By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Travel to the US from several European countries, including Finland, Germany, and Denmark, has significantly decreased. Sharp declines, ranging from 9% to 34%, are attributed to multiple factors, including stricter border controls and political opposition to the Trump administration. Concerns about potential difficulties at US borders, stemming from stricter immigration policies, have led some individuals to cancel travel plans. Furthermore, a perceived boycott of the US due to political objections is contributing to the downturn, impacting the American economy with an estimated $90 billion loss.
Read the original article here
Finland departures to the US are down 9%, a figure that some find surprisingly low given the current political and social climate in the United States. The relatively small decrease might be attributed to several factors, including the fact that many travel plans are booked well in advance, often months before any significant changes in political or economic landscapes become fully apparent. This means that the real impact on tourism numbers from Finland, and indeed other European countries, may not be fully realized for some time.
The 9% decrease, however, is viewed by some as a mere starting point, with projections for a steeper decline in the future. Several commenters expressed a belief that the full impact of negative news regarding US border control, including reports of increased scrutiny, detentions, and even instances of travelers being sent to other countries, will only become apparent as more people reconsider future travel plans. The current numbers, they argue, primarily reflect trips booked long before these issues became widely publicized.
The perceived harshness of US border control procedures is a significant deterrent for potential travelers. Stories of lengthy interrogations, arbitrary detentions, and even accusations based on seemingly innocuous details like hotel bookings are creating a sense of apprehension amongst those considering a trip. This perception is amplified by some commenters’ experiences, like one individual recounting a 30-minute grilling by a Customs and Border Patrol agent over their lack of pre-booked accommodation for an entire road trip. These anecdotes contribute to a wider narrative of a less welcoming environment for international visitors.
Furthermore, the economic context plays a role. The economic impact of certain US policies is cited as a cause for concern, with references to potential economic losses estimated in the tens of billions of dollars. This, combined with concerns about border security, is interpreted by some as indicative of an increasingly unstable and unpredictable environment, dissuading tourism. Many anticipate that the financial implications of such instability will manifest more strongly in future booking trends.
The relatively low decrease in Finnish departures (9%) is contrasted with a much more significant drop in Canadian departures to the US, reported to be as high as 70% in some analyses. However, this comparison also highlights a key difference: Canada’s proximity to the US allows for much more spontaneous and easily-cancellable travel compared to the considerably more involved, longer, and less flexible international travel from Finland. This makes it plausible that the immediate impact on Finnish tourism is less significant but that this might change over time.
The prevailing sentiment amongst many commenters is that the 9% drop is not reflective of the full potential effect. Many believe that the current figures don’t reflect the reality of the situation and that a larger reduction is expected in the coming months. The longer-term effect of increased border scrutiny and overall negative perceptions of the US as a travel destination are anticipated to significantly depress tourism numbers from Finland and other European nations. The current relatively small decrease is seen as a preliminary sign of a trend likely to become far more pronounced in the near future.
Finally, some commenters express disappointment in the seemingly low response from Finland to the situation. They encourage a more proactive approach in addressing the growing concerns around US travel, suggesting that the current 9% reduction is far too small given the severity of the described issues. The implication is that Finland needs to be more assertive in responding to the changing landscape of US-European relations, and that current actions are insufficient to protect the interests of Finnish citizens traveling to the US.