By John Q. Hosedrinker 
The U.S. economy is facing a decline in international tourism spending, largely due to a decrease in Canadian visitors. A recent U.S. Travel Association report forecasts a $5.7 billion USD loss in 2025, with double-digit drops in Canadian air and land travel to the U.S. observed. Canadians, traditionally the largest group of international tourists, are reportedly deterred by the current political climate and policies, as evidenced by an Angus Reid poll showing 70% of Canadians uncomfortable traveling to the U.S. Some U.S. tourism organizations near the Canadian border are responding with incentive programs and discounts in an effort to attract Canadians back.
Read the original article here
U.S. tourism faces a significant financial setback, with a projected $5.7 billion loss stemming from Canadians choosing to forgo trips to the United States. It’s a striking figure, and the reasons behind this shift are multi-faceted, painting a complex picture of modern tourism and international relations.
The political climate seems to be a major contributing factor to this trend. Many Canadians express a deep-seated distrust of the U.S. and its policies, citing concerns about safety, values, and the overall atmosphere. This sentiment is palpable, with numerous individuals sharing their personal decisions to avoid travel to the States due to political disagreements. The comments often indicate a strong desire to avoid supporting a country whose political direction is viewed with disapproval, suggesting that the “stay away” logic that some Americans expressed appears to be backfiring.
This aversion isn’t limited to a specific demographic or region within Canada. It seems to resonate across various segments of the population, reinforcing the idea that this is a widespread concern. Many Canadians are actively choosing alternative destinations, whether within their own country or in other parts of the world. Europe, Mexico, and other places are seeing increased Canadian tourism, indicating a deliberate shift in travel preferences. It’s clear that these tourists are looking for places where they feel more welcomed and share similar values.
The shift isn’t just about individual choices; it has broader economic implications. The reduced tourism has ripple effects, impacting businesses and communities that depend on Canadian visitors. It’s not simply a matter of lost revenue; it’s also about missed opportunities for cultural exchange and fostering international relationships. Many feel this loss is a small price to pay for what they view as a stand against policies and behaviors they find objectionable.
Safety concerns are also playing a role. Instances of detentions and perceived unfriendly treatment at the border, coupled with anxieties about gun violence and social unrest, are making the U.S. less attractive to potential Canadian travelers. These issues contribute to a sense of unease, causing potential visitors to reconsider their plans and choose safer, more welcoming destinations. This can include feeling that one can be detained without cause.
It’s also interesting to consider how this situation affects the broader economic landscape. While $5.7 billion is a significant sum for the U.S. tourism industry, the comments also suggest that this impact might not be as devastating as it seems. Domestic tourism within the U.S. is the mainstay, and some feel that the absence of Canadian visitors is hardly noticeable. The economic impact could be somewhat softened by the fact that many Canadians are spending their travel money within their own country.
The impact also extends beyond tourism itself. There is also the loss of revenue from business events, indicating a wider trend of reduced engagement with the U.S. This comprehensive effect suggests that the consequences are more widespread than merely lost vacation dollars. The issue is not just about tourism; it is about a more general hesitancy to engage with the United States in various contexts.
One common thread throughout the discussion is the impact of political leadership. Many commenters specifically name the former president, and the policies and rhetoric associated with that administration, as a key driver of the decline in Canadian tourism. The perception is that these policies have damaged the relationship between the two countries, leading to distrust and a reluctance to visit. The comments suggest that even a complete change in leadership might not immediately reverse the trend, as the damage to the relationship is already significant.
There are also discussions around the impact of border procedures, with reports of phone checks and detentions contributing to a sense of unease. The inconvenience and uncertainty associated with crossing the border appear to be a deterrent for many Canadians. The comments suggest that the process itself has become a factor in the decision-making process, making the U.S. less desirable as a travel destination.
The sentiment expressed is far from universal. There are voices that express genuine affection for the U.S., with individuals recounting positive experiences and friendships. However, these positive voices are consistently overshadowed by those expressing apprehension and disapproval.
Ultimately, the situation underscores the interconnectedness of politics, economics, and tourism. It highlights the power of public sentiment in shaping travel patterns and the importance of fostering positive international relations. The choice of Canadians to avoid the U.S. reveals a multifaceted reaction to political developments, concerns about safety, and a desire to align their spending with their values. It is a signal of the current state of global affairs.