Tourism Thailand Vows to End Dual Pricing Amid Growing Tourist Backlash

[thesetat]

3 hours ago, KhaoHom said:

Ssssh no one tell them about the additional assessments tacked onto tourist arrivals. Japan thinks it a great idea too. 

 

I expect far more class outta Japan. Thailand pfft..

 

They'll NEVER get the Andaman marine parks not to charge foreign fees. Ever.

 

What about HOSPITALS?!!

What about the privately owned business and theme parks in tourist spots that charge more for foreigners? No way the gov can firce them to cease and charge everyone the Thai price. I think if the gov really goes at this. It will cause a lot or turmoil and uncertainty about maintaining businesses. 

I really hate they even allow hospitals to charge 200% more for foreigners. 

[richard_smith237]

1 minute ago, thesetat said:

What about the privately owned business and theme parks in tourist spots that charge more for foreigners? No way the gov can firce them to cease and charge everyone the Thai price. I think if the gov really goes at this. It will cause a lot or turmoil and uncertainty about maintaining businesses. 

I really hate they even allow hospitals to charge 200% more for foreigners. 

 

Of course the government can force them to cease dual pricing - they can do so easily by making dual pricing illegal. 

 

Also - many (most) business that have 'two tiered pricing' do so based on a residency status whereby anyone, Thai or Foreign with a local license can get the the 'local price'...  

 

The two tiered pricing in hospitals is the worst of the lot I think - because someone 'needing' a hospital does not have the option to vote with their feet and walk away.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Patong2021]

And so the  circle begins anew.  Hub designations every 6 months, dual pricing promises every 18-24 months,  BKK Airport solutions   every 8-12 months, a crackdown on something - every  quarter.

[kwilco]

6 hours ago, TheFishman1 said:

I don’t think it’s ever gonna happen TIT

Classic case of using cynicism to cover ignorance.

[Caldera]

The first time I've heard this must have been almost 20 years ago, soon forgotten by those who "vowed"... 

[PeterA]

They should put up a donations box if they need extra for the parks. 

Those that have a little extra I am sure would be happy to chip in. 

[ericthai]

8 hours ago, connda said:

In Thai
Adults - 40 THB
Kids - 30 THB

You can read the English yourselves.  Do this in the US and you're a "racist."  Imagine a park in the US, but reverse the Thai and English but keep the prices in the same place.  "Racists!!! Racists!!!" 

 

They do, do it in the USA! 

Many states in the USA have no entrance fees for parks for residents of that state (Ohio, Pennsylvania. Iowa, Etc).   I have a place in Florida, I can show my Florida driving license at Disney, universal, Sea world, etc and get a reduced resident rate for park entrance and hotel.  

[spidermike007]

5 hours ago, Magictoad said:

A farang with Thai ID like a Thai DL can get in for Thai price.

Incorrect. Perhaps 10% of the time it works. Years ago I heard that was an actual law. But, the park employees ignore it and change stupid fees to "us outsiders". 

[Rhys]

...then the Asian Looking Westerner gets in free, using the Thai way.

[newnative]

1 hour ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

 

You've highlighted various examples of tiered pricing - for residents, age groups, and so on....  and I completely agree there's a place for that. The key distinction, however, is that these are typically based on residency, or age, or student status etc...  not on nationality alone.

 

What I, and many others find distasteful is when pricing is determined solely by nationality. It's a practice that feels inherently discriminatory, and frankly, it's difficult to find comparable examples of this in Western countries.

 

I disagree with the notion that those of us raising this issue are just "sweating the small stuff." No one's mounting protests or dedicating their lives to this issue - but when this topic comes up in discussion, as it often does, it's only natural that people speak out.

 

Many critics of dual pricing seem to miss the point entirely: it’s not about the amount being paid, but about an discriminatory practice based solely no nationality, its clumsy.

 

1 hour ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

 

You've highlighted various examples of tiered pricing - for residents, age groups, and so on....  and I completely agree there's a place for that. The key distinction, however, is that these are typically based on residency, or age, or student status etc...  not on nationality alone.

 

What I, and many others find distasteful is when pricing is determined solely by nationality. It's a practice that feels inherently discriminatory, and frankly, it's difficult to find comparable examples of this in Western countries.

 

I disagree with the notion that those of us raising this issue are just "sweating the small stuff." No one's mounting protests or dedicating their lives to this issue - but when this topic comes up in discussion, as it often does, it's only natural that people speak out.

 

Many critics of dual pricing seem to miss the point entirely: it’s not about the amount being paid, but about an discriminatory practice based solely no nationality, its clumsy.

     It really isn't 'difficult to find comparable examples' of dual pricing by nationality in other countries.  It only took me a couple of minutes to find examples of dual pricing in some Italian museums, based on nationality.  The Louvre museum in Paris is planning a higher entrance fee for non-Euro citizens in 2026--that will be based on nationality, as well. 

    According to Google, some Canadian ski resorts have one price for Canadians and a higher price for Americans--that's also nationality based.  I'm sure I've just scratched the surface with my quick search and there's other examples out there.  Although many posters seem to think dual pricing only happens in Thailand, clearly that is not the case.   But, take heart, folks!  At least we aren't in Venice, where apparently there is even dual pricing to go to the toilet.  

[kwilco]

18 hours ago, DonniePeverley said:

Dual pricing only effects cheap backpacker type tourists and sensitive souls. Thailand in no way should appease cheap backpackers who offer nothing to the economy, but take up valuable space. Not only should they put the prices up for foreigners but ban anyone with a back pack from coming into a national park. Furthermore ban hostels. 

 

The prices for these places are still cheap compared to western standards. 

 

Thailand simply needs to adjust the wording and image of the dual pricing. For example, if you see a price on the wall, but then offers Thais a reduction it may look better than showing two prices on board and you get the dreaded sensitive police brigrade crying dual pricing. 

 

In London you have attractions and places that offer discounts for locals, and those not from the area pay more. I see no moral outrage there. Imagine being a local Thai and seeing lovely national parks destroyed by mass cheap tourists, throwing rubbish everywhere, crowds, and the enviromental damage it does to your locality. Letting them in cheaply offers some compensation. 

 

Aren't the also planning this for the BTS - where by locals in Bangkok may get a set fare of 20 Baht per person, but others will pay full fares. Wording makes it okay. 

A profoundly ill-informed and prejudiced post.

Let’s clear up a few things about  your misinformed post on dual pricing. Calling budget travellers “cheap backpackers who offer nothing” is not only inaccurate—it’s offensive. These travellers helped build Thai tourism, stay longer, spend more broadly, and support small local businesses. They are not the problem.
Dual pricing isn’t the same as local discounts. It’s discriminatory pricing based on nationality, often 10x higher, even for foreigners who live, work, and pay taxes in Thailand. That’s why it gets criticised.
Comparing it to London is a poor fit. Most major UK museums are free, and discounted transport is based on residency, not passport. If Thailand adopts a smarter fare model for BTS—great. But that’s no excuse for unfair pricing elsewhere.
Environmental damage? That’s on park mismanagement, not travellers with backpacks. Pricing won’t fix that—better infrastructure and rules will.
Bottom line: Dual pricing damages Thailand’s image, discourages repeat visitors, and makes no economic sense. Fair, transparent pricing benefits everyone. Let’s stop scapegoating travellers and fix the system instead.

[kwilco]

error - see above

[kwilco]

4 hours ago, newnative said:

 

     It really isn't 'difficult to find comparable examples' of dual pricing by nationality in other countries.  It only took me a couple of minutes to find examples of dual pricing in some Italian museums, based on nationality.  The Louvre museum in Paris is planning a higher entrance fee for non-Euro citizens in 2026--that will be based on nationality, as well. 

    According to Google, some Canadian ski resorts have one price for Canadians and a higher price for Americans--that's also nationality based.  I'm sure I've just scratched the surface with my quick search and there's other examples out there.  Although many posters seem to think dual pricing only happens in Thailand, clearly that is not the case.   But, take heart, folks!  At least we aren't in Venice, where apparently there is even dual pricing to go to the toilet.  

 

your making a false comparison.....Yes, the Louvre is planning a higher fee for non-EU visitors in 2026, but the difference is small—only about €3–€8 more than EU citizens. It's nothing like Thailand's dual pricing, where foreigners often pay 400–1000% more. Also, many EU museums are free or low-cost for everyone, regardless of nationality. I can't find any examples in Italy - i used to be a regular visitor to both France and Italy and their museums and cultrural sites