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]

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

[norsurin]

Want help at all Thailand have priced themselves out compared to neighbor countries but they dont get it.

It want sink in that people talk and read on the net what's going on about prices.. crime..and many other things.

Phuket is like Russia in a miniatyr and Pattaya going the same way . Arabs make problems everywhere and get away easy.Indians sleeping on the beaches and doing crime.Stabbings..shootings..robberies all overall u go 

I use to stay in Bangkok and hua-hin and i never experienced this kind of problems there Indians trying to sell me fake watches is the only one but i just say no and they leave me alone.I saw something happened in a bar i was because the bounser from another bar and a policeman confronted him and the bar manager was also present.

I went over and asked what the problem was and he couldn't pay his bill about 1100 baht.The guy from USA Was really drunk.I tolded the manager and the 2 other ones i will pay for him.I did and problem solved.I even get a free drink from the manager.After they left the US guy  checked his pocket and many thousands thai baht fell out on the floor .So i had money to pay the bill but was so pissed drunk he couldn't find it Well. .he asked who helped him with his bill and gave me back the 1100 baht.He was polite all the time this happened but didn't get more to drink.The staff stopped a taxi for him and get him back to his hotel.I meet this person later but then not so drunk and he apologize to the manager and everyone's happy.

[wavodavo]

21 hours ago, BritManToo said:

London museums and parks all free for everyone.

 

21 hours ago, BritManToo said:

London museums and parks all free for everyone.

At some places in Australia  if a local brings a tourist to an attraction the local gets in free.

[Kenneth White]

Many issues need adjustment, but dual pricing is the least of concerns. How about addressing traffic deaths for one? Teach these youngsters proper riding skills. Save lives and arrive alive. 

[DonniePeverley]

The most i've ever seen with dual pricing was 500 baht for foreigners. This is about the price of a burger in the UK now. The average Thai income is tiny. 

 

Tell me one person who would not visit Thailand because to go into a national park cost the price of Burger? If they are that cheap then why on earth are they getting so obsessed about appeasing these?

 

The Louvre in Paris, is going to give discounts to Parisians. Will any tourist not go to see the Mona Lisa in the Louvre because they have to pay more than Parisians? Give over. Plenty of places in London, Madrid that has dual pricing. 

 

Why is Thailand constantly so defensive about these matters? 

 

India, Cambodia, Sri Lanka, Japan, hell even Singapore had elements of dual pricing in their mix up too. 

 

You have the moral preachers on X complaining, citing they live and work in Thailand (do they pay Tax though?) and should not be treated different. I can't stand these tree huggers, always whinging on they don't have the same rites. The point being they are not Thai citizens. That's the deal you making coming to developing nations. India does not allow foreigners to buy property or land, , etc ... these are practices developing countries put in place to protect their populations.

 

Honestly why the constant pivot to appeasing cheap tourists is disgusting.  If anything i would raise the price of foreigners to get into these places and reduce it more for Thai's for having to put up with mass cheap tourists who are causing havoc culturally and enviromentally to their country.

 

There needs to be a pivot to quality tourism.

 

 

[Cabradelmar]

Thailand can't figure out what boot to lick... Cheap Charlie's or the rich and shameless. Are all those quality hi-so tourist really complaining about a couple hundred baht

[actonion]

How can closing time be  06.00 

[newnative]

4 hours ago, kwilco said:

 

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

      I couldn't find any references to what the dual pricing would be at the Louvre.  The most recent info on Google that I saw stated that the new pricing would be announced in early 2026.  But, in any case, it is not a 'false comparison'.  Dual pricing is dual pricing.  It remains that the Louvre is planning to charge dual pricing based on nationality.  The poster I was responding to stated that it would be difficult to find any dual pricing in western countries based on nationality, with the implication that this was something pretty much limited to Thailand, and perhaps some other Asian countries, such as Japan.  I found it was not difficult at all.  

    I remain unconvinced that there is anything wrong with the concept of dual pricing by nationality.   To me, it is fair and makes perfect sense when it is applied to public things, such as museums, parks, etc. that are maintained through the taxes of the citizens.  Why shouldn't the citizens get a smaller entrance fee that recognizes the monetary support that they contribute on a yearly basis, while Joe International Tourist, who has not provided any financial support at all, is asked to pay a higher fee as his contribution to maintaining something that is there for his enjoyment?   

    That's basically why the Louvre is proposing dual pricing based on nationality--maintenance.  It is faced with a massive renovation that is needed in order to keep the museum open and functioning.  In order to pay the huge price tag for the renovation, non-Euro citizens will be asked to pay a higher price for admission.  I see nothing wrong with that--nor a higher admission for non-Thai citizens for it's citizen-maintained public things.

   Someone likely will post that local non-Thai citizens do contribute, too, through different taxes that they pay year-round, such as sales taxes.  Totally true, and in a perfect world they should also get a reduced admission.  I think some facilities do recognize non-Thais who present a pink card.  For the rest, file it in the very large 'life isn't fair' folder.  

[stix40]

18 hours ago, garzhe said:

Dual Pricing has got worse in recent years. I used to get into most places showing my Pink Thai ID card. Now not so easy. National Parks are the worst, most wont accept a driving Licence or  ID card.  It's considered a scam if Taxis or other private enterprises charge more to foreigners but where did they learn it from.  Cant see it changing anytime soon.

National parks

No credit cards 

No scanning qr code

Cash only 

Scam 

[recom273]

22 hours ago, Dave0206 said:

I've been to the Palace 2x once with a thai 2nd time with Filipino ( keep your mouth shut and walk through thai side) the entrance fee didn't change my life more annoying was the elephant pants I had to rent or buy outside gate.

I wouldn’t expect the grand palace to be included, I wouldn’t be bothered if it was or wasn’t. It’s a special place for all Thais, not sure why westerners would qualify for a special price -  but I hear you with the fillipino thing, they should be embarrassed, sneaking into a national park or a pile of old bricks is fine, a working religious site, nope. 
 

 

[Peterphuket]

23 hours ago, Unamerican said:

Another what exactly ? How long is this? 

For a long time not visiting national parks due to double fares.

[richard_smith237]

14 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. 

 

They are not based on Nationality - they are based on Residency - IF you can prove you live locally  and show residency documentation (driving license, resident ID card etc) - a visitor will receive the local price. 

 

14 hours ago, newnative said:

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. 

 

That again, is not based on Nationality, but on Residency - A national of any country who can prove they are living in the EU will get the 'local price' - they just need to show their residence permit, rental contract, utility bill. driving license... showing their address in an EU country (i.e. the discount is also extended to non-EU citizens who are legal EU residents)....

... So no, its not based on Nationality.

 

14 hours ago, newnative said:

    According to Google, some Canadian ski resorts have one price for Canadians and a higher price for Americans--that's also nationality based. 

 

No... You are misunderstanding 'nationality based'...  Anyone from the USA who is also a resident of Canada, or anyone from any other country who can show they are a resident of Canada will receive the price for locals (Canadians).

 

14 hours ago, newnative said:

I'm sure I've just scratched the surface with my quick search and there's other examples out there. 

 

Meanwhile, I am sure you do not understand the difference between 'based on Nationality' and 'based on Residency'...

 

 

14 hours ago, newnative said:

Although many posters seem to think dual pricing only happens in Thailand, clearly that is not the case. 

 

Agreed, it also happens in other countries, but its very rare in the West, and nearly ALL the examples people have provided from the West can be picked apart and highlight the posters misunderstanding of 'Dual Pricing based on Nationality alone'  just as you have.

 

14 hours ago, newnative said:

But, take heart, folks!  At least we aren't in Venice, where apparently there is even dual pricing to go to the toilet.  

 

Whereby, any local resident of any Nationally, will also get the local price...  (though using the Venezia Unica City Pass or the The Toilet Pass VERITAS, available through the Venezia Unica platform) - So not based on Nationality, but local residency.

 

 

As with so many of these arguments - People are putting forward examples of dual pricing and not understanding the differentiation between local resident discounts which can apply to any local resident of any nationality and Dual Pricing based on Nationality alone as its employed in Thailand.

[kwilco]

21 hours ago, Magictoad said:

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

When was the last time you visited a National Park? - I visit loads and I have D/L and pay tax and speak g=dood Thai and almost always fail these days.

[richard_smith237]

11 hours ago, kwilco said:

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

 

But its also a flawed comparison -  The increased admission fees for non-EU visitors to the Louvre in 2026 will not be determined by nationality, but by residency.

 

In practice, this means that a Thai, Singaporean, or indeed any non-EU national residing within the EU can simply present proof of residency - such as a residency card, driving licence, or utility bill - and will be eligible for the same rate as EU citizens.

 

Therefore, every example cited by newnative is fundamentally misguided. None of them illustrate a dual pricing system based on nationality - which is precisely how Thailand's system operates.

 

In Thailand, the dual pricing excludes non-Thai residents, including those with work permits, permanent residency, or long-term visas. If you don't hold a Thai passport, you're charged the higher rate - plain and simple. This is what makes Thailand’s policy xenophobic in nature.

[kwilco]

5 hours ago, newnative said:

      I couldn't find any references to what the dual pricing would be at the Louvre.  The most recent info on Google that I saw stated that the new pricing would be announced in early 2026.  But, in any case, it is not a 'false comparison'.  Dual pricing is dual pricing.  It remains that the Louvre is planning to charge dual pricing based on nationality.  The poster I was responding to stated that it would be difficult to find any dual pricing in western countries based on nationality, with the implication that this was something pretty much limited to Thailand, and perhaps some other Asian countries, such as Japan.  I found it was not difficult at all.  

    I remain unconvinced that there is anything wrong with the concept of dual pricing by nationality.   To me, it is fair and makes perfect sense when it is applied to public things, such as museums, parks, etc. that are maintained through the taxes of the citizens.  Why shouldn't the citizens get a smaller entrance fee that recognizes the monetary support that they contribute on a yearly basis, while Joe International Tourist, who has not provided any financial support at all, is asked to pay a higher fee as his contribution to maintaining something that is there for his enjoyment?   

    That's basically why the Louvre is proposing dual pricing based on nationality--maintenance.  It is faced with a massive renovation that is needed in order to keep the museum open and functioning.  In order to pay the huge price tag for the renovation, non-Euro citizens will be asked to pay a higher price for admission.  I see nothing wrong with that--nor a higher admission for non-Thai citizens for it's citizen-maintained public things.

   Someone likely will post that local non-Thai citizens do contribute, too, through different taxes that they pay year-round, such as sales taxes.  Totally true, and in a perfect world they should also get a reduced admission.  I think some facilities do recognize non-Thais who present a pink card.  For the rest, file it in the very large 'life isn't fair' folder.  

 

 

Let’s Stick to Facts, Not Deflections - Saying “dual pricing is dual pricing” is just a shallow comparison that ignores context, scale, and intent.
The Louvre’s proposed price hike for non-EU visitors is about €3–€8 more on a €20 ticket—not 5–10x the local rate like Thailand’s national parks. That’s a small surcharge to fund an €800 million renovation, not a blanket policy based on nationality.

In Thailand, many parks charge foreigners 400–1000% more, regardless of residency, tax contribution, or legal status. That’s the issue—not the idea of discounts, but the scale and execution. And despite this, most parks see no real income benefit from dual pricing. It’s been shown to deter tourists more than help conservation or funding.

Also, public museums in much of Europe—including the UK—are free or low-cost to all, regardless of nationality. Trying to use one partial and temporary future example to justify a widespread and outdated policy in Thailand doesn’t hold up.

The real discussion isn’t “do others do it too?”—it’s whether it’s smart, fair, and good for Thailand’s image. And on that, dual pricing fails.
 

[damo1967]

On 5/1/2025 at 8:06 AM, daveAustin said:

Will never happen. National parks etc. Next!

 

On 5/1/2025 at 8:06 AM, daveAustin said:

Will never happen. National parks etc. Next!

 

On 5/1/2025 at 8:06 AM, daveAustin said:

Will never happen. National parks etc. Next!

Some people (and I mean the nosey, selfish, tight-arsed cheap charlies) seem to not understand the standard Thai family cannot afford to visit these kinds of places because of the cost.  Eg.  a family of 4 to visit somewhere may equate to 3 or 4 days working salary.

 

I am happy to pay a fair price for farang.. and it may equate to $10 AUD or $12 AUD more than the Thai price, but the quality tourist in Thailand should respect that and remember they are on 'holiday' here.  If too expensive, then why not stay at home?  Also think that the Thai 'dual' price is fair based on earnings.

 

Would these people who complained be happy to increase the farang price up by 100%, and then raise the Thai price up to that amount to match the new 'farang' price which would be doubled?  

 

The people complaining should not be in Thailand in the first place.  (Maybe the complaining farang don't like paying like 150 - 200 more, but happy to grab a bargirl for like 20x that amount.  Shame on those people.

 

 

[kwilco]

22 minutes ago, damo1967 said:

Some people (and I mean the nosey, selfish, tight-arsed cheap charlies) seem to not understand the standard Thai family cannot afford to visit these kinds of places because of the cost.  Eg.  a family of 4 to visit somewhere may equate to 3 or 4 days working salary.

 

I am happy to pay a fair price for farang.. and it may equate to $10 AUD or $12 AUD more than the Thai price, but the quality tourist in Thailand should respect that and remember they are on 'holiday' here.  If too expensive, then why not stay at home?  Also think that the Thai 'dual' price is fair based on earnings.

 

Would these people who complained be happy to increase the farang price up by 100%, and then raise the Thai price up to that amount to match the new 'farang' price which would be doubled?  

 

The people complaining should not be in Thailand in the first place.  (Maybe the complaining farang don't like paying like 150 - 200 more, but happy to grab a bargirl for like 20x that amount.  Shame on those people.

Your rather ill-informed reply still misses the point -  Dual Pricing is Still a Bad Look, No Matter How You Spin It

So now for you it's “cheap charlies” ruining Thailand? Give me a break. This kind of rant isn’t an argument—it’s a lazy insult wrapped around bad economics.
The reality is this - studies have shown that doubling Thai entry fees wouldn’t deter locals, and that dropping the foreigner surcharge would actually increase visitors—and revenue. Dual pricing doesn’t help the parks. It shrinks the pie. 

You also aren’t seemingly aware of how the parks are funded. And those who run these sort of attractions elsewhere know: you don’t make money at the gate—you make it inside with food, tours, souvenirs, and services. Pricing people out before they even enter? That’s just bad business.

The idea that “tourists should just shut up and pay more” because they’re on holiday is nonsense. Thailand is selling an international product. If you want international money, you play by international standards—not discriminatory pricing that treats guests like walking wallets.

And no, means-testing tourists at the entrance isn’t the answer either. This isn’t about fairness—it’s about optics, economics, and common sense. Dual pricing hurts Thailand more than it helps, just economically it also damages the kingdom’s reputation

[Cardano]

On 5/1/2025 at 1:58 PM, JustinTyme said:

They just need to change the wording, to more easily explain the rationale behind this.  These are PUBLIC areas funded by taxes! 
The Thai have "already paid."

Tax Payer - 30 Baht
Non Tax Payer - 150 Baht

(and to the very small minority of tax paying foreigners, yes, they should provide you with a card to avoid the higher charge)

So 4 million Thais will pat 30 Baht and the other 70 million will have to pay 150 Baht.

[greeneking]

Would this be a good time to question why Ko Samet is desgnated as a National Park anyway? Rip off.