Passengers to Alaska may soon face an extra $50 tax.

[Chat Noir]

phost ghost

[mytime53]

Many Alaskan residents (and non-residents) pay "user fees" for quite a few services provided by the state that are not considered necessary. The idea is that if you use it, you help pay for it. For instance, to launch our small boat on some of our rivers we have to pay $25+ (each time we launch, or else buy a seasonal pass) to pay for the building and maintenance of the boat launch. And a fee to park while we're out on the boat.

I have been in ports around the world where having a cruise ship dock (or even 2 or 3 at a time) is a drop in the bucket compared to the total facilities at the port. On the other hand, needing to build the infrastructure (dock, terminal, motorcoach parking/turnaround area, etc.) required by cruise ships is a tremendous outlay for the state and cities and towns visited by cruise ships in Alaska.

So what I'm trying to say is that in Alaska this isn't really seen as a "tax the tourists--get their money". It's seen as "I pay to launch my boat. I pay to tie up at the dock. I pay to park. The cruiselines should pay to dock and park also."

[sea_u_onboard]

It's great that the voters can get out there and decide that the cruise industry should fork over this extra money at $50 per pop. But it would be naive to think that the cruiseline isn't going to pass this on to the passengers.

 

If cities started imposing fees to tourist for this and that it would soon move down the list of places to visit. Alaska is a unique location and in my opinion this is the "only" reason this whole tax won't be a failure. People don't have many other options if they want to see the types of things Alaska has. Sure I could just fly in and rent a car or RV and see the state that way - but truly a cruiseship is the most efficient (JMHO). So it appears that they have us by the jugular.

 

This whole thing could be mute if the courts find it violates this or that - so I will wait and see how it all pans out. I wonder want kinds of complaints the cruiselines are going to get once people get ready to make final payments. If everything does stands this should be VERY interesting.

[Yukon]

I wonder what kinds of complaints the cruiselines are going to get once people get ready to make final payments. If everything does stands this should be VERY interesting.

 

If a big stink is raised, the cruise lines will absorb the $50 - which they can easily do, since they're gouging you to the tune of hundreds of dollars each, as can be seen by looking at Caribbean prices.

 

Murray

[mbisson]

What type of business? Where are you located?

 

I'd wager that it's a business that isn't something cruise passengers would use.

 

jmo

-Monte

[jtl513]

If this tax was indeed intended to reduce the number of ships or cruisers it certainly has failed to achieve that goal. On these boards there is some grumbling, but few, if any, are actually cancelling cruises because of it.

[sea_u_onboard]

If a big stink is raised, the cruise lines will absorb the $50 - which they can easily do, since they're gouging you to the tune of hundreds of dollars each, as can be seen by looking at Caribbean prices.

 

Murray

While I do agree they are just going to work this into the cruise fare - at least for those who hadn't book yet. They have that WONDERFUL contact that allows them to basically anything they want. They are tacking it on and when people complain they are just going to say - it's in the contract - we can adjust for port fees/taxes. So it's a lose lose for the cruiser.

 

They (the cruiselines) are making money hand over fist in Alaska - they could EASILY pick this up - but why when all of us will pay it for them.

 

Basically they have us. I'm not going to cancel my trip over it but I do think I'm going to put together a well crafted letter and send it to the cruiseline explaining that if this tax is overturned I expect to see my money back.

[sea_u_onboard]

I think instead of having the cruiseline collect the tax they should have an Alaskan resident standing on the pier with a bucket to collect the fees as people embark / disembark. I wonder if they could get anyone to take that job??

[sea_u_onboard]

I hope this isn't a double post - this board is acting soooo strange.

I think instead of having the cruiseline collect the tax they should have an Alaskan resident standing on the pier with a bucket to collect the fees as people embark / disembark. I wonder if they could get anyone to take that job??

[mbisson]

I think instead of having the cruiseline collect the tax they should have an Alaskan resident standing on the pier with a bucket to collect the fees as people embark / disembark. I wonder if they could get anyone to take that job??

 

They would never go for it! Some would avoid the tax by staying on the ship and knowing how politics go, they'd want $50 at every port ;)

 

-Monte

[CanCanCase]

Politics aside, arguing about the source of anyone's information aside... The bottom line is that most of the Alaskans you will meet on your cruise (shop owners, excursion vendors, cruise crew, etc.) either aren't involved in the voting process, or voted against the tax.

 

If I were cruising Alaska this year, I would certainly pay close attention to the tax and how it holds up in court. The cruise lines are collecting the money now, to cover their rear-ends IF the tax holds up. In the event it does not hold up, I would like to think anyone who paid the tax should be entitled to a refund. If the cruise lines were smart, it would be levvied as an increase in cruise fare, not a separate tax. Then they would be less liable for the refund, even if the tax was never collected. I'll be interested to read/hear some of the refund stories if and when they begin to happen.

 

This may also be a good thing, at least in the short term... There are some wonderful deals to be had on excursions, etc... and if the cruise lines won't absorb the additional $50, some local vendors will.

 

-Case

[sea_u_onboard]

They would never go for it! Some would avoid the tax by staying on the ship and knowing how politics go, they'd want $50 at every port ;)

 

-Monte

Well - they do have to get on in the beginning and off in the end. :D

 

You know - I think maybe they should just build another bridge to nowhere like they are going to do with all the Federal money they got - at least that's what I read. Are they still building that millions of dollars worth of bridge that the people don't even what?

[mbisson]

Are they still building that millions of dollars worth of bridge that the people don't even what?

 

Are you referring to the bridge in Ketchikan that would go to the island where the airport is? I think I saw once that with the amt it was going to cost they could buy everyone in Ketchikan a yacht to use to get to the airport! (but of course, that could be a rumor started by jealous legislators in other states)

 

Hopefully, Washington state wouldn't be stupid enough to allow Alaska to send people down here to collect the tax from people getting on & off the ships ;)

 

-Monte

[sea_u_onboard]

I did think some interesting articles when I did a search on google. It appears the pushers of the bill decided it wasn't the greatest idea when they became the butt of jokes and people were outraged.

 

Yes it was Ketchikan.

[jtl513]

they are just going to work this into the cruise fare - at least for those who hadn't book yet.

My TA said it will apply to everyone who hadn't made their final payment by 01/01/07, regardless of when the booking was done, and will be collected in an adjusted final payment if it wasn't reflected in the original quote.

[sea_u_onboard]

I think what I posted came across the wrong way - but either way maybe that is something the cruiseline you are on is doing but I got my bill in December with the adjusted amount. So I guess my cruiseline didn't extend that practice to it's clients.

[cruie4ever]

:rolleyes: Planing our 2008 cruises ,wonder if this whole issue will be resolved by the time we book our trip.The first leg is to take RCCL repositioning cruise from San Diego to Vancouver.Next leg is to stay on the same ship from Vancouver to Seward .Third leg is our Motor Home Rental in Fairbanks. This entire trip is 3 weeks & treating our grown daughter as a reward for her masters degree. I was going to void the 2nd leg of the trip & fly from Vancouver to Anchorage.However, a lot would be missed seeing the various ports & general sights.Thus,we decided to eat the tax ,if it still exists.But,I will make sure we don't spend that $150 on other items.

 

We did the repositioning cruise May 2006 from San Diego(we live close by) & it was great.We sailed on RCCL,Serenade of the Seas.A beautiful ship.We then rented a mini Van & took 12 days to drive home.what a great & unforgetable adventure.

 

We have done the inside passage twice & know the excitement.So,I know our daughter will measureably enjoy this trip,we planed.:D

[Tyrkitty]

I just called RCL to see what a new charge was on my booking. Total was 98.62 for the two of us. At first the rep wasn't sure and then told me it was for the new Alaska Tax. I will have to follow this thread a little more closely. The category for the new charge was "Other Options"

[Tyrkitty]

I can see my last post, but the thread didn't move up to the top with mine showing. Will try to bump it up with this little post.

[kingsgirl]

Is this just getting bumped so everyone knows about it?

[CanCanCase]

And here's another poorly planned tax measure. Governments think they have a problem, try to legislate it away, and cause bigger problems for other folks...

 

It seems Washington state is looking to tax freight coming both INTO and OUT OF its ports... Hey Monte... just where do you think my toilet paper and Hostess Twinkies come from???

 

http://www.juneauempire.com/stories/021607/sta_20070216034.shtml

 

-Case

 

PS: Is it merely a coincidence that the amount of the tax is based on the $50 mark??? :rolleyes: Hmmm.....

[mbisson]

It seems Washington state is looking to tax freight coming both INTO and OUT OF its ports... Hey Monte... just where do you think my toilet paper and Hostess Twinkies come from???

 

http://www.juneauempire.com/stories/021607/sta_20070216034.shtml

 

-Case

 

PS: Is it merely a coincidence that the amount of the tax is based on the $50 mark??? :rolleyes: Hmmm.....

 

I hope Haugen isn't playing "tit or tat" (and as she says, it's aimed at Asia instead of Alaska) but it is politics-so who really knows. Personally, I wonder why this wouldn't be considered a restraint of interstate commerce (which I've always believed was unconstitutional-but I am probably wrong AGAIN). I won't be voting for this measure (should it ever reach a ballot), and will have trouble voting for any reps who might support it.

 

BUT-are our politicians as dumb as yours? PROBABLY! (I still don't blame your politicians for the cruise tax-you just happen to have a higher percentage of idiots registered to vote than we do (so far)!

 

BTW-give up the twinkies, they'll kill ya! And maybe I should consider bringing up some TP for you on our next trip to Juneau (instead of buying ya a drink) LOL

 

But wait, if they're taxing freight shipped into the state, I bet that gets passed on to me as well! I'm not posititve, but from what I've heard I think it would apply to containers on trains as well. And if a container is imported by ship from Asia, and exported by train to another state :eek: IDIOTS!

 

And then there's the last paragraph of the article in the Empire "The Alaska counter-legislation is scheduled for a hearing before the House Labor and Commerce Committee on Monday." By "counter-legislation" are your idiots really after a trade war with our idiots? We both better duck & cover, cause we'll be the ones hit by the fallout, not the politicians!

 

 

 

-Monte

[CanCanCase]

Monte-

 

Just book a fishing charter. Then I could afford the price increase on the TP at Costco... isn't that economics at work? Besides, if you bring me TP, the airline will charge for extra baggage, or the cruise ship will call it an extra $50 passenger if it's one of those jumbo-cases... lose/lose either way!

 

Afterwards, we can both go to the Red Dog and have an Alaskan beer that never left Juneau to begin with! That'll show 'em... we don't need no stinkin' Washington ports! (Now if I could just figure out how to get my #2 diesel straight out of Valdez.... Hmmm.)

 

Aaah, the power of the half-wit voter...

 

-Case

[mbisson]

Monte-

 

Just book a fishing charter. Then I could afford the price increase on the TP at Costco... isn't that economics at work? Besides, if you bring me TP, the airline will charge for extra baggage, or the cruise ship will call it an extra $50 passenger if it's one of those jumbo-cases... lose/lose either way!

 

Afterwards, we can both go to the Red Dog and have an Alaskan beer that never left Juneau to begin with!

 

-Case

 

 

I like that solution. WE'LL SHOW EM

 

It'll probably be one of the early sailings in May '08 before we are able to come up again. What kind of fish should be in?

 

-Monte

[CanCanCase]

I like that solution. WE'LL SHOW EM

 

It'll probably be one of the early sailings in May '08 before we are able to come up again. What kind of fish should be in?

 

-Monte

Mid May - June is King Salmon season... either that, or halibut if the politicians don't take those away too!

 

I just had an idea for a new cruise line. All of the prices will be operating costs plus $150. Each stateroom will be a luxuriously finished cargo container - approximately 20' in length. Washington can have $50 per "stateroom" when the ship leaves Seattle, Alaska can have $50 for the person traveling, and you and I can split the other $50...! (I think I'll save up my share until I can afford to go airborne-wolf-hunting.)

 

-Case