Calls to abolish the travel tax are becoming louder. For many Filipinos and resident foreigners, it feels like an extra charge that comes at the wrong time. The frustration is understandable.

But as this discussion gains traction, there is a more important issue that needs attention. If the travel tax is removed without a clear replacement funding source for the Tourism Infrastructure and Enterprise Zone Authority (TIEZA), we risk weakening one of the foundations of tourism growth in the Philippines.

Why This Funding Matters

Under the current structure, 50 percent of travel tax collections go to TIEZA. That funding supports tourism-related infrastructure across the country.

This is not about optional improvements. It is about the basics that make destinations viable. Tourism enterprise zones, access roads, wastewater systems in island communities, ports, public spaces, and heritage rehabilitation projects determine whether a destination can sustain visitor activity and attract private investment.

From a development standpoint, the relationship is straightforward. When government invests in infrastructure, it reduces risk. When risk is reduced, private capital is more likely to follow.

Investors and developers do not commit to projects where access is unreliable or utilities are insufficient. But when roads, water systems, and public amenities are in place, hotels get built. Commercial activity expands. Jobs are created. Local economies become more resilient.

We have seen this pattern repeatedly in destinations that have successfully grown their tourism sectors.

Reform Is Valid but Elimination Is Different

It is reasonable to ask whether TIEZA can improve. Transparency, project prioritization, and implementation timelines should always be reviewed. Accountability strengthens institutions.

However, questioning efficiency is different from removing a funding stream altogether.

A stable and dedicated mechanism for tourism infrastructure is not a luxury. It is part of what keeps the sector competitive. Reforming the system is one conversation. Eliminating it without a replacement is another.

Regional Competition Is Infrastructure Driven

Across Southeast Asia, tourism competitiveness increasingly comes down to infrastructure.

Indonesia is investing in access and utilities in its priority tourism zones. Vietnam continues to build expressways that connect coastal destinations. Thailand has maintained steady upgrades to its tourism infrastructure for decades. Cambodia is expanding resort and eco-tourism facilities with clear direction.

These are long-term strategies. They recognize that infrastructure is what allows tourism demand to convert into sustained investment.

The Real Question Policymakers Must Answer

The conversation should not focus only on whether the travel tax is unpopular. The more important question is how tourism infrastructure will be funded if the tax is removed.

There are options. The rate can be adjusted. Exemptions can be explored. The collection structure can be improved. A redesigned tourism levy may be considered. Public-private partnerships may also play a role.

But any change must come with a stable and predictable replacement mechanism. If funding shifts to general appropriations, tourism infrastructure will compete annually with other national priorities. That creates uncertainty and makes long-term planning difficult.

Removing the travel tax without a defined alternative is not reform. It creates a gap.

Protecting Long-Term Tourism Growth

Tourism is regaining momentum. More importantly, it remains one of the country’s strongest economic multipliers. It drives regional development, activates land values, attracts capital, and generates employment in areas where growth options are limited.

But growth depends on readiness. Destinations must be accessible, functional, and capable of supporting both visitor demand and investor confidence.

Policy decisions that affect tourism funding should be anchored in long-term competitiveness. The goal should be to strengthen the system, not unintentionally weaken it.

Reform is welcome. It can make the sector more efficient and equitable. But any reform must preserve the core function of sustained investment in tourism infrastructure. Without that foundation, the country risks slowing the progress it has worked hard to build.