with one purpose – tangible visitor infrastructure improvements.
Quarterly public dashboards should show:
- Every pound collected
- Every pound spent
- Specific projects funded
- Measurable outcomes
And critically, the improvements need attribution. Signs at enhanced attractions: “Improved accessibility funded by London Visitor Fund.” Digital boards at transport hubs: “Extended hours made possible by visitor contributions.”
Make the benefit visible, make the attribution clear, and the tax becomes an investment visitors understand and accept.
What Success Looks Like in Three Years
In 2028, I want our guides to say: “Notice how efficiently we moved through Westminster today? That’s thanks to the queue management system funded by the Visitor Fund.”
I want families with accessibility needs to choose London over Paris because our infrastructure improvements are world-class.
I want visitors paying the £3 per night tax gladly because they see the benefit in every improved route, every accessible entrance, every efficiently managed attraction.
And I want London positioned as the premium European city experience it should be, not the overcrowded, underfunded alternative to continental competitors.
Why We’re Speaking Up Now
As I wrote in my recent LBC piece and LinkedIn article, the tourism industry holds the key to this debate. We understand visitor needs better than politicians. We see infrastructure failures daily. We know what actually needs fixing.
The comfortable position would be staying quiet. Let politicians debate it and don’t risk alienating clients or colleagues.
But after years of organising tours in our capital and listening to visitor feedback, I’m convinced that doing nothing is not an option. Our city’s tourism reputation is built on centuries of history and culture, but it needs to be serviced by modern, maintained infrastructure.
Right now, we’re failing on the second part whilst relying on the first.
London’s proposed tourist tax isn’t perfect. It needs proper oversight, dedicated spending, transparent reporting, and visible results. But it’s a funding mechanism that could finally address the failures we see every day.
That’s why we’re supporting it, and that’s why we’re speaking up publicly.
As someone whose business depends on happy visitors, I believe this can make London more competitive, not less. The question isn’t whether London needs investment in visitor infrastructure, every tour operator knows we do.
The question is whether we’ll fund it properly or keep apologising to 42.6 million visitors a year for problems we could fix?
Sources for Financial and Visitor information
£240 million annual tourist tax income
My thanks to LBC for allowing me to share my thoughts with them.
