Venice is concluding a pilot program that charges tourists an entry fee into the historic center of the city, resulting in earnings of over two million euros, and the city is now determined to double the fee in the future, while opponents label the idea as a failed experiment.
Opposition city council member Giovanni Andrea Martini described the decision to introduce entry tickets as unsuccessful.
During the first 11 days of the trial period, the city recorded an average of 75.000 visitors. Martini noted that this was 10.000 more each day than on three indicative holidays in 2023, citing figures provided by the city based on mobile phone tracking data of people visiting the city.
This year, Venice introduced the long-debated day-trip tax on 29 days, mostly weekends and holidays, from April 25th to mid-July. The project, delayed due to the pandemic, was announced by UNESCO member states when they decided against recommending the city be placed on the endangered world heritage list.
In the past two and a half months, nearly 438.000 tourists paid the tax, generating about 2.19 million euros, according to calculations based on data provided by the city. Officials stated that the money would be used for essential services, which cost more in a city traversed by canals, including waste removal and maintenance.
The decision did not apply to people staying in hotels in Venice, who already pay a tourist tax. Exceptions also included children under 14, regional residents, students, workers, and people visiting relatives, among others. The city’s top tourism official, Simone Venturini, hinted that the fee would continue and be increased. A proposal to double the fee to 10 euros for next year is being considered, according to a city spokesperson.
Officials promised hefty fines for those attempting to evade payment, but none were ultimately imposed. Checks were conducted at entry points where tickets were issued, ranging from 8.500 to 20.800. City officials said this was because they wanted discreet implementation of the decision, while critics argued that this resulted in reduced payments as visitors realized there was no risk in avoiding payment.
Opponents of the plan argue that the project failed to make the city more livable for the local population, as intended. They advocate for policies that encourage the return of local residents to the historic center, which has been losing inhabitants for decades. They also demand restrictions on short-term rentals. In the historic center, there are now more tourist beds than official residents, whose number has reached a record low of 50.000.
