South Korea changes tourism policy: President Lee Jae-myung calls for quality and fair prices

South Korea announces a tourism “reset”: President Lee calls for quality, fair prices and stronger regions

South Korea is entering a new phase of tourism policy at a moment when international travel is returning strongly and the country is again posting figures that exceed pre-pandemic records. On 25 February 2026, at an expanded meeting on the national tourism strategy at Cheong Wa Dae (Blue House) in Seoul, President Lee Jae-myung said it is time to shift the focus from “how many” to “how”: instead of merely racing to grow arrivals, the priorities should be a higher level of service, more transparent and fairer prices, and spreading the benefits beyond the capital. The focus, he stressed, is travellers’ trust and the experience from the first contact at the border to the final restaurant bill, because a bad experience quickly undermines a reputation the country has built through culture, gastronomy and the global popularity of K-content. At the same time, the government wants to ambitiously raise arrivals to 30 million a year by 2030, but with a “qualitative turn” that would reduce pressure on Seoul and provide a stronger boost to smaller cities, islands and the interior.

Record rebound in international arrivals, but also a warning about the limits of the model

The context for the president’s call for change is record arrivals: according to tourism statistics cited by The Straits Times, South Korea recorded 18.936.562 foreign visitor arrivals in 2025, a 15,7 percent increase compared with 2024, when 16.369.629 arrivals were registered. In December 2025, the Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism (MCST) announced that the country was on track to end 2025 with around 18,7 million visitors, which would surpass the previous peak from 2019 of 17,5 million. Behind these figures are restored air connections, reopened markets in Asia, and strong interest linked to Korean popular culture, shopping and urban offerings. However, the very top of the government warns that a model in which a large share of spending and logistics flows into one metropolis is hard to expand without bursting at the seams—either through rising prices or declining quality. Lee therefore stressed that if “we remain content” with Seoul attracting about 80 percent of foreign travellers, tourism growth will sooner or later hit a ceiling.

A similar warning also comes from experts: on the MCST website, in tourism statistics, it can be seen that the number of inbound tourists recovered rapidly after the pandemic collapse to 16,37 million in 2024, but also that the negative tourism balance is deepening at the same time. According to those statistics, the tourism balance in 2024 was -100,38 (in the MCST display marked as USD, with revenue of 164,5 and expenditure of 264,9), pointing to a structural problem: Korea as a destination is attracting more and more guests, but Koreans’ domestic spending abroad still exceeds revenues from foreign visitors. In a sector analysis, InvestKOREA further highlights the concentration of tourism businesses in the wider suburban area around Seoul and the growth of digital platforms, which intensifies competition but also raises questions of price, quality and standards oversight. In such an environment, the “reset” announced by the president does not mean giving up on growth, but an attempt to make growth sustainable, to deliver more value per visitor and to be felt in the regions.

Why prices and the experience have become a political issue

One of the most sensitive parts of the strategy is tackling overcharging and practices that put foreigners at a disadvantage, especially where they rely on unfamiliarity with the language and local rules. At the meeting, Lee explicitly warned about “unreasonably high prices, poor service and excessive customer solicitation,” judging that such practices harm honest entrepreneurs and local economies. The topic has been in the public eye for some time, because incidents in popular markets, tourist streets and seasonally overloaded destinations often go viral and can quickly change perceptions of a destination. In its 25 February 2026 report, The Straits Times described the problem as “opportunistic” practices that deter travellers, while The Korea Times on the same day relayed an announced package of measures aimed at the accommodation and hospitality sector and partly transport.

The complaints system provides an additional picture. In May 2024, The Korea Times, citing a Korea Tourism Organization (KTO) report, published that KTO’s Tourist Complaint Center received 902 complaints in 2023, significantly more than 288 in 2022, with the largest share related to shopping and then taxi services. The same text states that shopping complaints included overcharging, tax refunds and return/exchange policies, while common taxi issues were refusing to turn on the meter, rudeness, or deliberately lengthening the route to increase the fare. Such data do not mean every experience is bad, but they show why the authorities want to shift the focus from visitor numbers to reputation and trust—especially in an era of individual travel and online reviews, where negative examples travel faster than official campaigns.

Measures against “rip-offs”: price transparency, tougher penalties and reservation protection

At the expanded meeting on 25 February 2026, a package of moves was announced that, at least on paper, relies on a mix of regulation, inspections and financial incentives for local authorities. The Korea Times (Yonhap) reports that the government plans regulatory amendments so that private accommodation service providers, including those offering lodging specifically to foreign tourists, are required to clearly display prices and comply with price-related rules. In addition, tougher penalties were announced for restaurants and accommodation facilities that do not publish prices or overcharge guests, as well as the introduction of new rules that would sanction unilateral reservation cancellations and set consumer compensation standards. In practice, these are measures targeting the two most common sources of frustration: situations where a traveller cannot verify a price in advance, and situations where they are left without accommodation due to a last-minute cancellation or a sudden change in terms.

The same announcement also mentions transport, including plans for Jeju Island to introduce new rules to reduce excessive differences in car-rental prices between peak season and the off-season. The role of “on-the-ground” inspections was also emphasised, in destinations where problems recur, with the possibility that regions actively working to curb overcharging could receive financial incentives. It is important that the authorities openly acknowledge the problem is not just “bad publicity” but a risk for the entire value chain—from small retailers to hotels and airports—because one bad contact can undo investments in promotion. If the announcements are truly translated into implementation, the result could be a clearer standard for tourists, but also greater pressure on the part of the market that has profited from non-transparency.

• What is being announced as a priority in the fight against overcharging:
• an obligation to clearly display prices in accommodation and stricter oversight of service providers
• stronger sanctions for hospitality businesses and accommodation facilities that do not publish prices or overcharge guests
• rules against unilateral reservation cancellations and compensation standards for travellers
• targeted regulation of seasonal price spikes, including car rentals on Jeju
• enhanced inspections and incentives for local authorities that successfully curb “rip-off” practices

Spreading tourism beyond Seoul: infrastructure, offerings and local benefit

The second pillar of the strategy is a “regional leap”—redirecting tourist spending toward cities and provinces that have struggled for years with demographic decline and youth outmigration. Yonhap reported that Lee emphasised the need to strengthen regional transport infrastructure and develop tourism offerings based on specific local resources, so visitors have a reason for multi-day trips outside the metropolis. The same message also carries a clear socioeconomic note: the benefits of tourism, he said, should flow to small entrepreneurs and “alleyway” commercial zones across the country, rather than remain concentrated in the centres of large cities. This approach aligns with a broader trend in which destinations try to reduce excessive dependence on one location or one season, and encourage distributed spending through events, gastronomy, cultural routes and natural attractions.

In its sector analysis, InvestKOREA states that about 45 percent of tourism businesses are located in the wider Seoul metropolitan area, pointing to a structural concentration of supply and jobs. In that light, the political call for regionalisation is not just a marketing phrase, but an attempt to create conditions for investment and growth in provinces—from accommodation and transport to festival content and creative industries. If the plan succeeds, regional destinations could gain greater bargaining power with platforms and tour operators and develop higher value-added products such as thematic routes, wellness, food-and-wine tourism, or sports and cultural events outside peak season. The risk, however, is that without clear standards and investment in the workforce, growth in the regions could repeat the same problems seen in the metropolis: fast, expensive and often insufficiently high-quality services that leave a bitter impression. That is why government messages insist on service quality as the foundation, not as an after-the-fact ornament.

Entry and travel logistics: visas, airports and cruise ships

To increase visitor numbers, the announced changes also extend to the border—entry procedures and transport hubs. In its report from the Blue House meeting, Korea JoongAng Daily states that the government announced easing visa rules and expanding “regional entry points,” aiming to prevent tourists from funnelling only through one main channel. Concrete examples include a pilot visa-free entry programme for Indonesian tourist groups of three or more travellers, as well as introducing multi-year multiple-entry visas for travellers from China and Southeast Asian countries who have a prior history of visiting Korea. It also mentions expanding the automated immigration screening system to additional countries, including European Union states, and increasing the number of automated checkpoints to shorten entry and exit times.

Seoul Economic Daily reported ahead of the meeting that multiple ministries will be involved in the plans, including justice (immigration), transport (regional airports) and oceans and fisheries (cruise infrastructure), showing that tourism has been positioned as a cross-sector project. This is an important signal for the private sector, which often warns that bottlenecks in entry, transfers and information can negate a destination’s attractiveness. If complaints about services and price non-transparency are addressed in parallel, the government expects the share of repeat visits and average spending to rise, and thus revenue stability. The Straits Times notes that foreign tourists’ spending in 2025 rose to just over 17,4 trillion won, which further explains why tourism is increasingly treated as a growth industry rather than merely a cultural “add-on”.

Culture as an engine—and a challenge: how to turn the K-wave into sustainable benefit

At the heart of the political message is also the claim that the “explosive energy” of Korean culture should result in growth citizens can feel through jobs and income, not only through global visibility. The Straits Times relayed Lee’s message that the development of cultural industries driven by K-culture must “ultimately lead to tourism,” because only then does the cultural boom turn into a broader economic impact. This fits a reality in which many visitors come for music, series, film, gastronomy and shopping, and then seek authentic experiences in cities and regions that do not appear on standard postcards. Precisely here, the regional development strategy opens space: linking globally recognisable cultural brands with local stories, crafts, nature and gastronomy.

But the success of culture as a magnet also carries risks. If visitors are drawn by content of high symbolic value but are met with confusing information, long border queues, unclear prices or a sense of a “tourist trap,” the reputational hit can be greater than in destinations without such a strong global brand. That is why two words keep returning in the current strategy: trust and experience. In a study of the “Korea Tourism Data Lab,” the OECD described how Korea increasingly uses alternative data sources—from mobile signals to card transactions—to track tourists’ movement and spending, which can help identify overloaded zones, seasonal spikes and places where better infrastructure is needed. Such an analytical approach, if followed by implementation, can also help target inspections and design regional products that relieve Seoul while offering visitors more diverse itineraries.

What a “tourism reset” could change—and where the biggest unknowns are

The announced policy direction has the potential to change how South Korea competes with other Asian destinations: instead of exclusively quantitative growth, the emphasis is placed on service quality, consumer protection and more even regional development. If price regulation and reservation standards are implemented consistently, this could increase the security of individual travellers, who today make up a growing share of the market. At the same time, investment in regional airports, transport links and cruise infrastructure could open new entry points and redistribute tourist flows, but that requires coordination among ministries and local authorities—often the hardest part of any reform. It remains open how the balance between market dynamics and regulation will be managed, especially in segments dominated by digital platforms and short-term rentals, where prices are highly sensitive to demand.

In practical terms, success will be measured by whether the number of complaints about overcharging and unfair practices decreases, whether the share of visits outside Seoul increases, and whether growth in arrivals is matched by growth in satisfaction and repeat visits. Politically, Lee has elevated tourism to the level of a strategic industry, with a clear message that growth must be visible in smaller places, among small entrepreneurs and local communities. Economically, higher spending by foreign visitors and better reputation management can mitigate the negative tourism balance shown in MCST statistics, although the balance will still be strongly influenced by Koreans’ mass outbound travel. In any case, the message from late February 2026 is clear: tourist numbers matter, but without fair prices, professional service and strong regions, that number can easily become a fragile façade.

Sources:

• - Yonhap News Agency – report on President Lee’s messages at the expanded national tourism strategy meeting and the target of 30 million visitors by 2030. (link)
• - The Straits Times – overview of the “qualitative growth” strategy, 2025 arrival and tourist spending data, and a description of the measures and meeting participants. (link)
• - The Korea Times (Yonhap), 25 February 2026 – package of measures against overcharging in hospitality and accommodation, including the obligation to display prices and rules for cancelling reservations. (link)
• - Korea JoongAng Daily, 25 February 2026 – details from the Blue House meeting, emphasis on curbing overcharging, and announcements on easing visas and entry procedures. (link)
• - Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism (MCST) – official statistics on the tourism balance and inbound tourist numbers for 2020–2024. (link)
• - The Korea Times, 5 May 2024 – KTO data on tourist complaints (shopping, taxis, accommodation) and post-recovery trends. (link)
• - InvestKOREA, 4 July 2025 – analysis of the structure and recovery of the tourism sector, business concentration and digitalisation trends. (link)