Departure tax hike exemption for non-VIA passengers fail

Opposition Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP)'s proposal not to levy departure tax at any airport except Velana International Airport (VIA) was rejected by the parliament's committee on Wednesday.

The Maldivian government has put forward a bill aimed at increasing the departure tax fees for international passengers, with the proposed changes affecting all airports across the country.

However, the MDP proposed an amendment to exempt all airports other than Velana International Airport (VIA) from these increased fees, aiming to support smaller, regional airports. Despite arguments in favour, the amendment was rejected by the entire parliamentary committee.

The proposed legislation, submitted by the government, aims to raise the departure tax for passengers departing from all Maldivian airports. The updated fees are:

Economy-class fees for Maldivian citizens would remain unchanged. The law is set to be amended and enforced from December.

During the full parliamentary committee session, MDP MP Ameen Faisal proposed an amendment to the bill to exempt all airports except Velana International Airport from the fee hike. Faisal argued that applying the increase uniformly across all airports would discourage international flights to smaller airports in the country’s regions, ultimately hindering their development.

"This change will bring very little financial difference," Faisal stated, "but it would encourage the use and growth of smaller international airports, like those that operate flights from Manta Air to India."

He emphasised that exempting these regional airports from the new fee structure could incentivise investment and development in other parts of the country, potentially leading to more international connectivity.

The motion received support from MDP prosecutor leader and Hithadhoo South MP Ibrahim Nazil, who echoed the call to support the development of smaller airports through tax exemptions.

The amendment faced significant opposition in the committee. When put to a vote, 68 members opposed the amendment, while only 11 supported it. As a result, the amendment failed, and the committee passed the bill without any changes.

In the subsequent vote, the full parliamentary committee upheld the decision with similar numbers: