National Parks to charge international tourists extra—domestic visitors get the benefit

What it does

This bill authorizes the National Park Service to charge international visitors (those admitted on tourist or visa-waiver visas) an additional surcharge on top of standard entrance fees to national parks. Park superintendents can set surcharge amounts to maximize revenue while maintaining visitation. Proceeds stay with individual parks for maintenance and services, except for annual pass surcharges, which go to a federal restoration fund.

Why we flagged it

The bill's core mechanism is a new revenue-raising surcharge on a specific class of park visitors based on immigration status. It is functionally a discriminatory pricing scheme, not a broad park-funding reform.

What the text implies

• Surcharge amount is set by individual park superintendents with no statutory cap, creating potential for wide variation and unpredictable cost to international travelers.
• Bill explicitly permits third-party travel vendors to collect surcharges, creating intermediary profit opportunities and potential data-collection points on international visitors.
• Surcharge is explicitly separate from visa fees and outside State Department/DHS administration, creating a parallel revenue stream that bypasses federal immigration-fee structures.
• Tiered pricing based on visitation levels could create perverse incentives for parks to manipulate surcharge amounts to maximize revenue rather than optimize visitor experience.
• International visitors may be deterred from visiting parks, reducing tourism revenue in gateway communities and potentially harming small businesses dependent on park tourism.

Section numbers refer to the bill text the analysis read — linked under Primary records below.

Who it affects

Domestic visitors and park maintenance benefit from increased funding, but international tourists face a discriminatory price increase based on immigration status. The surcharge may reduce international visitation (which the bill acknowledges as a risk), potentially harming tourism-dependent communities and reducing cultural exchange.

Who stands to gain

• National Park Service (increased operating budgets)
• Individual national park units (direct revenue retention)
• Third-party travel vendors (commission/collection fees if contracted)

Named in the bill

National Park Service, Secretary of the Interior, National Park System units, Park superintendents, International visitors (nonimmigrants under INA 101(a)(15)(B) and 217), Third-party travel vendors, National Parks and Public Land Legacy Restoration Fund

Where it stands

3 cosponsors: 3 Republicans.

• Jul 16, 2025 — Introduced · Congress.gov: “Introduced in Senate”
• Jul 16, 2025 — Referred to Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources · Congress.gov: “Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources”
• Dec 9, 2025 — Hearing held · Congress.gov: “Committee on Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on National Parks. Hearings held”

Dates and quoted wording are Congress.gov's action record; the timeline shows status changes, not every procedural step.

Money around this bill

2 lobbying clients named this bill on 2 disclosure filings across 2 quarters, Dec 2025 to Jun 2026. Those filings disclosed $279,430 in lobbying spend. A filing names 43 bills on average, so that figure is what each filing reported, not a share belonging to this bill.

More lobbying clients named this bill than 41% of bills with at least one filing.

Jim Banks, the sponsor, reported $559,626 in PAC receipts in the 2026 cycle.

• Heritage Action for America — $140,000 on 1 filing
• National Parks Conservation Association — $139,430 on 1 filing

Lobbying Disclosure Act filings through Jul 16, 2026. A filing shows who paid to lobby on a bill it names, not what changed.