To charge or not to charge? That is the question facing the UK’s National Museums

Summary

• National museums and galleries across the UK are under significant financial pressure.
• A recent independent review has proposed that institutions in England should limit free entry to UK residents – a recommendation accepted by the UK Culture Department.
• Alternatives worthy of consideration include a tourism levy and enhanced tax incentives for philanthropy.

Background

Overseas visitors to major museums in Paris, New York and the majority of major European cities would expect to pay an entry fee. The UK’s national museums are a notable exception. In 2001, the Labour Government introduced free entry for all visitors to the 15 museums and galleries in England sponsored by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS). The policy has been a powerful draw for England’s tourism and therefore income. Visits to previously charging institutions rose by 151% following the change. The devolved nations have their own parallel free entry arrangements.

However, in a recent independent review of Arts Council England, Baroness Margaret Hodge suggested that museums and galleries in England should consider limiting free entry to UK residents. This proposal comes in response to decreased public funding for the arts and rising operational costs. The funding that museums and galleries in England receive from the DCMS is not sufficient to cover their running costs, and overseas visitors – who make up 43% of the footfall at the major institutions – represent a potentially significant source of untapped revenue.

The financial pressures facing these institutions are clear. The question is whether charging tourists for entry is the most effective solution.

Practical difficulties

The European countries that currently charge overseas visitors a museum entry fee have one thing in common: national ID cards. Baroness Hodge’s recommendation relies on the introduction of this crucial yet controversial piece of infrastructure. This has been the subject of heated political debate in the UK, featuring in the King’s Speech earlier this month. However, this issue is unlikely to be resolved in the near future.

Even if national ID cards were introduced (a political hot potato), museums would have to front additional administrative costs in implementation, installing barriers, hiring more staff to check IDs, taking payments, and managing the inevitable queues. These additional costs will eat into the gains made by charging tourists an entry fee.

Moral challenges

The proposal to charge overseas visitors has faced significant backlash. For example, it has reignited the restitution debates about foreign artefacts held by institutions such as the British Museum. Free and universal access is one of the central arguments for keeping these items in the UK. 

What are some alternatives?

Tourism levy

One alternative is the introduction of a tourism levy, a small tax applied to overseas visitors on overnight stays. This model has already been adopted in several major European cities such as Paris, Venice, and Barcelona. If a proportion of these funds were ringfenced for the cultural sector, this could generate a meaningful and sustainable revenue stream for museums and galleries. New polling commissioned by the Art Fund suggests that nearly three quarters of the public support this proposal over introducing entry fees. 

Notably, as tourism and culture are devolved matters, the position on a tourism levy differs across the UK’s four nations. In Scotland, the Visitor Levy (Scotland) Act 2024 empowers Scottish local authorities to introduce a discretionary levy on overnight visitors. Edinburgh is expected to be among the first to adopt this policy later this year. The Welsh and UK Governments have consulted on this, but legislation has not yet been enacted. Northern Ireland has not introduced or proposed a visitor levy to date. A UK-wide tourism levy would therefore require either coordinated devolved legislation or intervention from Westminster. 

Enhanced tax incentives for benefactors

Philanthropy remains a vital source of income for museums and galleries. There is a strong case for enhancing the tax incentives available to those who give generously to the arts. Key existing measures include:

• Inheritance tax exemptions on gifts to charities;
• Cultural Gifts Scheme; and
• Acceptance in Lieu scheme. 

An expansion of these benefits and the introduction of new incentives would be welcomed by both the cultural and private client sectors. For donors, collectors, and those engaged in estate and succession planning, enhanced incentives could make philanthropic giving both more impactful and more tax efficient. These reforms would position England as one of the more attractive jurisdictions in which to make charitable donations to the arts, drawing international philanthropy and reinforcing the country’s standing as a global centre for culture and heritage.

Conclusion

Museums and galleries provide immense public benefit and deserve sustained public funding. However, current funding levels are not sufficient to sustain these institutions’ long-term futures. Charging overseas visitors may appear to be an attractive solution, but the difficulties outweigh the benefits. As highlighted by Jenny Waldman, the director of the Art Fund, ‘our free national museums are one of the great success stories of UK cultural policy… charging tourists at the door risks putting up barriers for everyone’.

The introduction of a tourism levy, with funds ringfenced for the cultural sector, represents a more workable and favourable alternative. Coupled with enhanced tax incentives for benefactors, it could help place the UK’s national museums on a firmer financial footing without compromising the open access that makes them exceptional.