Impact of Trump 2.0 Intensified US-Led Trade Wars on the Global Travel Industry (2025–2026)

Trade tensions led by the United States are escalating under a potential Trump administration (2025–2026), raising broad concerns for the global travel industry. Tariffs on goods, retaliatory trade barriers, and geopolitical frictions threaten to dampen travel demand and disrupt tourism and travel-related businesses worldwide. This report examines how an intensified “trade war” scenario could affect international leisure tourism, business travel, commercial aviation (airlines and aircraft manufacturing), hospitality (hotels, resorts, events), and travel services across key regions – the United States, United Kingdom, European Union, China – and the spillover effects globally. We consider both direct impacts (like costlier airline components or new visa hurdles) and indirect impacts (like weakened economies, reduced discretionary income, or currency fluctuations), and we highlight sector-specific vulnerabilities as well as adaptive strategies emerging in response. Each regional section provides a summary of anticipated effects, followed by a global synthesis of overall trends and responses.

Channels of Impact: From Tariffs to Travel Tensions

Even though tariffs target goods rather than services, trade wars can hit travel through multiple channels. Direct effects include higher operating costs (for fuel, aircraft, construction materials, etc.), supply chain disruptions, and potential policy barriers (visa restrictions or travel advisories). Indirect effects are often even more significant: economies slow down, currencies shift, and international relations sour, all of which can deter travelers. Analysts identify three primary channels in such a scenario :

- Economic Pressure: Broad tariffs and counter-tariffs drag down GDP growth, reducing household incomes and corporate profits. This dampens demand for both leisure vacations and business trips as people have less money to spend and firms tighten travel budgets .

- Exchange Rates: Trade measures tend to strengthen the U.S. dollar (as imports shrink) . A stronger dollar makes the U.S. an expensive destination for foreigners while potentially boosting Americans’ purchasing power abroad. Simultaneously, currencies of tariff-targeted countries may weaken, affecting where travelers choose to go and how far their money goes.

- Travel Sentiment and Geopolitics: Heightened tensions and nationalist rhetoric create a “vibe shift” in traveler sentiment . Tourists from countries feeling targeted may simply choose not to visit out of patriotism or perceived hostility. Government advisories or informal boycotts can amplify this. For example, during the 2018–2019 U.S.–China trade clash, Chinese group travel bookings to the U.S. plunged over 30% , and officials warned citizens about visiting America amid “frequent shootings” and harassment concerns (a clear signal discouraging travel). Such diplomatic rifts cast a long shadow on tourism flows.

These forces intertwine to influence every facet of travel – from a family’s ability to afford a holiday, to an airline’s cost of acquiring new jets, to the willingness of international delegates to attend a U.S. conference. The following sections break down the anticipated impacts by region, before providing a global overview of how the travel sector is bracing for and adapting to an era of trade turmoil.

United States: Falling Inbound Tourism, Cost Pressures, and Domestic Slowdown

Figure: Leading outbound markets for tourists to the U.S. (2024) and corresponding U.S. tariffs imposed in 2025. Major visitor source countries like Canada, Mexico, and China face steep tariffs of 25–34%, risking sharp declines in travel demand. (Data source: U.S. National Travel & Tourism Office and White House)

The United States – as both a top destination and a huge outbound market – stands at the center of this storm. Inbound international tourism to the U.S. is expected to contract markedly under an expanded trade war scenario. America’s largest visitor sources (Canada and Mexico account for over 50% of U.S. inbound trips) are now hit with new 25% tariffs . Early signs already show Canadian travel dropping off: in February, cross-border car trips from Canada to the U.S. plummeted by 24% year-on-year after tariff threats surfaced . Tourism Economics forecasts a 15% collapse in Canadian visitors in 2025, leading all markets . China – previously a fast-growing inbound segment – saw a 5.7% decline in 2018 during the last trade standoff and could fall further now that a hefty 34% tariff is in place . Overall, the analysis projects international travel to the U.S. will drop by about 5% or more versus prior expectations , representing billions in lost tourism revenue. One estimate pegs the two-year loss from reduced Chinese visits alone at $11 billion if hostile relations and travel warnings persist. Moreover, President Trump’s combative stance toward the EU (e.g. threatening 200% tariffs on European wine) and perceived sympathies toward Russia have created “antipathy towards the U.S.” in Western Europe, likely discouraging many Europeans from transatlantic holidays . Travel industry experts warn that U.S. policies could “cut U.S. travel growth by half,” as tourists from affected countries rethink visits to an America engaged in trade battles .

Business and corporate travel in the U.S. is likewise under threat from economic uncertainty and geopolitical friction. As tariffs bite, corporate profits and confidence waver – and one of the first budget areas companies trim is travel. The Live Events Coalition cautions that rising costs set off a domino effect: “Corporate travel freezes, marketing budgets tighten, sponsorships shrink, and internal and external events are the first to go.” Indeed, major U.S. airlines report that corporate demand has softened in early 2025, with Delta’s CEO noting companies are “pulling back on spending” for travel amid uncertainty . The conventions and meetings sector feels this acutely. Tariffs on steel, aluminum, and electronics are driving up the cost of trade-show booths, staging, and A/V equipment, making it pricier to mount events . Exhibition organizers fear fewer exhibitors and attendees, especially international ones, as global firms cancel non-essential trips and pivot to virtual meetings to save money . Some even detect a “negative bias against the U.S.” for hosting events in the current climate . In short, both the volume of business travel and the willingness of global professionals to travel to U.S. events are eroding. This could hit cities like Las Vegas, Orlando, Chicago and others that depend on conventions and trade shows, translating into emptier hotels and conference centers.

Commercial aviation faces a two-pronged challenge: potential drops in travel demand and disruptions to aviation manufacturing supply chains. On the demand side, U.S. airlines enjoyed a strong post-pandemic rebound through early 2025, but tariff fears are starting to weigh on bookings. After a new tariff round was announced, airline stocks nosedived (United Airlines down 12% in a day, Delta 9%, American 8% ) as investors anticipated weaker international traffic and higher costs. Carriers like Delta and American had already cut their revenue outlooks for 1Q 2025, citing “softness in domestic demand” due to reduced consumer and corporate confidence . United’s CEO also observed a “big drop” in bookings from Canada in particular . Leisure travelers on tight budgets are expected to scale back or opt for cheaper options, which could benefit low-cost airlines while legacy carriers struggle to fill premium seats . At the same time, U.S. aircraft manufacturing (led by Boeing) is caught in the crossfire of trade disputes. China, one of Boeing’s largest customers, may shift orders to Airbus or accelerate its own COMAC jets in retaliation for U.S. tariffs – a serious long-term threat to Boeing’s market share . In the near term, Boeing’s CFO insists the company has a “massive backlog” to shield it from immediate pain . However, he acknowledges concern about parts availability if tariffs disrupt the complex global supply chain for aircraft components . Many Boeing parts come from overseas suppliers; any new import duties or export restrictions could raise input costs or delay production. Airbus, on the other hand, has hinted it could re-route new aircraft deliveries away from U.S. airlines if transatlantic trade tensions make U.S. sales less attractive . “We can adapt by prioritizing other customers eager for planes,” Airbus’ CEO said, indicating that American carriers might wait longer or pay more for new jets . All of this means U.S. airlines could face higher capital costs for planes and fewer aircraft available, even as passenger demand becomes more uncertain – a tough equation for an industry that relies on long-term planning.

Hospitality and tourism services in the U.S. are bracing for leaner times ahead. A trade war-driven economic slowdown and strong dollar will hit big-city hotels and tourist attractions first. Fewer international tourists (down an expected ~12% in visits under worst-case scenarios ) mean less occupancy, especially in gateway cities popular with Chinese and European travelers. Tourism Economics warns U.S. hotel room demand will weaken noticeably in 2025 if trade conflicts expand . Domestic leisure travel is also vulnerable: with higher consumer prices due to tariffs and slower wage growth, Americans are expected to take fewer or shorter trips at home as well . In fact, overall U.S. travel spending (domestic and inbound combined) could end up $64–72 billion lower in 2025 than it would be otherwise, as per Oxford Economics modeling . This pullback will be felt across airlines, hotels, restaurants, theme parks, and tour operators that serve tourists. Travel booking platforms (OTAs) and tour operators are already seeing shifts in demand – for example, operators catering to Chinese tour groups have taken a hit as those groups cancel U.S. itineraries, and American travel agencies note fewer bookings to China and some other destinations under diplomatic strain.

Cost inflation is another headache for the hospitality sector. Tariffs on building materials (steel, lumber) and imported furnishings are pushing construction and renovation costs up . Developers worry that new hotel projects will become financially unfeasible if material costs keep climbing . Even existing hotels feel the pinch: everything from furniture to electronics and linens often comes from abroad. If tariffs extend to more countries (Vietnam, Europe, etc., as threatened ), hotels may have to pay more to refurbish rooms or source amenities. An analysis of U.S. hotels found that a majority of their furniture and fixtures now come from outside China, but could still be hit by tariffs on other Asian or Canadian suppliers . These rising costs squeeze profit margins unless hoteliers raise room rates – which is hard to do if demand is soft. Travel service providers like visa processing firms also face challenges. With tit-for-tat diplomatic moves, there could be consular staffing cutbacks and longer wait times for travel visas (for instance, China and the U.S. each closed consulates in recent years during disputes, slowing visa issuance). Additionally, heightened security screenings at borders (amid trade-related tensions) create uncertainty for travelers. The overall result is a more frictional, expensive environment for travel to and from the U.S., dampening the free flow of visitors.

Adaptive strategies in the U.S.: Facing these headwinds, different players are adapting in various ways. U.S. destinations and tourism boards are diversifying their marketing efforts – for example, if Chinese visitor numbers are down, cities might target other high-growth markets like India or South America to fill the gap. The strong dollar, while deterring inbound visitors, gives American travelers more buying power overseas, so outbound-focused agencies are promoting international trips to Americans (who may choose Europe or Asia deals, ironically offsetting some losses on the inbound side). Airlines, anticipating a possible downturn, are managing capacity and costs: U.S. carriers are slowing expansion plans, retiring older inefficient planes, and focusing on the still-robust segments (United noted long-haul international and premium travel remain “really strong” so far ). Low-cost airlines see an opportunity – as one budget airline CEO put it, when belts tighten, travelers “look harder for lower fares,” benefitting carriers with a low-cost base . In the hospitality realm, some hotel brands are pivoting to segments that could be more resilient. Notably, extended-stay hotels in the U.S. are cautiously optimistic that if manufacturing jobs reshore due to tariffs, they’ll house those workers near project sites . Hotel owners are also lobbying against broad tariffs and seeking exemptions for key materials to contain construction costs . Finally, the U.S. travel industry at large is banding together to advocate for policies that keep travel accessible – urging the government to refrain from heavy-handed visa or border restrictions and to perhaps invest in promotion (to counter negative perceptions abroad). Despite these efforts, the consensus among U.S. travel economists is that an escalated trade war presents “high-risk consequences for the US travel sector”, and mitigating the damage will require concerted action .

United Kingdom: Collateral Impacts and Cross-Atlantic Crosswinds

The United Kingdom is not directly “at war” in the U.S. tariff battles but will still feel the effects through economic linkages and shifts in travel flows. In the unfolding scenario, the UK actually faces a lower U.S. tariff (10% on its exports) than other allies do , and the British government has so far avoided retaliating in kind . This reflects the UK’s post-Brexit strategy of pursuing a trade deal with the U.S. and staying aligned. However, even without direct trade confrontation, the UK’s travel industry stands to be impacted by global spillovers and specific market trends:

- Transatlantic Travel: The U.S. is one of the UK’s most important travel partners, both in terms of British tourists going west and Americans coming east. A U.S. downturn or strong dollar can cut both ways. On one hand, a stronger dollar makes the UK relatively affordable for American visitors, potentially boosting U.S. tourist arrivals to Britain (Americans might seize the chance to visit London, Scotland, etc. with a more favorable exchange rate). On the other hand, if the U.S. economy slows and sentiment sours, fewer Americans may travel abroad overall, which could reduce the anticipated benefit. Recent signals are worrying: Virgin Atlantic reported a slowdown in U.S.-to-UK travel demand in early 2025 , and its partner Delta cited U.S. economic uncertainty weighing on transatlantic bookings . British travel firms fear that if American business travel and group tours diminish, it will hit major UK destinations that rely on U.S. visitors (for example, Americans are a top market for London’s luxury hotels and cultural attractions).

- Outbound UK Tourism and Business Travel: For British travelers, a global trade war brings a mix of constraints and opportunities. The pound may weaken amidst worldwide volatility and UK-specific economic challenges (the UK is managing Brexit-related trade frictions and inflation, leaving little cushion for external shocks ). A weaker pound means holidays abroad become pricier for Brits, which could dampen demand for long-haul leisure travel to the U.S. and beyond. If UK exporters face any U.S. tariffs or if global growth falters, British firms’ profits suffer, and they may cut back on corporate travel. Thus, UK outbound leisure e business travel could see a modest pullback. Companies in London’s financial and professional services sectors, for instance, might reduce discretionary travel or opt for virtual meetings if transatlantic political tensions make trips less fruitful. That said, some British tourists might substitute U.S. trips with closer or cheaper destinations (e.g. Europe or domestic UK breaks) until things stabilize.

- Aviation and Aerospace: Aviation is a significant industry linking the UK to this trade saga. Britain’s airlines (like British Airways and Virgin Atlantic) are heavily dependent on transatlantic routes. If demand from either side softens, their revenues suffer. There is also a supply chain angle: the UK is home to key aerospace manufacturers (Rolls-Royce produces jet engines, for example). In Trump’s tariff package, the UK as an exporter was relatively spared (10% general tariff) , but tariffs on the EU (20%) and on specific sectors like automotive could indirectly affect UK manufacturing too . If the U.S.–EU dispute escalates, the UK might find itself in a tricky spot – potentially benefitting if U.S. airlines shift some plane orders from Airbus (EU) to UK-linked production, but also losing if global aircraft demand falls. The recently announced U.S. tariffs did include 10% on imports from Britain’s economy (despite the UK not being a main target) . This could hit UK-made aerospace parts and raise costs for U.S. airlines that buy British engines or components. So far, Britain’s strategy is to stay close to Washington; for instance, it has ruled out a tit-for-tat tourism or trade boycott and is positioning itself as a stable partner . British Airways and other carriers will hope this goodwill keeps travel between the two countries flowing.

- Hospitality and Tourism Services: The UK’s hospitality sector could experience a mixed regional impact. London, as a global city, might actually gain some business (e.g. if fewer Chinese or Gulf tourists go to the U.S. due to tensions, they might choose London or Paris instead for their big trips). Already, Chinese visitor numbers to the UK were on an upward trajectory prior to 2020, and the UK will want to remain an attractive alternative for high-spending tourists avoiding the U.S. However, if China’s economy stumbles from the trade war, Chinese tourists may cut back on all long-haul travel, UK included. The same goes for other international segments – for example, British tour operators relying on American retirees or students could see lower bookings if those groups pull back. Domestically, British tourism may get a slight boost if UK travelers decide to “holiday at home” due to global uncertainty or if encouraged by any “choose UK” patriotic campaigns. (In Canada, for instance, leaders explicitly urged citizens to explore locally instead of visiting the U.S. – the UK could see a parallel sentiment of supporting domestic tourism industry). UK travel agencies and services will also adapt by redirecting marketing: a British tour company that lost U.S.-bound clients might pivot to selling packages for, say, UK-to-Canada or UK-to-Commonwealth destinations, which could strengthen due to friendlier ties.

- Business Events and Education: A notable consideration is Britain’s role as a host of international events and students. If the U.S. becomes less welcoming, more international conferences might choose London (or other UK cities) as neutral ground – potentially a boon for UK event venues. Likewise, international students or business travelers from, say, China or the Middle East who feel unwelcome in the U.S. might opt for the UK as an English-speaking alternative, benefiting UK airlines, universities, and hotels. This adaptive benefit is speculative but plausible given the reputational dynamics; it represents how the UK could cushion the blow by capturing displaced demand from the U.S.

In summary, the UK’s travel sector faces headwinds from the global economic slowdown triggered by trade wars and specific dips in U.S.-linked travel, but it may also find silver linings by absorbing some of the tourism and business that is diverted from the U.S. due to geopolitical frictions. The net outcome will depend on how severe the economic fallout is. If a full-blown recession is avoided, the UK might navigate this period with only a slight drag on growth (helped by pent-up travel demand post-Covid). However, if trade conflict sinks confidence worldwide, the UK – already dealing with its own trade adjustments post-Brexit – could see a notable downturn in both outbound and inbound travel. British stakeholders are thus monitoring developments closely. Their strategy, like many, is to stay flexible: airlines adjusting capacity, tour operators refocusing on friendly markets, and government tourism bodies ready to launch campaigns to keep the world coming to Britain even as the geopolitical winds shift.

European Union: Transatlantic Tensions and Redirected Flows

For the European Union, U.S.-led trade wars present a double-edged sword: Europe could suffer collateral damage from reduced global travel, and also potentially face direct friction with the U.S. if tariff disputes extend to the EU. The EU is a major player in international travel – as a source of tourists, as a destination for Americans/Chinese, and as home to global travel companies – so any disruption in cross-border exchange reverberates through its economies. Key points for Europe include:

- Fewer Europeans Visiting the U.S.: Europe’s outbound travel had fully rebounded to record levels in 2024 , with many Europeans eager to visit the U.S. after pandemic lockdowns. But trade tensions threaten to dampen that enthusiasm. There is evidence of a “backlash” against the U.S. among European travelers due to the tariff war and geopolitical rifts. According to Accor (the French hotel giant), there is “bad buzz” around U.S. travel, and summer bookings from Europeans to U.S. destinations were down 25% as of early 2025 . This startling drop suggests that millions of Europeans who might have vacationed in America are now reconsidering. Part of this is practical – a stronger dollar and possible airfare increases make U.S. trips costlier – and part is emotional/political, as European media and leaders criticize U.S. trade tactics. Additionally, President Trump’s controversial stance on issues like Ukraine (where Europe strongly supports Ukraine against Russian aggression) has “affected European sentiment toward the U.S.”, potentially reducing their interest in traveling there . European tour operators report softer demand for USA packages, and some airlines like Virgin Atlantic have warned of weaker U.S. routes demand . If this trend continues, popular U.S.-bound segments (e.g. German tourists to Florida, French tour groups to New York) could see significant declines through 2025–26, impacting airlines and tourism businesses on both sides of the Atlantic.

- Transatlantic Business Travel: The flow of business travelers and professionals between Europe and the U.S. may also ebb. European companies facing U.S. tariffs (on cars, industrial goods, etc.) will find their U.S. ventures less profitable, possibly curtailing executive trips for negotiations or investments. Moreover, if U.S.–EU trade talks turn hostile, we could see scenarios reminiscent of past diplomatic strains – for example, during the “freedom fries” episode in 2003 or GDPR disputes, some companies quietly boycotted transatlantic meetings. While nothing that dramatic is certain, the current climate has introduced wariness. European regulators and industry groups are being urged to “re-evaluate [Europe’s] role in the world” in response to Trump’s policies . This introspection could translate to Europe seeking greater self-reliance and focusing more on intra-EU business, thus relatively fewer trips to American partners. However, it’s worth noting that as of early 2025, not all data shows a decline – Germany’s Lufthansa stated they had not yet seen a fall in transatlantic bookings , indicating resilience in some markets. The ultimate impact may vary by country and sector in Europe, but overall a slight cooling of business travel across the Atlantic is anticipated if economic uncertainty persists.

- Inbound Tourism to Europe: Europe might experience both positives and negatives in inbound tourism due to the trade war. On the positive side, Europe could attract more visitors from markets shunning the U.S. – for instance, Chinese tourists who feel unwelcome or face difficulties going to America might choose Europe for their long-haul trip instead. Europe’s tourism industry could capitalize on any diversion of Chinese outbound travel. Indeed, prior to this trade flare-up, Chinese travel to Europe was on a strong growth path, and Europe would be keen to sustain that. But there are risks: if China’s economy is significantly weakened by the trade war, the Chinese may travel less globally, which would hurt Europe too. Furthermore, if the U.S. pressures the EU to take a tougher stance on China (trade or tech issues), China could retaliate by discouraging tourism to Europe as well. (Beijing has used this tactic before, e.g. banning tour groups to South Korea in 2017 over a political dispute). The EU must also monitor its own trade spat with China (like the dispute over Chinese EV subsidies in late 2024) – those could independently strain Chinese tourist sentiment toward Europe. So, European destinations are not guaranteed a windfall from displaced U.S.-bound travelers; they must navigate carefully to remain attractive to global tourists amid great-power tensions.

- European Airlines and Aviation Manufacturing: Europe’s aviation giants – both airlines like Air France-KLM, Lufthansa, and British Airways (via IAG), and manufacturers like Airbus – face turbulence from the trade war scenario. If fewer Americans and Chinese travel to Europe, airlines lose important customer segments (Americans are among the highest spenders in European cities, and Chinese tourists drive duty-free sales on European carriers). Conversely, if Europeans cut trips to the U.S., airlines might redeploy that capacity to other routes (say, intra-Europe or to the Middle East) which may be less profitable. We already see European carriers adjusting marketing: Canada’s Porter Airlines actually paused advertising U.S. flights because Canadians showed reluctance to visit the U.S. in the current climate – a North American example that European airlines might emulate in tone if anti-U.S. sentiment rises in Europe. On manufacturing, the dormant Airbus-Boeing trade dispute could be rekindled. The Trump administration previously imposed tariffs on Airbus jets and EU products in 2019, and the EU retaliated on Boeing jets. A five-year truce was reached under Biden, but a Trump return may undo it. Already, sweeping U.S. tariffs of 20% on EU goods have been mentioned ; if they include aerospace, Airbus could face U.S. import duties. Airbus’s CEO indicated that if delivering planes to U.S. customers becomes too costly or difficult, Airbus will prioritize other markets . This flexibility shields Airbus but could disadvantage European airlines that might otherwise get U.S.-made Boeing planes (if Europe retaliates, Boeing deliveries to EU carriers could face tariffs). Such tit-for-tat would raise aircraft prices globally or delay deliveries, hurting airline fleet plans. European plane-maker ATR or engine makers like France’s Safran and UK’s Rolls-Royce also have supply chains tied into the U.S. A trade tightrope is evident: one Reuters analysis noted that Boeing sends ~17% of its jets to Europe and Airbus about 12% to the U.S., so both sides have incentive to avoid ruining aerospace trade . Europe’s strategy may be to hold firm on defending its industries (possibly threatening counter-tariffs on U.S. goods/services) while trying to keep the travel and aviation links with America as undisrupted as possible.

- Hospitality and Services in Europe: European hotels, tour operators, and attractions could see a shifting mix of guests. With potentially fewer American visitors (if U.S. outbound dips or Europe gets caught in the rhetorical crossfire), businesses might lean more on intra-European tourism – which fortunately has rebounded strongly post-pandemic. The EU’s large domestic travel market (e.g. Germans vacationing in Spain, French in Italy) can sustain many hospitality sectors if global visitors wane slightly. The higher cost of imported goods due to tariffs (for example, if European hotels import American bourbon, or U.S. hotels import French wine with 200% tariffs – those kinds of cross-imports get pricier) could alter supply choices. A “buy local” ethos might strengthen: European hotels and restaurants might source more local products to avoid tariffed items, aligning with sustainability trends too. European online travel agencies and booking platforms will adjust algorithms to promote destinations with fewer international barriers at the moment. Also noteworthy: Europe’s visa policies (like Schengen) might be leveraged as a competitive advantage – the EU could expedite tourist visas for certain nationals to lure them, especially if the U.S. imposes tougher screening on those same nationals.

In essence, the EU’s travel industry stands to lose some business from a fractured transatlantic relationship and a slowdown in global travel, but Europe also remains a highly desired destination that could capture tourism redirected from the U.S. The net effect for Europe depends on how far the tit-for-tat trade actions go. If Europe itself enters a trade war with the U.S. (e.g. over car tariffs or digital taxes), then we might see sharper declines in U.S.–EU travel in both directions, compounding the pain. If, however, Europe can maintain diplomatic poise – protesting U.S. tariffs through the WTO but not an all-out tariff war – it may actually benefit by comparison, appearing more welcoming to international travelers and preserving relatively stronger travel growth. European tourism officials are thus emphasizing messages of openness and are monitoring sentiment closely. As Accor’s CEO noted, the perception issue is real: a “bad buzz” can significantly reduce bookings . Europe will want to avoid that buzz turning on itself.

China: Outbound Slowdown, Nationalist Headwinds, and Asia-Pacific Ripples

China’s travel sector has grown explosively in recent decades, but a U.S.-led trade war casts a long shadow over Chinese tourism and business travel, both outbound and inbound. As one of the primary targets of U.S. tariffs (now facing duties exceeding 30% on its exports ), China is experiencing economic and psychological effects that feed directly into travel trends. Here’s how intensified trade tensions could impact China’s travel industry:

- Chinese Outbound Tourism: Chinese tourists are a critical driver of global tourism, known for their high spending abroad. In 2018–2019, the U.S.–China trade war had an “unquestionable” negative impact on this flow . The current escalation threatens to hit outbound travel even harder. Firstly, the economic impact: tariffs and counter-tariffs are slowing China’s growth and putting pressure on the yuan. A weaker yuan means international trips become more expensive for Chinese consumers. Combined with uncertainties about jobs and income, the average middle-class household in China is likely to scale back discretionary spending like long-haul travel. We could see Chinese outbound tourism growth stagnate or even decline in 2025 for the first time (excluding the pandemic), especially to long-haul destinations. Travel agencies in China have already reported a drop in inquiries for U.S. tours since rhetoric heated up. Secondly, there’s a nationalist sentiment component. The Chinese government has considerable influence over tourism flows – through official travel advisories, state media narratives, and even direct administrative controls (e.g. suspension of group tour approvals). In mid-2019, China’s Ministry of Culture and Tourism did issue a safety advisory against travel to the U.S., citing incidents of gun violence and harassment . A renewed advisory or even unofficial propaganda campaign could dissuade millions of Chinese from considering U.S. travel “until the situation improves.” We’re already seeing a preference shift: more Chinese travelers are opting for destinations within Asia or those deemed friendly. For example, Japan received a record 980,000 Chinese visitors in a single month in early 2025, more than double the previous year – a sign that Chinese tourists are reallocating their trips, in that case partly due to a weaker yen and safety issues elsewhere, but it illustrates how quickly Chinese tourism demand can pivot. If the U.S. is perceived as antagonistic, Chinese tourists might favor Europe, Southeast Asia, or the Middle East instead, diverting their tourism dollars away from America. Destinations like Thailand, which traditionally attract many Chinese, will be watching closely; any decline in Chinese outbound travel or redirection to competing locales (like Japan or Singapore) can cause those countries to adjust strategies .

- Inbound and Domestic Travel in China: International inbound tourism to China (foreign visitors coming to China) might also be affected. Trade wars often go hand-in-hand with broader geopolitical friction – and indeed, U.S.–China tensions raise security concerns. The U.S. government has already been warning businesses about arbitrary enforcement and exit bans in China , which could discourage American business travelers or tourists from visiting. If relations deteriorate further, China might see fewer Western visitors overall, not just Americans – for instance, Europeans and others might be cautious if there’s an atmosphere of U.S.–China confrontation. This could hurt China’s inbound tourism recovery after its long COVID closure. However, China’s tourism industry can fall back on its vast domestic travel market, which the government has been actively promoting (especially during periods when outbound travel was restricted). In a scenario of restricted international exchange, Beijing may double down on campaigns like “Travel in China” to boost local economies and compensate for lost foreign spending. Domestic tourism in China could therefore see a boost – which helps Chinese hotels and attractions, but doesn’t benefit global airlines or overseas destinations that previously welcomed Chinese groups. It’s a form of adaptation: keeping Chinese tourists (and their money) at home as an implicit retaliation against countries seen as hostile.

- Business Travel and MICE: The trade war directly curtails a lot of business-related travel between the U.S. and China. Negotiations have stalled, joint conferences are canceled or moved to neutral locations, and executives from both sides are wary of traveling due to political scrutiny. American corporations are reconsidering sending staff to China given the risk of being caught up in tit-for-tat actions (for example, in 2023–24, China detained some consulting firm staff and raided offices as a counter to U.S. intelligence concerns). Likewise, Chinese business delegations to the U.S. have faced visa delays or denials at times. If this worsens, we might see a near freeze in U.S.–China business travel, except for essential supply chain management. That affects airlines (fewer lucrative business class seats filled on transpacific routes) and cities that host trade fairs. Notably, some major trade shows that used to shuttle between the U.S. and China (auto shows, tech fairs) may split or avoid one country. Hong Kong, traditionally a gateway, is also impacted: with U.S.–China tension, Hong Kong’s role as an East-West business hub diminishes, leading to fewer conferences and incentive trips there. The MICE (Meetings, Incentives, Conferences, Exhibitions) segment in China will likely refocus on intra-Asia events, and Chinese companies might favor Dubai or Singapore for international gatherings instead of Las Vegas or London, depending on geopolitical winds.

- Airlines and Aircraft in China: Chinese airlines and aviation planners are in a delicate position. U.S. tariffs on Chinese goods don’t directly tax airline operations, but any reduction in Chinese travelers to the U.S. will cause Chinese carriers (like Air China, China Eastern, China Southern) to adjust capacity on those routes. They may redeploy planes to regional routes or slow down aircraft purchases. Significantly, China has a big stake in aircraft manufacturing: it had been a major customer of Boeing, but amid the trade war, China has incentives to reduce dependence on U.S. planes. We already saw hints of this when China delayed certification of Boeing’s 737 MAX and placed a big order for Airbus in 2019. Now, with new tensions, China could explicitly favor Airbus for new orders – Airbus’s large deal with Chinese airlines in 2023 suggests this trend. Moreover, China’s own commercial jet (the C919) made by COMAC is entering service; the government might accelerate its adoption to replace foreign aircraft, aligning with the “self-reliance” push in tech and aviation. If Boeing is effectively shut out of new Chinese orders due to politics, that’s a severe long-term impact on Boeing (the Chinese market was projected to be one of the largest for aircraft sales). Conversely, if China imposes tariffs or sanctions on U.S. aviation products (for example, Boeing planes or GE engines), Chinese airlines could face higher costs or difficulty maintaining their U.S.-made fleets. However, as of now, China’s response has been measured – they know completely severing aviation trade would hurt their airlines too. Instead, a likely scenario is China delaying or withholding approvals for Boeing purchases, indirectly punishing U.S. aerospace. For instance, during the 2018 trade standoff, state-owned airlines in China reportedly held off finalizing Boeing deals. We can expect similar caution going forward, which helps Airbus and maybe Russia’s Irkut (MS-21 jets) fill the gap.

- Asia-Pacific Travel Ripple Effects: China’s reduced outbound travel has knock-on effects for the wider Asia-Pacific. Many countries (Thailand, Vietnam, Japan, Australia, etc.) rely on Chinese tourists for a big chunk of their tourism revenue. If Chinese outbound trips drop overall due to economic hardship, those economies feel the pain too – a “global spillover” we will detail in the next section. Already, as Chinese travelers pivot away from certain destinations, competition for Chinese tourists is heating up between countries like Japan, Thailand, and others . Trade tensions also realign regional travel partnerships: China might deepen tourism ties with sympathetic countries (for example, easing visas with countries in its Belt and Road network) while making it harder for citizens to visit nations aligned with the U.S. Similarly, wealthy Chinese individuals may choose to invest in vacation homes or longer stays in places like Dubai or Singapore as relations with the West strain – affecting high-end travel and hospitality markets in those locales.

In summary, China is likely to see a significant outbound tourism slowdown in a protracted trade war, hurting destinations worldwide that have come to depend on Chinese visitors. The Chinese travel industry’s focus will turn inward (boosting domestic travel) and toward friendlier shores. This realignment not only alters travel industry revenues but is also a bellwether of the broader decoupling between East and West. However, one should not underestimate the Chinese traveler’s adaptability: if tensions ease even slightly, there is huge pent-up demand to see the world. In the late 2010s, despite trade woes, over 3 million Chinese still visited the U.S. annually (though that number was dipping). The key will be whether political barriers make it practically difficult to travel (visa issues, flight route cuts) or if it remains mostly a question of sentiment and economics. By 2026, if trade conflicts are unresolved, we might see a new normal of Chinese travel where regional trips dominate and far-flung journeys are rare – a reversal of globalization’s boost to wanderlust.

Global Spillovers and Sector-Wide Synthesis

The effects of an intensified U.S.-led trade war are not confined to the countries directly in the crossfire; they ripple throughout the global travel ecosystem. Here we synthesize the broader implications across regions and sectors, and examine how the travel industry as a whole is responding:

- Global Tourism Growth Slows: Prior to these trade tensions, the World Tourism Organization (UNWTO) and World Travel & Tourism Council (WTTC) had projected robust growth in international travel through the mid-2020s as the world recovered from COVID-19. Those projections are now being tempered. A full-blown trade war could even tip the global economy toward recession, which historically correlates with a decline in travel demand. Oxford Economics finds that under an “expanded trade war” scenario, global GDP in 2025 would be significantly lower, directly translating to millions fewer international trips . Destinations from Thailand to Turkey to the Caribbean that rely on travelers from the big economies will see fewer arrivals if Americans, Chinese, and Europeans all tighten their belts. For example, a beach resort in Bali might see fewer Chinese tour groups; a safari lodge in Kenya could get fewer American retirees than expected – small drops in each source market that add up globally. The spillover is industry-wide: airlines might reduce flight frequencies on underperforming routes, hotels might postpone new openings, and tourism-dependent workers (from tour guides to cab drivers) could face underemployment.

- Trade Policy Uncertainty = Volatility in Travel Prices: Trade disputes introduce volatility not just in currency exchange rates but also in commodity prices. Oil prices could swing depending on the growth outlook – interestingly, a trade-war-induced economic slowdown might depress oil demand, lowering fuel prices. This can benefit airlines’ operating costs in the short run (cheaper jet fuel) and potentially keep airfares somewhat in check even as other costs rise. On the flip side, tariffs can increase the cost of aircraft themselves (as discussed) and spare parts, which over time can put upward pressure on ticket prices. Travelers may also encounter higher costs for travel goods: luggage made in China, or European wines at duty free, etc., become more expensive with tariffs . These price signals may alter consumer behavior – e.g. opting for closer destinations, shorter stays, or downgrading to cheaper accommodations. Overall, the pricing environment in travel becomes more unpredictable, complicating planning for both travelers and businesses.

- Shifts in Travel Patterns and Alliances: We are likely to witness a geopolitical reordering of travel flows. “Travel corridors” might strengthen among allied or economically integrated countries while weakening between rivals. For instance, as noted, Chinese tourists might favor Russia, Southeast Asia, or Middle Eastern destinations more, while American tourists could pivot to domestic travel or visits to politically allied nations. Canadians are already favoring domestic and non-U.S. travel due to the tariff spat . At a larger scale, tourism boards in various countries are re-strategizing marketing budgets: those expecting fewer American visitors may invest more in courting Europeans or vice versa. Airlines and hotel chains form alliances to tap into new markets – for example, Gulf carriers and Asian destinations might collaborate on promotions to attract Chinese and avoid reliance on Europe-US traffic. We may also see regional tourism blocks form, where neighboring countries coordinate promotions to offset lost long-haul visitors. In Africa and Latin America, if U.S. and European visitors decline (due to economic woes), these regions might turn to intra-regional travel or look for visitors from wealthier emerging markets that are less entangled in the trade war (such as wealthy travelers from India or the Middle East).

- Sector-Specific Vulnerabilities: Each segment of the travel industry has its weak points in this scenario. Airlines are vulnerable due to high fixed costs and thin margins – a slight drop in load factors (passengers per flight) can swing them into losses. They are also exposed to currency risk; for example, a strong dollar vs. weak euro can hurt European carriers by reducing U.S. tourism, while helping U.S. carriers with outbound travel, and vice versa. Aircraft manufacturers like Boeing and Airbus are vulnerable to losing market access (Boeing in China, Airbus in U.S.) and to supply chain disruptions – aircraft have thousands of parts crossing borders, and tariffs or export controls on any crucial part (like avionics or materials) can slow production. Hotels and resorts are vulnerable on two fronts: demand and development costs. Luxury city hotels may see a dip in occupancy if international corporate travel dries up, while mid-scale hotels in highway or airport locations suffer if domestic budget travelers cut trips. The development pipeline for new hotels is at risk if financing dries up due to economic uncertainty and if construction costs spike . Cruise lines (not explicitly mentioned so far) also face vulnerability – they rely on a global supply chain (ships built with international parts) and on customers from many nations. A trade war could mean higher costs to build and provision ships (e.g. tariffs on steel for shipbuilding, or food imports for cruise buffets) and potentially fewer Chinese or Europeans booking cruises. Travel tech and services (OTAs, car rentals, GDS systems) are not immune either; while they can be somewhat flexible (people will still book travel somewhere), a net reduction in transactions globally or shifts to more domestic trips (often with shorter booking windows and lower yields) can hurt their commission-based earnings.

- Adaptive Strategies Across the Industry: Faced with these challenges, the travel industry globally is adapting with remarkable resilience and creativity. A few notable strategies:

- Market Diversification: Destinations and companies are diversifying target markets to reduce reliance on any single country’s travelers. For example, when Chinese arrivals to the U.S. declined in 2018–19, American cities ramped up promotions in India and Latin America to attract other visitors. Similarly, Australia (which had tensions with China) started marketing more to India and Southeast Asia. This strategy is now standard – don’t put all your eggs in one basket of tourists.

- Cost Management and Operational Efficiency: Travel companies are tightening operations to weather an uncertain demand environment. Airlines are implementing fuel hedging and using more fuel-efficient aircraft to save costs. Some are considering consolidation; Willie Walsh of IATA even suggested Trump’s pressure was a “wake-up call” that could encourage much-needed consolidation in the airline industry . Hotels are using technology to automate services and reduce labor costs, and pausing non-essential renovations to avoid high import costs.

- Advocacy and Diplomacy: The travel industry isn’t just a bystander – it’s lobbying governments to ease the collateral damage. Industry groups like the U.S. Travel Association and counterparts in Europe and Asia are actively highlighting the economic contribution of tourism and urging policymakers to keep tourism out of the trade crossfire. There is precedent: in previous spats, certain sectors get carve-outs (for instance, the U.S. exempted some products under USMCA tariffs recognizing Canada/Mexico importance ). Travel lobbies want governments to understand that heavy-handed trade barriers can boomerang by deterring tourists and investors.

- Flexible Booking and Marketing: Sensing traveler hesitation, many airlines and hotels have introduced more flexible booking policies (low change fees, refundable rates) to keep people traveling even in uncertain times. Marketing has also shifted to emphasize value and experience over geopolitics – e.g., campaigns focusing on the safety and hospitality of destinations to counter negative news. Canadian airlines promoting the beauty of Canada’s own parks (as Trudeau encouraged ) is one example of turning patriotism into a tourism drive.

- Domestic Tourism Promotion: Almost every country involved is putting new emphasis on domestic tourism to offset international shortfalls. The U.S., China, and others are running “see your own country” initiatives. This can partially buffer hotel and attraction revenues, though domestic tourists often spend less than foreign ones (who stay in hotels and spend on shopping). Still, in tough times, filling a theme park with local families at a discount is better than it sitting empty.

- Monitoring and Scenario Planning: Big players are using data to closely monitor travel bookings and economic indicators, ready to adjust capacity or strategy month-by-month. For instance, if data shows European bookings to the U.S. are sharply down, airlines might proactively cut some flights and redeploy aircraft to another region (rather than fly half-empty planes). The industry is more agile post-Covid, having learned to respond quickly to sudden demand shifts.

The global travel industry is inherently cyclical and historically has bounced back from shocks – whether oil crises, wars, or pandemics. A trade war is a different kind of challenge: more slow-burning and pervasive. The worst-case outcome would be a sustained global recession combined with a breakdown in international mobility (imagine a world where visas are harder to get, flights between major economies are fewer and costlier, and every country promotes “local only” ethos). This would fundamentally alter the open international tourism model of the last 30 years. The best-case outcome is that cooler heads prevail: trade disputes get negotiated before too much damage is done, leaving only a temporary dent in travel trends (a year or two of slower growth, after which pent-up demand could fuel a strong rebound). Many analysts lean towards a middle scenario – some damage is already occurring, 2025 will be a tough year for global travel growth (perhaps well below the 7% annual growth the WTTC had forecast pre-trade war), but adaptation and partial resolutions will prevent a complete collapse of international travel.

In conclusion, the travel industry is both a casualty and a barometer of the U.S.-led trade wars. From tourist selfies in Times Square to business class seats on transpacific flights, the effects of tariffs and tensions are making their presence felt. While demand softens and costs rise in the short term, the industry’s adaptive strategies aim to sustain connectivity and commerce across borders. The final outcome will hinge on the duration and intensity of the trade conflicts. Should diplomacy succeed, travel can quickly become a conduit for renewed goodwill and economic vitality. But if barriers harden, we may enter a period of more insular travel patterns, with the industry forced to retrench until fair winds return. The coming 2025–2026 period will be critical in determining which path the global travel sector takes – one of resilience and partial recovery, or one of extended turbulence. The hope among travel leaders is that even amid trade wars, the fundamental human desire to explore and do business across borders will prevail, and thus they stand ready to adapt, whatever the policy environment may bring.