Alaskan cruise tax

[bigred12]

Has anybody heard anything on the cruise tax? Has anybody been told to pay it?

[agabbymama]

Yes, HAL sent me a new invoice including the $50 Alaska tax for my August Cruisetour.:eek:

[alcpa1]

Check your on line booking it should show up there. Celebrity is charging each passenger with this horrid tax and if you would like to read more about it do a search on the Alaska board or just google Alaska cruise passenger tax 2006. I am sure your TA can also explain it all to you too.

We were there last year when all of this was transpiring and it is not cruiser friendly even though land based tourist are for nw exempt, but they will get around to that sooner rather than later.

It wasn't a deal breaker we are going back this year.

[rjg41]

You will be charged. If you booked before the tax went into effect a month or so ago (actually was passed in August) the $50 per person will be added to your next invoice from whomever you booked through. Anyone booking now it will show up included in the gov't taxes and fees. The $50 is on top of $40 to $70 per passenger already paid to the state of Alaska.

 

This tax was a "voter" initiative. This tax really had less to do with cruiser unfriendly or the environment then it did about money, although some of its' support was gathered that way. It was all about the money. As background you may be aware Alaska gets back far more from our federal government than they pay in taxes. In fact they were #2 in 2004, the last year for which I could find figures. They got back $1.87 for every dollar. Not bad. Of course there was also the bridge to nowhere.

 

In addition, from oil, every man, woman and child resident in Alaska receives a check each year for over $1,000. Further they have no state income tax and except for the big cities, there is no property tax.

 

They know how to work the system. Note this quote from an article in the Anchorage newspaper,

 

"All this from a state with no personal income tax, no state sales tax, the lowest gasoline tax in the nation, a relatively low corporate tax burden and free money once a year from the Permanent Fund for all Alaskans.

We're happy to tax everyone but ourselves.

BOTTOM LINE: Welcome to Alaska, tax-free for us, not you."

 

In this case, they know they have a cash cow in the cruise lines and went after a piece of the pie. Besides the $50, there is a 33% tax on casino profits and they are trying to tax the corporate profits of all the cruise lines. I have not seen how the cruise lines are planning to deal with the casino tax but the corporate tax will likely go to court. This have been tried before by other states and not worked, but it helped pass the imitative because it looked like even more money for Alaskans.

 

Now as for probably the real purpose for the initiative---jobs. The leader for the initiative was the attorney that represents the maritime union. One of the other parts of this initiative was a requirement of an observer on each ship to monitor compliance with environmental laws. I wonder which union they will belong to? From the LA Times; "The $50 head tax includes $4 to establish a corps of ocean rangers stationed on each ship to monitor pollution controls. The remaining $46 is intended for improvement of ports, harbors and visitor services. With about 950,000 passengers cruising to Alaska each season, the head tax will bring about $47.5 million into state coffers." And who will get the jobs for making the port & harbor improvements, etc.?

 

Now you know the rest of the story.

[salty dingo]

If the money is used to improve the ports and preserve the environment, that is a good thing for cruise passengers.

 

As with any tax, people may not agree with it, but what can you do, except not travel?

 

Hotel tax, rental car tax, etc. are all popular because they are imposed on visitors. Locals vote for them because they don't have to pay. And they reason - and rightly so - that the visitors use public facilities and services, and should have to pay their share while they are there.

 

I was pricing airfare to Europe recently, and was surprised to find a flight where the taxes totalled more than the airfare! Those Europeans really know how to tax visitors. Yet we still go there!

 

Another aspect would be if there are too many visitors, raising the price of a visit would tend to reduce the traffic to a more manageable level.

[MrsKinsey]

Contrary to popular belief, Alaskans are NOT profiting from the cruise tax. The PFD is comprised of revenue from the oil companies here, and NOT the cruise industry.

 

To be completely honest, many business and residents didn't want to cruise tax to pass. Yes, it was a voter initiative, but nobody I talked to wanted it.

 

Secondly, although Alaskans do not pay state taxes, there IS a sales tax. That was recently instated because of the HORRIBLE handling of the state budget. Honestly, how a state can have so much revenue that it can actually give money back to the people and then claim it is broke every fiscal year is a mystery to me.

 

In any case. The cruise tax benefits the state budget (as does a recent start of the state sales tax). It doesn't go to line the pockets of Alaskan citizens who didn't really want it anyway. So don't blame us, okay? :o

 

P.S. If there is no property taxes here, then I have a HUGE refund coming to me!! I don't know why I have to pay property taxes every year if there apparently aren't any!

[ocngypz]

My agency has been reinvoicing all our 2007 Alaska bound clients so they are not surprised come final payment time.

[hcat]

... but what can you do, except not travel?:mad:

 

 

That is exactly how I intend to address the issue. Alaska has joined the ranks of Aruba and France on the list of places that don't welcome me so I won't go there. Let's see how those Alaskans can feed themselves with out tourism, perhaps they can eat snow.

[MrsKinsey]

Let's see how those Alaskans can feed themselves with out tourism, perhaps they can eat snow.

 

Hahahaha!!! Oh man! I needed a good laugh! I suppose that next everyone is going to say we all live in igloos, eat whale fat, and wear seal skins? Hahaha!!! :rolleyes:

 

Some of the best weekend excusions I've had here in Alaska is when I've met people from all over the world who have taken a cruise here. Alaskans love the cruisers and all tourists are welcomed here. Alaskans are a different breed of people, I think. Most are some of the friendliest and most welcoming you would find.

 

Don't judge us because of some silly $50 tax.

[smeyer418]

... but what can you do, except not travel?:mad:

 

 

That is exactly how I intend to address the issue. Alaska has joined the ranks of Aruba and France on the list of places that don't welcome me so I won't go there. Let's see how those Alaskans can feed themselves with out tourism, perhaps they can eat snow.

 

Did Aruba and France do something personal to you? Or are you persona non grata? I have always felt welcomed in both....

 

England is charging a 40 pound transfer fee to any one leaving or changing plabnes at their airports...more than even the US.

[rjg41]

Contrary to popular belief, Alaskans are NOT profiting from the cruise tax. The PFD is comprised of revenue from the oil companies here, and NOT the cruise industry.

 

Any money paid into the state treasury by non-residents at the very least indirectly financially helps Alaskans. The non-residents are paying to support the state so the residents pay less taxes just like the Anchorage newspaper article said. How about the bridge to nowhere? I didn't see any Alaskans protesting that? Further, how about the new natural gas line that can be built into Canada much cheaper than the Alaskan route? How about Alaskans giving up a few places in the standings of getting far more in federal taxes than Alaskans pay in? How about that the initiative was driven by the lawyer of the maritime union which will benefit big time by this and not everyday state voters?

 

In the end, while some opposed it, it passed with more than 52% of the vote so I guess more Alaskans wanted the money then didn't.

[MrsKinsey]

I'm not going to argue about this because it seems silly to me to argue with someone who doesn't even live here and doesn't even know all the facts.

It's as if someone is telling me that he/she knows for certain that the sky is actually green in Alaska because they read it in some editorial somewhere. :rolleyes:

Unless you live here, you don't know. It's that simple. And to anyone interested in coming here, regardless of the tax, we'd be happy to have you! :D

[rjg41]

I'm not going to argue about this because it seems silly to me to argue with someone who doesn't even live here and doesn't even know all the facts.

It's as if someone is telling me that he/she knows for certain that the sky is actually green in Alaska because they read it in some editorial somewhere. :rolleyes:

Unless you live here, you don't know. It's that simple. And to anyone interested in coming here, regardless of the tax, we'd be happy to have you! :D

 

I can learn something. What that I have said is not true? I never said the PFD was from the cruise companies. I can find no information on a state sales tax. There are local ones but I don't see a state one. I said that the property tax is in major cities only.

 

Here are some interesting links:

http://kipesquire.powerblogs.com/posts/1103522556.shtml

http://www.fa-ir.org/alabama/constitution/Best_worst1.htm

http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2005-05-17-alaska-edit_x.htm

[greatam]

I can learn something. What that I have said is not true? I never said the PFD was from the cruise companies. I can find no information on a state sales tax. There are local ones but I don't see a state one. I said that the property tax is in major cities only.

 

In all your statements, you very carefully ignored the EXTREME toll infused on the Alaska infrastructure by cruise passengers. All those buses, all the litter, all the trampling of nature paths, the graffiti in the roadside restrooms and the rocks in Cook Inlet, etc. The roads and surrounding areas take a HEAVY beating in the summer time. The damage is increased because of the heavy bus traffic. Those buses are primarily cruise passengers. And the majority of those buses are owned by companies who are NOT based in Alaska.

 

A very specific example of why the money was needed: Seward has a parking lot which is used by lots of the cruise line busses and passengers. The city of Seward should be responsible for repairing, cleaning, etc. the parking lot, right?? There is no charge to use the parking lot. So you either institute a charge which affects EVERYONE, including the local residents YEAR 'ROUND. OR the city of Seward asks the Alaska general fund for money to repair and clean the parking lot. Which is fair to you if Seward was your town?

[smeyer418]

In all your statements, you very carefully ignored the EXTREME toll infused on the Alaska infrastructure by cruise passengers. All those buses, all the litter, all the trampling of nature paths, the graffiti in the roadside restrooms and the rocks in Cook Inlet, etc. The roads and surrounding areas take a HEAVY beating in the summer time. The damage is increased because of the heavy bus traffic. Those buses are primarily cruise passengers. And the majority of those buses are owned by companies who are NOT based in Alaska.

 

A very specific example of why the money was needed: Seward has a parking lot which is used by lots of the cruise line busses and passengers. The city of Seward should be responsible for repairing, cleaning, etc. the parking lot, right?? There is no charge to use the parking lot. So you either institute a charge which affects EVERYONE, including the local residents YEAR 'ROUND. OR the city of Seward asks the Alaska general fund for money to repair and clean the parking lot. Which is fair to you if Seward was your town?

 

 

Sorry but this time I disagree with you. The buses pay highway taxes and are run by locals. The Parking lot is the Cities responsibility. They can issue parking permits to the city residents and charge others that use it, who should be responsible for maintaining it- not people who may never even see it. Why do you belive that the Graffitti is only caused by Tourists? Since Federal Highway taxes pay 80% of the cost of maintaining most roads already where do those taxes come from?

 

Much Federal money is spent in Alaska- the bridge to nowhere as an example. Why isn't this same fee paid by airline passengers and everyone who drives into the state?

[scapel]

I would not live in Alaska for $1000/mo

With the money the Alaskans get from my federal government using my tax dollars, I am happy for them. Better to spend it there than give it away to some South American country or Vietnam or Iraq or Somalia.

I have taken only three trips to Alaska, but have gone from Juneau to Seward to above the Artic Circle and many places in between.

I have been taxed in Las Vegas and all hotels. I think they are all too high, but if I want to be there, I have a choice. Taxes are created so everyone is forced to contribute money to hopefully be spent for the good of all.

The problem, all politicians are not honest. Hopefully most are.

Yes Alaska will have a tax and I doubt it will prevent anyone from going. If you want to cut off your nose to spite your face so be it. Don’t want to pay the tax, don’t go, but you will miss one of the greatest shows on earth.

How about all the port taxes the ships pay and pass on to the passengers. I don’t know how much they are because if I want to go and can afford it, I’m paying and going.

If you can’t afford the tax and want to go, move to Alaska and go to work. Get on the $1000 income thing—Yearly or monthly whatever.

If the tax gets to $500 I’ll still go if I want to and have the health to make it. The 950,000 /year may drop at that level.

Remember if you have your health you are a rich person. Don’t let a $50 bill destroy your pleasure.

 

I take it Alaskans run Alaska and I can’t even tell my local state authorities how to run my state, so I can’t tell Alaskans how to run their state.

[scapel]

When I landed at Allakaket and then Bettles, I remember making the comment that you couldn't pay me to live here.

[greatam]

Sorry but this time I disagree with you. The buses pay highway taxes and are run by locals.

 

Hwy taxes in Alaska comprise a VERY small amount of the money needed to maintain the roads. Registration fee for a HEAVY (semi) vehicle is only about $1200 (about 1/2 what other states charge). A bus is $300 + fee of no more than $500.00 depending on year of vehicle. There is NO IFTA (International Fuel Tax Association) tax in Alaska. The buses may be DRIVEN by locals, but the majority of buses seen in Alaska in the summer are owned by the cruise lines. Quite a few of the cruise line buses are not even registered in Alaska.

 

I'm surprised you brought up the road taxes-it now costs me almost $100.00 in tolls alone to get one of my semis into and out of Hunt's Point/Long Island from NJ. Not counting the overpriced NY road and fuel taxes. Hasn't the GW been paid for about 25 times????

 

The Parking lot is the Cities responsibility. They can issue parking permits to the city residents and charge others that use it, who should be responsible for maintaining it- not people who may never even see it. Why do you belive that the Graffitti is only caused by Tourists? Since Federal Highway taxes pay 80% of the cost of maintaining most roads already where do those taxes come from?

 

IF you cruise out of Seward, the chances are great that the cruise line bus either takes you to the parking lot OR the bus "stages" there to pick you up or drop you off (assuming, of course, you take the cruise line transfer). The cruise lines fought hard and won about NOT paying to use the parking lot. "We bring lots of people to your town. Look at the economic benefit. We DESERVE the parking lot"

 

I never said the graffiti was ONLY caused by tourists. But it is generally tourists that stop at the overlooks along Cook Inlet. Two summers ago, I was sitting there watching some of the surfers on the boar tide and saw a family throw all the garbage out of their car all over the ground. Then the kids wrote their names in magic marker all over the rocks leading to the paths in the overlook. Mom and Dad thought it was "cute". Even took pictures of their names. Those particular overlooks are maintained by the Hwy. dept.

 

 

Much Federal money is spent in Alaska- the bridge to nowhere as an example. Why isn't this same fee paid by airline passengers and everyone who drives into the state?

 

Much Federal money may be spent in Alaska, but much Federal money is GENERATED in Alaska (taxes on oil and fishing to name a couple). Cruise pax make up the MAJORITY of visitors to Alaska. IMHO, the cruise lines do not pay their fair share for all the infrastructure required by cruise pax. The cruise lines didn't want to impact THEIR bottom line, so the people of Alaska took it upon themselves to protect THEIR bottom line (with a lot of help from the environmental wackos from the left coast).

[smeyer418]

Most of the road fees you paid are in NJ...don't blame that on NY. The NYNJPort Authority which runs the interstate bridges subsidizies mass transit and the airports. I have no problem with road fees or congestion pricing(which will be next in New York)...Yes the bridges are paid for they must be maintained and the heavier the truck the more wear and tear on the highway and bridges. Actually I wouldn't mind the amount we are paying if in fact they maintained the roads halfway well which they don't! But I still think you should pay for your own roadway and I do believe that Alaska gets back 1.25 for every dollar you send south and I think NY gets .50....

[MrsKinsey]

I suppose a lot of people like to tout our so called "Bridges to Nowhere" as reasons for claiming that Alaska already is spending too much money.

 

First let me say that our bridges have nothing to do with the cruise tax.

 

Secondly, without having to Google it, do any of you actually know what the purposes are for those bridges? Or are you just regurgitating a term coined by an uniformed and overly opinionated Senator who didn't believe our bridges were truly necessary?

[rjg41]

The issue is not just the cruise tax but that as said by the Alaskan in the Anchorage news article quoted earlier, the curise tax is just another way that the state wants everyone else to pay a good chunk of their bills. As for what the cruise line costs the state, what about all the jobs generated and $$$ spent by the tourists? How about the $40 to $70 paid by each passenger already paid before the new tax? As for the "Bridges to nowhere", how many people live on the islands now? How about the land developers who will be reaping the benefit of the bridges pay for them instead of the lower 48?

[MrsKinsey]

rig41,

 

That last post was not directed towards you. But since you bring it up, to the contrary, an editorial in the newspaper can hardly be misconstrued as unbiased journalism. An editorial is just someone's opinion, which they are entitled to. However, it doesn't reflect everybody's point of view. So unless you have the notion that our newspaper is completely comprised of editorials (ours isn't. Is yours?), you can't say that a quote from an editorial is a true reflection of what is going on in our state.

 

It is true that many small Alaskan towns are inundated with tourists in the summer. It really does take it's toll on the environment whether you acknowledge it or not. Using part of the tax to ensure our pristine water and wilderness stays pristine is not greedy.

 

And it is my experience that Alaskans are not the ones scooping up all the jobs created by the cruise industry. I have been to MANY of the destinations that the cruise passengers frequent and every single one of the hotels created by the cruise industry (Mt. McKinley lodge, Grand Denali lodge, Denali Princess lodge to name a FEW) are staffed entirely by non-Alaskans.

 

The truth is, you are trying to put an ugly spin on everything Alaskan. I'm sorry if something embittered you against Alaska, but the solution is simple. If you hate it so much, don't make yourself miserable by coming here.

 

Every state has it's skeletons. No state is perfect. And the residents certainly are not responsible for the flaws of the state in which they live. Alaskans are good people and contrary to what the cruise tax may say about us, we do embrace tourists and try to make them feel welcome.

 

That's all I'm going to say about the subject. I've wasted too much of my time debating it as it is.

[greatam]

As for what the cruise line costs the state, what about all the jobs generated and $$$ spent by the tourists?

 

Better check this one out more thoroughly. A large percentage of the jobs in the summer are done by people from the lower 48. A good percentage of the shops in the ports close after cruise season. A lot of those shops are owned by companies from the lower 48. Quite a lot of the money generated goes OUT OF ALASKA. I am as guilty as the cruise lines. I send 4-6 employees to Alaska EVERY YEAR to expedite our fish shipping business. Other than the small amount of money they spend on food and personal stuff, most of the money made by my employees and company leaves Alaska.

 

How about the $40 to $70 paid by each passenger already paid before the new tax? As for the "Bridges to nowhere", how many people live on the islands now? How about the land developers who will be reaping the benefit of the bridges pay for them instead of the lower 48?

 

The $40-70 are port charges, supposed to go DIRECTLY to port infrastructure. Doesn't do a thing for the roads, litter, graffiti, etc.

 

What developers benefit by the bridge to the airport??? Not saying it couldn't happen, but development on the scale you imply is most likely NOT going to happen in Ketchican. There would be very little benefit to building a hotel, condos, etc. on Gravina Island. Ketchican is generally accessible only by cruise ship or an exorbitant air fare.

[greatam]

dup post

[DonLou]

What I find interesting is that the price for an Alaskan cruise seems to be equal to or less than what was advertised last year. On top of that, I've received several mailings (U.S. post and email) offering special low price deals for Alaska. If the tax is so bad, why is Celebrity pushing the Alaska cruise so hard? Their pricing and scheduling of ships doesn't seem to support any arguments that the tax is bad for the cruise industry or its passengers.

 

Conceptually, I hate the tax. But if I paid $1500 for an Alaskan cruise last year and I will pay the same this year, the issue of how much of that is taxes is a non-issue. The bottom line is I'm paying $1500, the same as last year.