Standing Up for the Great Outdoors: Our Stance on the Proposed English Visitor Levy

At Pitchup.com, we champion the rural businesses that make the UK’s outdoor tourism sector thrive. Recently, the government announced a proposed Visitor Levy (often called a "tourist tax") on overnight stays in England. We believe this proposal, in its current form, threatens the very rural economies it aims to support and introduces unworkable complexities for small businesses and booking platforms alike. Below, you will find our official letter to industry stakeholders outlining our deep concerns and urging a vital rethink of this policy.

Dear XX, 

We are writing to express Pitchup.com’s concerns about the proposed Visitor Levy on overnight stays in England announced during the recent budget.

Pitchup is Europe’s largest booking platform for outdoor accommodation, ranked the sixth-largest online travel agent (OTA) in Europe by organic traffic. 

We book over 5 million domestic visitor nights each year, particularly in rural destinations. Since being founded in 2009, we have handled over £500 million worth of bookings, and 3,928 UK campsites took bookings via our website last year.

We are aware there is a public consultation currently in place: however we are surprised and disappointed, given the industry backlash to the Scottish Visitor Levy, that there has been no engagement or consultation thus far with tourism industry bodies, operators or providers in the development of the overnight visitor levy in England.

Our main concern is that the levy will ultimately restrict economic growth in rural communities across England who desperately need a boost, especially in light of data showing declining visitor numbers and one pub a day closing in 2025.  In addition, we believe that in the pursuit of flexibility, the proposed levy in its current form will be almost impossible to administer not only for organisations such as ours (booking platforms, OTAs) but also for accommodation providers. The consequence will be mass non-compliance with CMA rules as detailed below.

Impact on growth

According to the Country Land and Business Association’s (CLA) Rural Tourism Partnership, the rural tourism sector contributes £11.5bn Gross Value Added (GVA) to England’s rural economy, far exceeding the contributions from agriculture (£8.5bn GVA), and has a key role in supporting local communities, preserving heritage and enhancing national wellbeing.

In January 2025, the Prime Minister stated: "If it’s good for growth, good for wealth creation, the answer is ‘yes’, if it’s not then the answer is ‘no’."

While the visitor levy consultation document mentions "growth" no fewer than 42 times, no evidence is provided to suggest that a levy will not have the effect on growth that conventional economics dictates, i.e. a reduction in demand. Especially when close substitutes - local authorities which opt not to introduce a levy - exist nearby.

That there has been no assessment of this point or indeed consultation on the existence of a levy in principle is very concerning, particularly when:

• Domestic overnight trips in July/August have already fallen by 20% between 2022 and 2025 before the impact of the visitor levy (https://www.visitbritain.org/research-insights/domestic-tourism-latest-results).

• New Economics Foundation's analysis of Visit Britain’s Great British Tourism Survey 2025 highlights that seaside, countryside and small town destinations are particularly affected by this decline, losing £1.8bn in spending over the twelve months to September 2025, and £4.6bn (-25%) since 2022. Coastal areas were the worst hit, losing 28% of overnight domestic tourism spending in just four years. Since 2022, a total of 75 million domestic nights have been lost, a fall of 21%.
  

Although the consultation document attempts to characterise the UK as an "outlier" in various international tax comparisons, it omits the most pertinent comparison of all - the UK having one of the highest rates of VAT for hospitality in Europe at 20%. Comparatively, the VAT rate for popular European destinations is much lower for tourism, at 9% in Ireland, 10% in Spain, France and Italy, and 13% in Greece. Previous models have shown that reducing VAT on tourism attractions and accommodation to 5% would lead to an increase in tax receipts for the Exchequer over a 10-year period (CLA, 2025).

According to the Tourism Alliance’s Tourism Taxation Report (2023), of 12 competitor destinations (in Europe, the USA and the Middle East) that impose a tourism tax, all 12 have a significantly lower rate of sales tax on accommodation, averaging 14%. This means that even when tourism tax is included, visitors to those destinations pay less accommodation tax than visitors in the UK already do due to the UK’s high sales tax (20% VAT). The report also notes that destinations with the highest rates of visitor tax have implemented this to meet their objectives to deter, reduce and restrict visitor numbers.

We agree with the Tourism Alliance that the issue is not only the level of tax already charged to tourists in the UK (VAT), but also that this revenue goes to central government and is not then equitably distributed at a local level for investment in, and maintenance of, tourism destinations. Rather than charging additional local taxes to visitors, the existing tax system should be improved to ensure revenue is shared more equally between central and local governments.

 

The Tourism Alliance report also discusses the price elasticity of tourism in the UK, noting a 2007 report by Christel DeHaan Tourism and Travel Research Institute which found visitors are extremely susceptible to changes in the cost of holidays. The study found that the price elasticity of tourism to the UK for holiday visitors is -1.23, meaning a 1% increase in the cost of holidays in the UK translates to a 1.23% decrease in the revenue the UK receives from overseas holiday visitors. It also found that a 1% increase in domestic holiday prices will lead to a 1.46% fall in trips and a 1.95% fall in expenditure as UK residents will substitute overseas holidays for domestic holidays.

It is extraordinary therefore that "VAT" is not mentioned once in the consultation, given the obvious impact of even higher taxes on the UK's competitiveness as a destination and existing downward trend in domestic trips.

Industry bodies such as UK Hospitality also dispute the unfounded assertion that "growth" will result, describing the government's U-turn on tourism tax as "the fastest way to undermine investment", burdening Brits with £518m in additional tax to holiday in England when domestic holiday volumes are in freefall. This decline in demand for overnight domestic stays is likely driven by cost of living pressures, which an additional tax on visitors will not alleviate.

 

Domestic tourism is an essential income stream for rural and coastal destinations, with 84% of domestic overnight tourism spending occurring in destinations outside of London (Visit Britain 2026). It is imperative that domestic visitor levels recover in rural areas, and growth is not stymied by costs increasing even further following the unprecedented increases afflicting the hospitality sector in recent years.

In addition to bringing much-needed income to rural communities, by providing more options to stay outdoors, campsites and holiday parks relieve the pressure on residential housing stock from other types of holiday accommodation such as Airbnb and cottage-booking agencies. In many rural areas, more than half of properties now have no permanent occupant. It is well documented that rents are escalating as supply reduces, displacing people from the communities they grew up in and depriving tourist areas of accommodation for seasonal staff. This is leading to 'zombie villages' whose school, health centre and other services cease to be viable as year-round populations fall below critical mass.

Outdoor accommodation provides a cost-effective break, close to nature which boosts physical and mental health. It is the most sustainable form of tourism accommodation, with a vastly lower environmental impact than alternatives. Temporary campsites in particular have allowed holidaymakers to learn about farming and rural life.

In addition, the Welsh Government’s own impact assessment on the tourism tax underlines the fallacy of introducing a tourism tax altogether further. The assessment states that the tax would raise an estimated £264m in the 10 years to 2035. However, it also states that it will cost between £313m and £576m to collect the tax. Economically, this makes no senseand will not benefit local communities whatsoever. 

Calculating the rates

As in Scotland, I note the Overnight Visitor Levy proposes to exclude amounts not reasonably attributable to accommodation. This could include meals, drinks, parking, laundry facilities or services, entertainment and transportation to or from the accommodation.In many cases, these amounts are included in the price. Therefore, they should be excluded before calculating the levy.

This makes calculation of the levy yet more complex. Clearly it is not going to be possible for a platform like ours to collate the value of each of these components for every type of pitch at every campsite, especially when facilities do not operate at certain times of the year (e.g. entertainment only in peak season), so the split would vary even for the same type of pitch at different times.

 

This only complicates what are already complex schemes. Even with the limited flexibility granted by Scotland’s initial scheme - currently being expanded by emergency legislation - five different regimes already exist at five local authorities. Not only do we need to incorporate different percentage rates, but also we must cease applying the rate after a certain number of days (in Edinburgh for example) adding another layer of complexity.

Regardless of the components the levy applies to, any supplementary tax will only worsen UK destinations’ poor international competitiveness. For example, while Wales has opted for a fixed fee of £0.75 per person per night, this could amount to as much as 25% of the pitch fee based on a family of six. This will simply deter visitors and does not justify the cost of administering the levy to providers or local authorities.

 

Furthermore, the proposal that mayors would have the power to charge either a flat fee or % rate would bring yet another headache in the monitoring, managing and calculating of rates per geographical location.

Even further complexity will result from local authorities changing the structure and parameters of their scheme at irregular intervals.

Complexities on where the levy applies

We do not currently collect which local authority each campsite is a member of. Local authorities do not map to counties, and are not usually obvious from the address so this would require accommodation providers to select their relevant authority or the provision of a geofencing file that provides geographical boundaries and ensures accuracy and compliance.

Furthermore, if the campsite fails to select the tax scheme applicable to its local authority, some of the liability for that error would no doubt attach to us regardless, under CMA rules.

Compliance with CMA guidelines

We understand that drip pricing is among the CMA’s priorities for enforcement. While we made a number of changes to our website last year to meet the new criteria, introducing multiple local tax schemes throughout the UK would be an entirely different undertaking, bringing exponentially more pricing complexity than a uniform rate of VAT included in the price (as has applied thus far).

In a single search, users of our website trigger searches for tens of thousands of prices, all of which, according to the recently updated CMA price transparency rules, must include all compulsory elements however they are ultimately calculated. 

The reality is that few platforms will have any capacity in their technical roadmaps to launch every possible permutation afforded to local authorities, even in time for authorities yet to announce their plans. We understand other large travel websites have confirmed this to the Scottish government. The consequence will be mass non-compliance with CMA guidance.

In our view these new levies will make CMA drip-pricing rules unenforceable in accommodation sales for years to come. That goes for the websites of accommodation providers, who would be responsible for actually collecting the tax, and of agents such as us.

Cancellations, refunds and no-shows

The levy also proposes additional complexity by not following the campsite's existing cancellation policy, meaning a campsite would need to refund the levy in circumstances when refunds were otherwise not due. This would incur additional payment processor fees at a loss to the campsite, which are often not refundable even if the original transaction is refunded (e.g. with Stripe). 

Conclusion

It is curious to see the 'flexibility' at a local level being lauded as an unambiguous benefit by officials. From our perspective, what was one tax and pricing regime is now many multifaceted, location-dependent schemes, with dimensions such as stay length required for the first time. With the onset of API-driven dynamic pricing, meeting the needs of accommodation providers is challenging enough already without further complexity being layered on in the name of flexibility.

The outdoor accommodation sector is made up of farms, pubs, SMEs and microbusinesses, who are already struggling with the challenges of other tax and regulatory changes (significantly higher business rates, above-inflation rises in national insurance, minimum wage, utility costs and other inputs, expanded employment rights, inheritance tax reform, removal of basic payments scheme). Burdening the outdoor tourism sector with the administration of a local taxation scheme this complex - for the sake of sums under £0.50 on many bookings in our sector, tax rates of as much as 25% of a pitch booking in the case of on Wales’s tax rate (with VAT on top), and near-zero quarterly submissions for half the year - will only accelerate the decline of many rural businesses.

The irony is that this burden is being imposed on the sector that retains the lowest proportion of overall visitor spend, yet brings the vast majority of visitors to many rural high streets, pubs and attractions which are ailing throughout many areas of England. 

We hope you will take our feedback into consideration and will work collaboratively with tourism operators to reconsider plans for the levy to prevent continuing decline in an already hard-pressed sector. 

Current state of play by UK country:

• Scotland: Edinburgh Council implementing first, affecting arrivals from 24th July 2026, other councils either announced or in consultation. We've also submitted a letter to relevant stakeholders in Scotland.
• England: Consultation closed February 2026 over implementation of visitor tax - letter covered above.
• Wales: Allowed from April 2027 at 75p per person per night for camping, after 2022 national consultation, now in consultation at council level.