suze - Same as on this thread?

http://www.fodors.com/community/air-...50-penalty.cfm

Travelgourmet, Chile, Côte d'Ivoire, Democratic Republic of Congo, France, Madagascar, Mauritius, Niger and the Republic of Korea have put the UNITAID contribution on airline tickets. In France, it is 4€ for basic economy class and 40€ for any other existing class. It was decided that people who can afford business and first class travel should be able to afford helping to fund medicine for HIV, malaria and tuberculosis in the developing world. I tend to agree.

<i>Travelgourmet, Chile, Côte d'Ivoire, Democratic Republic of Congo, France, Madagascar, Mauritius, Niger and the Republic of Korea have put the UNITAID contribution on airline tickets. In France, it is 4€ for basic economy class and 40€ for any other existing class. It was decided that people who can afford business and first class travel should be able to afford helping to fund medicine for HIV, malaria and tuberculosis in the developing world. I tend to agree.</i>

And the US has decided that those traveling to the US should pay for the costs of ensuring visa-free travel, as well as general marketing efforts. It may not be as noble of a cause, but it is definitely more directly related. And that certainly doesn't explain the UK tax rates, which are incredibly high.

And, just to be clear, I don't particularly object to the increased costs of other countries' taxes. I am simply pointing out that the government imposed costs of travel vary from country to country and that those costs sometimes greatly exceed the ESTA fees, particularly when you consider that they apply to every trip. Why then, the outrage over the very, very low ESTA fees? It is illogical.

Someone mentioned double-standards. I'm just pointing out the double-standard regarding the constant whining about American passport control measures. It isn't really more intrusive than the standards in places like Australia or Japan or Korea, which nobody every complains about. The lines aren't, at least consistently, any longer than in London or Hong Kong or Bangkok. And the cost, when considered in the context of all the government taxes and fees imposed upon travelers is miniscule. Yet, to hear it told, this is the end of the world. It is, at best, kind of silly, but more often just annoying.

Here is another thought to solve this (my daughter came up with it this morning.... She must be smarter than me...):

Since (as mentioned yesterday) my daughter has a dual citizenship, having 2 passports, neither needing visa for a 90-day stay in the Schengen area, nor in the UK:

At the end of her Italy semester she flies to London (she has a good friend there, whom she was planning to visit anyhow), and then use her OTHER passport to re-enter the Schengen area (have her other passport stamped when entering), travel in Europe for a couple week, go back to London, and use her US passport to get on her US-bound flight.

Technically this can be done, right? Looks perfectly legal and safe to me.......

That's exactly what I said could be done earlier in this thread.

For those of you who have watched Peter Kay....

Kin ell!!!

Thanks, Kerouac.... This thread was flooded with so many responses, and I was (still am) busy with so many other things, that I guess I missed your idea (well, you're smart as my daughter, and sure smarter than me!....).

See, I prefer the PRACTICAL ideas here, like yours or Travelgourmet's -- rather than those admonishing me for my morality or ethics..... I am NOT trying to break any laws, send my daughter to Europe to find work, sell drugs, or do anything to harm them. She simply wants to travel for a couple weeks, but also, like a typical tourist -- spend money there (I think that's good for European economy, no?..). I don't see whay I deserve to have my morality questioned.......

But I'm here to solve a technical/logistic issue, nothing beyond that.

I'm not at all sure tha the various governments involved wold think that traveling on differnt passports to avoid following the laws is a mere "technical/logistc" issue. It is, in fact, a legal one.

Mamamia...you just don't get it, do you?

<I am NOT trying to break any laws>

Yes you are.

"<i>I am NOT trying to break any laws,</i>

<B>YES</B> you are. The rule is <u>for the person</u> not the passport. If she is caught intentionally overstaying and using the two passports to do so -- she will very likely be flagged in the computer systems of all countries involved (including the USA) and have serious travel problems for years to come.

And the airline may want to know why she is using different passports for the various flights. A passport isn't just a form of ID, it provides legal permission to travel/be somewhere. Between this thread and the other one linked above -- it looks like you just don't like rules. Fine -- but it is your daughter who will face the potential consequences.

"Technically this can be done, right? Looks perfectly legal and safe to me......."

Technically possible - but I doubt if it's legal.

You just don't get how serious this is, do you? Your daughter could get both the passports flagged for future travels, be fined, not let onto her flights home, etc. all for insisting on a 2-3 week vacation past what is legal for her to be there.

Sounds like a lot of sour grapes to me. All of you dissidents should be hunting up proof that a citizen of one country cannot return as the citizen of another country and benefit from the advantages that the EU accords one and/or the other country. It would violate just about every treaty in the book if the EU said (for example) "we refuse to recognize our visa exemption for Canada because even though you are a citizen of Canada, you have been here recently as a citizen of Japan." One what grounds could they possibly do that, since the blanket visa exemptions are given to "citizens of x or y" and not to a specific individual?

"Sounds like a lot of sour grapes to me."

No, it sounds like people thinking sensibly. Even if you are a citizen of a country with a visa exemption you do not have an absolute right of entry to a country.

Whatever the morality, technicalities etc. IF she gets caught, then it will be unpleasant for her, and mess things up for her. I wouldn't want that for my daughter...er if I had one!

kerouac: you are an old (meant in the <i>nicest</i> possible way) hand and can probably get away w/ this.

The OP's daughter is a student all starry eyed about going to Italy for 3 months. ANY little slip up and she is totally SOL. Stuttering through a couple of questions at immigration, using different passports when checking in for the same airline, or anything that flags her as potentially over staying.

If she has thousands of $$ available to buy a last minute replacement ticket, or if she doesn't fear the chance of being red flagged - she can listen to her mother. But if she's sensible -- she'll play by the rules.

<I am NOT trying to break any laws>

Yes you are, and you are teaching your child to.

In all fairness, I think if we should all take a step back and not be so judgmental. If you personally had dual citizenship, you would also use that privilege to your advantage. What if her other passport is british or swiss and she uses the US passport first and then use the swiss passport afterward, would you say that's illegal because she's still a US citizen therefore she should not cheat and use her other passport to go beyond the 90 day stay? The Schengen rules are based on the passport not on the person otherwise it would spell out rules for dual citizens.

Good for her if she has a canadian passport that allows her another 3 month stay in the Schengen. From his previous posts it seems that mamamia's daughter already went to Europe last year, so she's not all that starry eyed. I can't condemn him for teaching his daughter to use her privileged status.

Thanks, Coincidenza..... The ONLY thing that may prevent us from deciding to use the 2 passport trick, is the very SLIM chance of SOMEHOW being caught (though I can't see how, in normal circumstances)..... We will try to get an extended visa from the Italian consulate, and if denied we'll think it over.

While thanking all posters involved, I do not take seriously those who're questioning my morality (not in THIS case, at least). That's just --- excuse my French --- anal.