Proposed immigration fee pushing through

Remember the Bureau of Immigration (BI)’s controversial proposal to implement a new border security system that includes an immigration fee of P240 per passenger?

After all is said and done, the BI seems determined to implement it.

No less than BI Commissioner Joel Viado defended the project before the House of Representatives last month, saying it would strengthen the country’s borders, which currently rely on manual checks and outdated databases.

Indeed, this massive security project is pushing through, including the P240 one-way fee for international passengers (P480 round-trip).

I agree with Commissioner Viado that we need a stronger border security system, especially with all the illegal aliens in the country and the horror stories of our very own kababayans being trafficked abroad.

But some questions remain unanswered:

Why do we need to pay for something our government is mandated to do, and it’s not exactly cheap?

At the Ninoy Aquino International Airport, there are already new biometric immigration e-gates. I’ve seen them from my recent trips. The new e-gates were provided by its new concessionaire, the New NAIA Infra Corp. Are these e-gates not enough?

Last year, the BI separately signed a P1.5-billion contract for more e-gates – 47 e-gates and 57 biometric devices for manned counters. (The STAR, Dec. 31). Do we need more?

The BI also recently posted an invitation to bid for what seems to be an expansion of this P1.5-billion contract signed last year: “Expansion of e-gates in international ports of entry and exit – Phase II.” The cost of this contract, based on the notice, is P1.3 billion. Again, are these e-gates not enough?

What is the track record of the proponent, Securiport LLC? In Africa, the proponent has had issues. In Gambia, for instance, a national audit found a number of questionable findings in a project involving Securiport.

‘Service fee, not a tax’

Commissioner Viado, during last month’s budget hearing at the House, told lawmakers that we need a more integrated program covering the border security platform. He mentioned biometrics, advanced analytics and a more comprehensive passenger information system.

At the same hearing, he also said that the proposed P240 one-way fee on passengers is a service fee and not a tax.

He also said that overseas Filipino workers won’t be paying the fee themselves but their employers.

The P240 one-way fee, Commissioner Viado said, is lower than the fees collected in Australia, Singapore, Thailand, Hong Kong and Japan.

Here’s what I gathered, though. In Australia, the fee is A$70 or P3,135; Singapore, S$46.40 or P2,280; Japan, ¥3,000 or P1,200; Hong Kong, HK$200 or P1,600 and Thailand,1,120 baht or P2,111. The charges cited are departure taxes and airport terminal fees.

In these countries, the collected fee or tax goes to the government or a state-owned airport and not to the private vendor.

Besides, the Philippines already charges both types of fees: a P1,620 travel tax plus the NAIA terminal fee of P950.

What is the project about?

Here’s what the new system is as I wrote in a previous column.

The Civil Aviation and Immigration Security Services (CAISS) Project is a major PPP aimed at modernizing the country’s border management infrastructure across 11 international airports, one major international seaport and six mobile border crossing stations.

The project stemmed from an unsolicited proposal submitted by foreign firm Securiport LLC through the PPP Center of the Philippines in May 2023.

The Department of Justice, the designated approving body under Republic Act 11966 or the PPP Code, approved the project on Dec. 2, 2025.

“The CAISS is a significant upgrade to the Bureau’s border management capabilities in many years. It combines advanced biometric management and physical security infrastructure under a single, integrated platform, all operated by Bureau personnel within government-controlled networks and maintained throughout the contract life by the private partner,” according to the BI.

Securiport, with its local partner, will finance, design, build and maintain the platform, the BI said.

The total project cost is P10.7 billion, which will not be charged to the government but instead will be recovered through a user fee.

“Investment recovery is through a user fee of $4 per international traveler, built into airline ticket costs. The concession period is 20 years from commercial operations, after which the assets are transferred to the government,” according to the BI.

At 29 million passengers, the estimated $4 or P240 for a one-way international trip translates to some P6.9 billion, the bulk of which will go to Securiport.

Securiport’s share of the $4 is $3.80 per traveler or P228 per passenger per one-way international trip, while the BI’s share is $0.20 or P12 per passenger per one-way international trip.

This puts Securiport’s take to a total of P6.6 billion a year. At this amount, it would theoretically recover the P10.7-billion project cost in less than two years.

Imagine that. And yet, if the project pushes through, we will have to pay the P240 one-way fee per passenger for at least 20 years.

In June, the Palace said the proposed new fees were still under study. The BI likewise said it would review the cost.

No official announcement has been made, but sources say the project – and the fee – will push through.

As I said, it’s potentially a good project that will protect our borders, but the P480 cost for a round-trip journey is simply too high for many Filipinos, especially in these challenging times.

*      *      *

Email: [email protected]. Follow her on X @eyesgonzales. Column archives at EyesWideOpen on FB.