Korean Job Discussion Forums

[Derrek]

http://www.amchamkorea.org/publications/2004ikbc/Travel%20and%20Tourism.doc


This document argues against tough restrictions on Korean visas. They make one mention of why in this sentence, "We acknowledge that Korea��s high rejection rate, in some part, may be attributable to Korea��s ongoing problems with visa fraud, passport fraud and theft, illegal immigration and other visa transgressions, which have resulted in higher levels of scrutiny and rejection. "

_____________________________________________


The Value of Korea to the U.S. Industry

Travel from Korea is of great economic significance to the United States. Korean visitors to the United States have grown on an average of 15 percent per annum each year since 1988. The United States as a destination ranks third overall as a Korean��s destination of choice for overseas travel behind China and Japan

In 2003, Korea was the fifth largest source of foreign visitors to the USA in spite of the fact that Koreans are the only country in the top five that require visas to visit the United States.


Top 5 Overseas Sources of U.S. Visitors, 2003

Country Visitors Growth U.S. Visas Required
1. UK 3,958,000 4% No
2. Japan 3,014,000 (17%) No
3. Germany 1,153,000 ( 3%) No
4. France 689,000 ( 6%) No
5. Korea 629,000 ( 1%) Yes
6. Australia 397,000 ( 2%) No
7. Italy 378,000 ( 7%) No
8. Netherlands 373,000 ( 3%) No
9. Brazil 317,000 (22%) Yes
10. Venezuela 283,000 (28%) Yes

Source: U.S. Department of Commerce 2003 (Forecast Nov. 2003)


Value of Lost Market Share—Korean Visitors to the USA

Koreans spent an estimated $1.2 billion in 2003 on U.S. travel, including airfare. Korea is also the United States�� fourth largest source of foreign students, who collectively spend $1.7 billion annually during their period of study in the United States. In spite of these positive numbers, the United States continues to lose share of the total Korean outbound market, representing billions each year in lost revenue.


Year USA Share Pax Loss v. ��88 Share Spend Loss v. ��88 Share
1988 18.5% 0 $ 0
1989 15.1% (40,202) $ (118,375,236)
1990 15.4% (47,791) $ (135,154,100)
1991 15.9% (46,983) $ (133,381,182)
1992 17.1% (27,262) $ (72,435,838)
1993 17.4% (26,547) $ (56,988,559)
1994 18.3% (5,554) $ (11,641,628)
1995 17.2% (47,143) $ (110,584,996)
1996 18.1% (18,688) $ (42,939,027)
1997 17.8% (32,228) $ (70,209,950)
1998 13.9% (140,831) $ (233,905,325)
1999 13.2% (230,126) $ (394,819,778)
2000 13.1% (297,606) $ (571,661,079)
2001 11.0% (452,752) $ (849,370,370)
2002 9.7% (622,589) $ (1,165,941,330)
Cumulative (2,036,303) $ (3,967,408,398)



2004 Issues and Recommendations

Consistent with the mission of the Tourism & Transportation Committee, this paper is intended to identify those impediments to commerce in the area of tourism and transportation that require policy attention at a federal level.

• Establish balanced measures that both protect security and facilitate flow of visitors to and through the United States.

The changing face of border security is directly impacting legitimate inbound international travel to the United States. As Congress and the administration implement new laws and programs, U.S.-destined international visitors are facing increasing hurdles and challenges to enter the United States. It is critical that the industry and Korean government lobby the U.S. government on international transportation facilitation issues to ensure the United States remains a viable destination for Korean visitors. The U.S. travel industry wants and needs enhanced national security. But increases in security at our airports must at the same time, be matched with corresponding increases in personnel, equipment, and efficiency up and down the delivery chain. To do otherwise will needlessly drive international travelers to other international destinations that have fewer entry barriers and deprive U.S. consumers, companies and destinations of much-needed revenue opportunities.

The following issues represent significant challenges to the facilitation of Korean visitation to the United States and the economic development of the travel industry.

1. Biometric Visas—Amend the Implementation Date
All Korean visitors must obtain U.S. visas before traveling to the United States, because Korea has not yet qualified, to date, for entry into the U.S. Visa Waiver Program. As a result, Korea has long been the U.S. State Department��s largest visa issuance post in the world, issuing between 400,000 and 600,000 visas each year since 1996.

Effective July 18, 2003, the U.S. State Department implemented a new personal interview policy for all visa applicants which, in the case of Korea, abolished the majority of the personal interview waiver programs that had historically processed 64 percent of the visa workload without a personal interview. Today, approximately 73 percent of all applicants must physically present themselves at the Embassy to obtain their visas. The resulting strain on Consular resources has produced waiting periods of four to six weeks for a visa.

Effective October 26, 2004, all visa applicants will also be required to submit to fingerprinting at the U.S. Embassy as part of their visa application process. This mandate will effectively eliminate all remaining Personal Interview Waiver Programs and require the Embassy to physically process 100 percent of all visa applicants, face to face.

Even with the anticipated incremental resources being allocated to Seoul, the underlying physical limitations of the Embassy facilities and Consular staffing is likely to cause severe incremental delays to an already lengthy application process, once this new policy is implemented. Based on an actual 2003 Visa Issuance level of 450,000 applications, the impact of the phased elimination of all personal interview waiver programs is projected to have the following effect on the time it takes to get a U.S. visa:

% Applicants Available Interview
Interviewed Windows Period Avg. Wait 33.6% 9 Pre- Aug 2003 2-4 days
72.6% 9 Current 2-6 weeks
100.0% 13 Eff Oct 2004 4-12 weeks

Recommendations:

 Defer the requirement for capturing biometric data at time of visa issuance by two years to October 2006, or until such time that the Embassy is able to acquire and install the requisite resources and processing procedures that will enable it to meet demand and deliver visas within a 1 week maximum turnaround time frame.
 Retain the current Visa Referral Programs and implement new processing procedures that enable legitimate, large groups access to a controlled, interview waiver channel for visa applications.

2. Biometric Passports—Amend the Implementation Date
Effective January 5, 2004, all non-Visa Waiver Country visitors entering the United States are now required to submit to electronic fingerprinting at their first port of entry along with a digital picture of the individual. This entry-exit record is in addition to the normal questions and examination of documents performed by immigration inspectors. To date, the infrastructure at U.S. Ports of Entry appear to be handling this workload without significant delays.

Congress has established a mandated deadline for Visa Waiver Program participants to have passports containing biometric identifiers by October 26, 2004. According to the Border Security Act, Visa Waiver country travelers with non-biometric passports issued on or after October 26, 2004 will now be required to obtain a visa for travel to the United States. At this point, it is expected that only three of the 27 countries participating in the Visa Waiver program will have the ability to produce biometric passports by that date. Other countries, such as Japan and the United Kingdom, have indicated that they will not have biometric passport capabilities until late 2005 or 2006.
While Korea is not currently eligible to participate in the Visa Waiver Program, the hurdle bar for Korea��s potential qualification will in turn be raised as a result of this deadline. Any prospects for Korea��s future VWP eligibility will require that Korea first implement new biometric passports as a pre-requisite to VWP entry.

Recommendations:

 Understanding the difficulties for countries to overhaul their passport protocols to create and develop biometric passports, AMCHAM proposes a two-year extension of the October 26, 2004 deadline for VWP countries to implement biometric passports. Failure to do so, will significantly impact the flow of foreign visitors from VWP countries into the United States, and at the same time place a significant impediment in Korea��s potential bid to qualify for future VWP status.

3. Transit Without Visa—Reinstate the Program
The Transit Without Visa Program (TWOV) permitted those travelers who did not have U.S. visas to enter the United States in order to transit U.S. airports en route between two non-U.S. points. This enabled U.S. carriers to carry traffic on their third and fourth freedom services that would otherwise bypass the United States entirely. In 2003, the U.S. government cancelled the TWOV program on the basis of national security concerns. Prior to the program��s cancellation, over 27,000 Korean��s per year transited the United States without visa en route to third countries. The cancellation of this program has deprived the airlines operating between Korea and the U.S. of more than $22 million per year in lost revenues, reducing the economic viability of many gateway operations.

Recommendations:

 Reinstate the TWOV program from select countries, such as Korea, that have historically demonstrated low levels of security threat, and implement necessary procedural safeguards to insure the integrity of the program.

4. Visa Waiver Program—Revise the Country Eligibility Criteria
The Visa Waiver Program (VWP) allows foreign nationals from certain countries to be admitted to the United States under limited conditions and for a limited time without obtaining a visa. In order to qualify for VWP participation, a country must meet the following criteria:

Visa Refusal Rate
The nonimmigrant visitor ("B-1/B-2" visa category) refusal rate for nationals of a country who have applied at a U.S. Embassy in that country must average less than 3% for the previous fiscal year.

Korea Status: Non-Compliant. Over 3% FY2003.

Reciprocity
VWP countries must provide reciprocal visa-free travel for U.S. citizens.

Korea Status: Compliant. No visas for U.S. visitors to Korea.

Passport Security
A country must have a machine-readable passport (MRP) program in place in order to qualify for VWP participation. Effective October 26, 2004, all new passports issued by VWP countries must also have biometric identifiers.

In addition, VWP candidate countries must demonstrate that adequate safeguards against fraudulent use of their passports are in place, including proper storage of blank passports and sufficient screening of passport applicants.

Korea Status: Compliant. 100% machine-readable passports.
Non-Compliant. No biometric identifiers to date.

Political and Economic Stability
VWP countries must be sufficiently stable to ensure that conditions that may affect VWP-qualifying criteria are not likely to change dramatically in the future.

Korea Status: Compliant.

Border Controls
VWP candidate countries must demonstrate that effective border controls are in place for all territory under their control.

Korea Status: Compliant.


Law-Enforcement Cooperation
The degree to which host country law enforcement agencies cooperate with U.S. counterparts as well as international entities such as Interpol will be considered. The Attorney General, in consultation with the Secretary of State, must evaluate the nominee country's interest in enforcement of U.S. immigration laws, and the existence and effectiveness of extradition agreements with the United States, including extradition of its own nationals who violate U.S. laws. The Attorney General must submit a report to Congress on the country��s qualification for designation that includes an explanation of a favorable determination.

Korea Status: Compliant.

Currently, the following countries qualify for VWP participation:

• Andorra
• Austria
• Australia
• Belgium
• Brunei
• Denmark
• Finland
• France
• Germany • Iceland
• Ireland
• Italy
• Japan
• Liechtenstein
• Luxembourg
• Monaco
• the Netherlands
• New Zealand • Norway
• Portugal
• San Marino
• Singapore
• Slovenia
• Spain
• Sweden
• Switzerland
• United Kingdom *

Fundamentally, Korea currently qualifies for participation in the Visa Waiver Program under most all criteria with the exception of the ��Visa Refusal�� ratios. It was the original intent of Congress to base VWP qualification criteria on Visa Overstay statistics for each country, however since the United States has historically lacked an entry/exit control system which could track foreign visitor overstays, the Refusal Criteria was adopted as the primary qualifier.

The new US-VISIT program contains an exit control component that is currently being tested at Baltimore Washington International Airport. Visitors will check out at kiosks by scanning their visa or passport and repeating the fingerprinting/picture identification process. The exit confirmation will be added to the visitor's travel records to demonstrate compliance. The law requires that all ports of entry have an automated entry and exit system by December 31, 2005.

With the 2005 implementation of the US-VISIT program and the implementation of an exit control infrastructure at all Ports of Exit, the government will soon have the ability to amend its VWP criteria from Refusal Rates to Overstay Rates. AMCHAM believes that the overstay ratios are a more indicative benchmark of a country��s compliance with the intent of the VWP.

We acknowledge that Korea��s high rejection rate, in some part, may be attributable to Korea��s ongoing problems with visa fraud, passport fraud and theft, illegal immigration and other visa transgressions, which have resulted in higher levels of scrutiny and rejection.

While it is unrealistic to expect immediate movement on Korea��s qualification under the Visa Waiver Program, AMCHAM continues to support expansion of the VWP beyond its current members. State Department sources have indicated that no new countries are in line to enter the program, but it is imperative that we continue to collectively work on progressing Korea towards the program��s compliance thresholds. As America��s fifth largest source of visitors and seventh largest trading partner, we believe it is of national interest to both countries to pursue measures for qualifying Korea for the Visa Waiver Program at the earliest possible date.

To achieve this goal also requires the active involvement of the Korean government in implementing initiatives that will reduce and eliminate the fraud and abuse, which have been an impediment to Visa Waiver qualification.

Recommendations:

 Revise the VWP legislation to replace ��Refusal Rate�� criteria with ��Overstay Rate�� criteria, effective 2007, based on prior fiscal year actual data for each country. Source of overstay data would be captured from the US-VISIT program entry/exit control system.
 Solicit Korea��s implementation and enforcement of criminal penalties for activities relating to the fraudulent application and procurement of passport and visa documents.
 Solicit Korea��s establishment of a Government Task Force to work with their US Government counterparts to expedite the resolution of any barriers towards Korea��s qualification for the U.S. Visa Waiver program.
 Facilitate Korea��s compliance with the border control and visa reform provisions of the Homeland Security Bill, specifically:
- Implementation of machine-readable passports with biometric identifiers.
- Establish a system for providing the U.S. information on stolen blank passports "on a timely basis".


• Establish balance measures that both protect security and facilitate flow of cargo to and through the United States.

1. Aviation Security
In 2003, the Korea Custom Service (KCS), published draft regulations that would have required shippers to provide manifest information on export shipments moving by air two hours prior to the loading of the aircraft. These regulations could have severely damaged the air express industry in Korea and the local firms who depend of the air-express industry for the speedy, reliable delivery of their product.

We were pleased to work with the Ministry of Finance and KCS to modify those proposed regulations so that they would not cause irreparable harm to our industry or our customers. This collaboration kept in place a ��win-win�� system that provides security while not impeding trade.

Overall, international policy is moving towards a security screening requirement whereby 100 percent of all cargo moving on passenger aircraft must be inspected and X-rayed prior to loading. With the bulk of airfreight between Korea and the United States moving on all cargo aircraft, it is important that as Korea moves to adopt security regulations and procedures for freight moving on freighter aircraft, that such regulations be based on realistic threat assessment and take into account the different risk profiles of the different modes of transportation.

Recommendations:

• Cargo aircraft operate with a risk profile that is very different than that of passenger aircraft. It is critical that the Korean government consult the industry to come up with the most cost-effective way of meeting any security goals, consistent with the measures that have been put in place elsewhere in the world in consultation with and compliance with federal, industry and ICAO guidelines.


• Cultivation of a healthy and robust air transportation environment.

A national agenda to make ICN the Northeast Hub of Asia cannot succeed without the support of a healthy, viable air transportation sector. Not only must the environment sustain incumbent operators, but it also must be conducive to the stimulation of new capacity. This requisite environment is currently absent. The 2001 opening of Incheon International Airport and the resulting increase in user fees versus Gimpo has already challenged the fragile airline economic base. With the fallout from the events of 9-11, the impact of SARS and Bird Flu and a sluggish economy, the world��s aviation industry still suffers financially. In contrast to this situation the cost of operations at ICN has become an even greater burden. And while other airports in the region, recognizing this critical juncture in the industry, have implemented user fee reductions, Incheon has not.

As a case in point, Incheon is currently pushing to raise user rates by 57 percent over the next three years. This strategy is diametrically opposed to the well being of its main constituents—the airlines, as well as being in contradiction to the Korean government��s objective of building Korea as the Hub of Asia.

Recommendations:

• Work with the industry��s representatives (IATA, AOC and BAR) to negotiate a more realistic cost structure at ICN. At the same time, secure the help of the diplomatic community, the business councils of different world regions, and the Korean government itself to obtain the necessary relief in charges at ICN for its viability and that of the airlines for the future.
• Accelerate current infrastructure development to improve customer access to existing facilities by expediting the completion of the airport express rail link and implementing a 24 hour transportation and airport services system to allow carriers to take advantage of ICN��s 24 hour runway operations.

[Real Reality]

[Wangja]

Maybe, pending reciprocity, Korea should withdraw their VWP for US citizens?

Although there are so few visitors, it would make no significant difference.

[Derrek]

[periwinkle]

I heard that when Koreans travel, they spend more money while travelling than any other visitor (they might be in 2nd place, behind the Japanese- don't remeber, exactly).

My friend used to work at a souvenir shop in Canada, and busloads of Japanese would come in and they would nearly clean the store out. Apparently when they travel, they feel obligated to by souvenirs for everyone they know back in Japan, so they will buy keychains, etc. in bulk. She had some interesting stories.

[Hollywoodaction]

Korea, and the other countries, would probably be further down the line if the list also included foreign countries that aren't overseas (i.e. Mexico and Canada).

[shakuhachi]

[Wangja]

[shakuhachi]

[Wangja]

[shakuhachi]

[Wangja]

[shakuhachi]

[Wangja]

Reciprocity, dear chap, reciprocity.

Get your biometric passport soon.

[shakuhachi]