BANGKOK, 19 January 2026: The reported decision by the administration of US President Donald Trump to suspend or significantly tighten US immigrant visa processing for nationals from 75 countries, including Thailand, has triggered widespread concern across the global travel, tourism and meetings industries.
Although the policy has been described as temporary, the absence of a defined end date has fuelled uncertainty and raised more profound questions about trust, reliability and the future direction of international mobility.
For tourism, confidence is currency. For meetings, incentives, conferences and exhibitions (MICE), confidence is everything. Any signal that access to a significant global destination may be unpredictable, selective or politically contingent has ramifications far beyond the visa office.
The affected 75 countries span every inhabited continent, reinforcing concerns that the policy has global implications for tourism, labour mobility and international meetings, rather than being confined to a single region or risk profile.
Countries Targeted By Region
- Africa: 25
- Asia & Middle East: 23
- Europe: 8
- Caribbean: 8
- Central & South America: 7
- Oceania: 1
A policy felt far beyond immigration
The list of affected countries spans Africa, Asia, the Caribbean, Europe, the Middle East and Latin America. It includes major emerging tourism markets and long-standing US partners. While official reporting suggests the pause applies specifically to immigrant visas, not short-term visitor visas, that distinction is often lost in the public mind.
To travellers, businesses and conference organisers alike, the headline message is blunt. Entry into the United States feels more complex, more uncertain and more conditional.
In tourism, perception often outweighs technical detail. A traveller deciding where to holiday, or an association choosing where to host its world congress, rarely dissects visa categories line by line. What matters is whether the destination feels open, welcoming and predictable.
The MICE industry, where inclusion is non-negotiable
Nowhere is the impact more acute than in the MICE sector. Global congresses and exhibitions are built on inclusivity. They succeed because they bring together delegates from dozens, sometimes hundreds, of countries to exchange ideas, conduct business and build long-term professional relationships.
For international associations such as Skål International and the Pacific Asia Travel Association (PATA), the implications are strategic and immediate. A Skål World Congress or a PATA Annual Summit is, by definition, global. Members expect equal access regardless of nationality, income level or passport strength.
If a host destination cannot reasonably guarantee access for all members, the legitimacy of the event is compromised. Attendance drops. Representation narrows. Sponsorship becomes harder to justify. The very purpose of a global congress is undermined.
As a result, organisers are forced to ask difficult but pragmatic questions. Can a truly global meeting be hosted in a country where access is uneven or uncertain? Would alternative destinations offering clearer, more inclusive entry conditions better serve the membership?
Planning horizons and the cost of uncertainty
One of the least understood aspects of the meetings industry is its long planning horizon. Major congresses are typically awarded three to five years in advance. Host city contracts, venue bookings, airline partnerships and sponsorship agreements are locked in long before the first delegate submits a visa application.
In this context, a policy described as temporary but lacking a clear timeline becomes a material risk. Even if the pause were lifted within months, the uncertainty alone can derail bids, delay commitments and push organisers towards destinations perceived as safer choices.
Uncertainty functions as a barrier in its own right.
Tourism economics: the multiplier effect
Overseas visitors spend heavily on flights, accommodation, food and beverage, retail, entertainment and domestic transport. Business travellers and conference delegates spend significantly more per day than leisure tourists, making MICE a particularly high-value segment.
Industry benchmarks for the United States suggest that a 1% decline in international visitor spending results in approximately USD1.8 billion in lost US travel export revenue. When indirect and induced effects are taken into account, including impacts on jobs, suppliers and tax receipts, the overall economic cost is significantly high. By extension, a 2% decline in international visitation linked to heightened uncertainty would imply annual losses of approximately USD 3.6 billion.
These figures are illustrative, not predictive. But they demonstrate how quickly policy signals can translate into economic consequences when confidence erodes.
What 9/11 actually taught us
Supporters of more rigid visa controls frequently cite terrorism and national security as justification. Security is a legitimate concern, and no responsible stakeholder disputes the need for robust border controls. However, history provides an important reality check.
The findings of the National Commission on Attacks Upon the United States concluded that the perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks entered the United States legally. Most arrived on temporary visitor visas, with some linked to student visas. They did not enter on immigrant visas.
The failure lay not in the existence of legal travel channels, but in shortcomings in intelligence sharing, monitoring, enforcement and inter-agency coordination. These lessons led to post-9/11 reforms focused on smarter screening, data integration and targeted risk assessment.
Against this backdrop, a broad pause on immigrant visas for 75 countries does not directly address the historical pathway used on 9/11. Critics, therefore, argue that such measures risk being punitive rather than preventive, offering political reassurance without materially improving security outcomes.
Temporary in theory, open-ended in practice
The policy has been framed as a pause pending review. Yet without a defined end date or transparent benchmarks for lifting the suspension, temporary quickly begins to feel open-ended.
For global mobility, this distinction is crucial. Airlines, tour operators and event organisers operate on long lead times. Investors and sponsors assess risk years ahead. A lack of clarity discourages commitment and encourages diversification away from uncertain markets. Once confidence is lost, it is not easily regained.
Implications for international associations
For organisations such as Skål International and PATA, the implications are both operational and philosophical. Event strategy must now incorporate visa policy risk alongside cost, sustainability and infrastructure.
Destinations that offer neutrality, openness and predictable access gain a competitive advantage. Cities in Europe, the Middle East and Asia-Pacific may increasingly position themselves as reliable hosts for global gatherings precisely because they minimise uncertainty for delegates.
This is not an anti-American stance. The United States remains a world-class destination with unmatched infrastructure, innovation and hospitality expertise. But in a competitive global marketplace, even marginal barriers can influence decision-making.
A more secure or a more fragmented world?
The fundamental question is whether such policies make the world safer and more inclusive, or whether they contribute to division and fragmentation.
Tourism and meetings are not merely economic activities. They are vehicles for soft power, diplomacy and mutual understanding. When people meet face to face, trust is built. When borders harden and rhetoric turns exclusionary, collaboration becomes harder. The risk is a gradual retreat from engagement, with long-term consequences that extend far beyond tourism balance sheets.
Conclusion
Security matters. Borders matter. But openness matters too. The lessons of the past two decades suggest that safety is best achieved through intelligence-led systems, cooperation, and targeted enforcement, rather than broad, nationality-based restrictions. Policies perceived as divisive may offer short-term political reassurance, but they carry long-term economic and reputational costs.
For global tourism and the MICE industry, the danger lies not only in lost revenue but in lost momentum for dialogue, partnership, and peace. The challenge for policymakers is to protect without isolating, and to reassure without closing doors. The future of global travel, and of truly global meetings, depends on striking that balance.
About the author
Andrew J Wood is a British-born travel writer and tourism consultant who has lived in Thailand since 1991. A former Director of Skål International and past President of Skål International Asia, Skål Thailand and Skål Bangkok, he writes widely on global tourism trends, policy and the future of international travel, with particular expertise in the Asia-Pacific region and the international meetings industry.
(Source and photo credits: Andrew J Wood)
