USA in 2026: political decisions, border procedures and cuts in promotion are reshaping the image of American tourism
The start of 2026 in the United States has been marked by a debate spilling from politics into the economy: is international travelers’ interest in traveling to the USA weakening, and who bears responsibility for it. At the same time, three related issues are in focus: how visitors are treated at the border, changes and announcements in visa and security procedures, and the financing of national tourism promotion. A central place in that story is held by Brand USA, the organization responsible for international destination marketing which, according to critics, is becoming increasingly difficult to sell under circumstances in which government policies create an impression of closing off or unreliability.
The topic is sensitive because tourism in the USA is not only an entertainment industry. It is an export of services that directly affects the revenues of cities and states, from lodging taxes to revenues of airports, convention centers and attractions. When international visitors change their minds, the impact is felt not only by hotel chains and airlines, but also by small businesses, cultural institutions, national parks and local communities that live off the season. That is why, on 06 February 2026, the question is being asked ever more loudly in the American tourism sector whether a destination’s reputation can be repaired with marketing campaigns while political decisions and border practices undermine the fundamental message: “you are welcome”.
Brand USA: promoting the country and communicating entry rules
Brand USA, according to its own data, was founded as the first national public-private partnership to lead a coordinated global marketing strategy to promote the USA as a travel destination, but also to communicate visa and entry policies. The organization began operational work in 2011, and its task is to connect the public and private sectors in promoting a destination that is simultaneously huge, diverse and regulatorily complex.
In practice, this means that Brand USA sells the story of the diversity of American regions, cities and attractions in foreign markets, but at the same time tries to offer the traveler a clear picture of the procedures they must complete before departure and upon entry into the country. Under normal circumstances, this “dual mandate” is an advantage: clear information reduces fear of the unknown, and well-told stories broaden interest to destinations beyond the best-known tourist hubs. But when messages of welcome collide with news of heightened checks, possible new obligations in digital applications, or tensions in foreign policy, the marketing message becomes weaker than the traveler’s real experience and the image conveyed by the media.
Funding cuts and the question of whether “more” can be expected with “less”
For Brand USA, 2025 was the year in which the financial issue became almost as important as tourism results. On 03 July 2025, in an official statement, the organization stated that the congressional budget reconciliation process had reduced federal matching funds from 100 million to 20 million dollars. Management said it was disappointed by the level of the cut, but remained committed to the mission and expected opportunities to restore funding, emphasizing that it was in “deep dialogue” with the administration and lawmakers.
In tourism marketing, an 80% cut is not an abstract saving. It means fewer campaigns in key markets, weaker reach of media buys, fewer joint appearances with airlines and partners, and less pressure on destination perception at a time when competition is rapidly returning to pre-pandemic capacities. Moreover, 2026 is the year in which the USA enters a cycle of major international events, so the industry is asking whether the state is sending a message that it wants travelers and their spending, or a message that other priorities come before the “soft power” that tourism traditionally brings.
VISIT USA Act and an attempt to restore predictability to Brand USA
In Congress, toward the end of 2025, a channel was opened for restoring funding through the proposed VISIT USA Act. According to a Travel Weekly report, the proposal was presented as an attempt to return funds to Brand USA so that part of the revenue tied to the Electronic System for Travel Authorization (ESTA), used in the Visa Waiver Program, is redirected back into national promotion. Public explanations emphasize that such a model should ensure a more stable funding framework, especially ahead of major events expected to attract millions of visitors.
For the tourism sector, the problem is not only the amount, but predictability. Markets are planned in advance, and campaigns are contracted months before the peak of the season. When funding depends on political negotiations and extraordinary deals, planning is shortened, and competitors gain an advantage because they can finalize contracts earlier with airlines, tour operators and booking platforms. In such an environment, Brand USA can hardly act as a long-term “national brand”, but becomes an organization that adjusts the scope of activities to budget cuts decided outside tourism logic.
Numbers and estimates: growth in forecasts, decline in part of real trends
The picture of international travel to the USA at the beginning of 2026 looks contradictory, partly because different sources observe different segments and time spans. The National Travel and Tourism Office (NTTO), operating within the International Trade Administration, states in its official forecast that the total number of international visitors to the USA in 2025 should reach about 77.1 million, compared to an estimated 72.4 million in 2024, and that 2026 could surpass the pre-pandemic level from 2019. Such projections are an important argument for those who claim that the USA has the potential for a rapid rebound, especially with major events coming.
However, part of recent analyses and media reports simultaneously warns that during 2025 a real decline compared to 2024 appeared. Financial media state that in 2025 an annual decline in international travel to the USA was recorded, which would be the first such decline after the period of pandemic recovery. In the same analyses, the decline is linked to a combination of political decisions, intensified immigration enforcement, stricter border oversight and changes in visa policy, with the note that the effect is most visible in traditionally strong markets such as Canada and part of Europe.
This picture is further outlined by the World Travel & Tourism Council (WTTC), which in 2025 estimated that international visitor spending in the USA could amount to about 169 billion dollars and be lower than the year before. WTTC warns that the USA could be the only country among major economies in which international spending is decreasing. For the industry, this is not just a statistic, but a signal that part of travelers and budgets is shifting to other regions, including markets that are simultaneously recording record arrivals and revenue growth.
Canada as the most important indicator of sentiment toward the USA
The fastest and most visible signal comes from Canada, a market that has been crucial for American tourism for decades. Statistics Canada states that in 2024 about 39 million trips by Canadian residents to the USA were recorded, accounting for approximately 75% of all their trips abroad. The same analysis notes that at the beginning of 2025 there are indications of a shift in sentiment, especially through a decline in return trips by car across land border crossings, which have traditionally been the simplest way to enter the USA.
In the first half of 2026, this trend also gains a political-economic framework. Media in the USA reported that Florida’s tourism authorities intensified contacts and outreach to Canadian partners after indicators suggested a weaker inflow of Canadian guests, with reasons in the public space being linked to strained relations and political rhetoric. Florida is particularly sensitive because it relies on a long-standing pattern of Canadians’ winter arrivals, so-called snowbird travel, so a change in habits in that market quickly becomes visible through lodging occupancy and spending.
For American tourism, Canada is more than just another market. It is a “thermometer” because it reacts quickly: the trip to the USA is short, there is strong transport connectivity, and a large number of travelers already has a travel routine. When such a market slows down, the industry reads it as an early signal that something has changed in the perception of safety, welcome or political stability, and that this signal can spill over to other markets.
Border treatment and digital screening: what travelers experience as the “first message”
In the tourism sector, it is often repeated that entry into the country is part of the tourism product. If a traveler expects stressful checks and uncertainty, the decision to travel changes before accommodation and flight prices are even compared. In that context, at the end of 2025 and the beginning of 2026, attention was drawn to a proposal that, in the ESTA process for travelers from Visa Waiver Program countries, up to five years of social media account history would be collected. Media reported that this was a proposal published through a regulatory process and that the topic was open for public comment, meaning that the very announcement can have an effect even before a final decision is made.
Although a proposal is not the same as implementation, the effect on perception can be immediate. Travelers often make decisions based on impression: if they expect that entry into the country will turn into an in-depth digital screening of private life, some of them will look for simpler alternatives. The tourism sector emphasizes that security screening is a legitimate state interest, but that it is crucial how the rules are communicated and how they are applied in practice, including clear criteria, data retention timelines and oversight mechanisms.
In the same period, the public is also debating the expansion of the use of biometric technologies in the work of American agencies. Investigative texts warn about the risks of misidentifications and the issue of oversight over systems. For tourism, it is important that such stories, even when tied to the broader context of immigration enforcement, spill over into the general impression of “welcome” and the feeling of predictability, because some travelers do not separate tourist rules from the overall picture of how the country treats foreigners.
Visas and waits: when logistics become an obstacle to travel
For a large number of visitors, entry into the USA requires a visa, and the process often comes down to a question of time: how long one waits for an appointment and how long processing takes. The U.S. State Department publishes estimates of waiting times for visa interviews on its official pages, noting that data can change depending on workload and mission capacities. Because of this, travel agencies and business travelers increasingly plan trips with a greater time buffer, and some travelers, according to industry assessments, redirect plans toward destinations with more predictable visa timelines.
In analytical reviews, the U.S. Travel Association warned that long waits and changes in the way appointments are reported are an operational problem for the sector because they limit arrivals from markets with the greatest spending potential. When waits combine with rising costs, the effect is amplified. Public debates also mention changes in fees for certain categories of travelers, including increases that affect visa waiver travelers through ESTA as well as those who need a visa. The tourism sector warns that such costs add up in the overall perception: a more expensive and more complicated entry sends a signal that the destination is less open, even when that is not the official policy message.
Broader political signal: measures in the visa area and reputational “spillover”
Tourism is particularly sensitive to the broader political signal, even when measures are formally not intended for tourists. In January 2026, media reported on the suspension of processing immigrant visas for citizens of 75 countries, which prompted legal reactions and international debates. This measure relates to immigrant, not tourist, visas, but the tourism industry has long warned about the “spillover effect”: travelers in the public sphere often do not distinguish visa categories, but absorb the general impression that entry into the USA has become more unpredictable or stricter.
The Congressional Research Service (CRS), in its 2025 overviews, states that among factors that can affect international demand for the USA are the length of visa waits, stricter border and immigration policies, potential trade tensions and the strength of the dollar. In other words, tourism in public policy cannot be observed in isolation: it reacts to a broader package of moves, and part of the effect arises only when the country’s international perception changes.
In such an environment, some commentators argue that tourism is being used as collateral in ideological and identity conflicts, from debates about social policies to the way travelers are communicated with at the border. When such debates spill over to social media, one unpleasant experience or a viral video can overshadow multi-million campaigns. Brand USA is then left with a difficult task: to convince the traveler that the travel experience is predictable and that procedures are proportionate to the goal.
Economic impact: why international visitors mean more than a full hotel room
International visitors on average stay longer and spend more than domestic guests, and their spending spreads through the entire local ecosystem, from lodging and food to transport, entertainment, shopping and cultural offerings. Therefore, a decline in arrivals, even when measured in single-digit percentages, can have a large effect on the revenues of cities and states. WTTC warns that a decline in international spending does not affect only tourism companies, but also the broader economy, because tourism is linked to a large number of jobs and local suppliers.
Some large systems are already publicly signaling problems. Disney has been mentioned in business reports and in media analyses as an example of a company that feels a decline in international visitors in its U.S. parks. When such a brand registers a change, the industry interprets it as a warning that weaker interest does not remain only in marginal markets, but also touches the “icons” of American tourism. Moreover, when big players redirect marketing budgets toward domestic guests, smaller destinations lose the indirect promotion that “spilled over” to them through the broader image of American tourism.
Preparations for the 2026 World Cup: a test of capacity and the message of welcome
In 2026, the USA enters with high expectations because of the football World Cup held in joint organization with Canada and Mexico. For the tourism industry, this is an opportunity to make up lost momentum, but also a risk if border procedures and visa capacities do not match demand. Travelers coming to sports events often travel within short time windows, which means that any delay in visa processing or entry procedures has direct consequences for flight loads, lodging and spending in host cities.
That is why the debate on funding for Brand USA is not conducted only as a budget question, but also as a question of coordinating the national message. Lawmakers who support restoring funds emphasize that it is an instrument that helps regional communities and spreads spending beyond major hubs. Critics counter that a marketing organization cannot compensate for a reputational blow if travelers believe that uncertainty or excessive privacy control awaits them at the border. The industry is therefore increasingly calling for tourism policy to be viewed as a combination of promotion and operational reality: a campaign can attract a traveler, but the entry experience can deter them permanently.
Three points where tourism policy breaks
In the debate taking place at the beginning of 2026, three pressure points stand out. The first is stable funding for international promotion and clear coordination of messages, without frequent cuts that prevent multi-year planning. The second is entry procedures into the country: from visa waits to the way checks are conducted at the border, because it is precisely that part that the traveler experiences as the “real face” of the state. The third is the broader political signal, which in the global public is read as the answer to the question: is the USA open to international guests, or is it closing under pressure of internal political conflicts.
For now there is no single answer, but trends suggest that reputation in tourism is built not only by attractions, but also by institutional consistency. If Congress and the administration reduce uncertainty in the coming months, from funding for Brand USA to clear and proportionate entry rules, the USA could meet 2026 as a year of returning international guests. If, however, the combination of cuts, shifting rules and political tensions continues, part of the market could be redirected more permanently toward competing destinations, and the cost of such a change would become visible only when the season is already lost.
Sources:- Brand USA – statement on the reduction of federal matching funds ( link )- International Trade Administration / NTTO – official forecast of international arrivals to the USA ( link )- Statistics Canada – analysis of changes in travel by Canadian residents to the USA ( link )- WTTC – estimate of the decline in international visitor spending in the USA in 2025 ( link )- Travel Weekly – VISIT USA Act bill proposal to restore funding for Brand USA ( link )- U.S. Department of State – tools and tables for tracking visa appointment wait times ( link )- U.S. Travel Association – overview of changes in reporting visa wait times and the impact on travel ( link )- PBS NewsHour – report on the proposal to collect five years of social media data under ESTA ( link )- Financial Times – analysis of the decline in international arrivals and related policies ( link )- U.S. Congress / CRS – overview of recent trends and risks for international tourism in the USA ( link )
Find accommodation nearby
Creation time: 2 hours ago