Since the resort tax began in 2022, the Krasnodar region has seen a notable rise in revenue. Official figures show a fivefold increase in income from resort fees collected in hotels, yet there is a striking gap between the number of vacationers and those who actually pay the tax. This discrepancy is tied to exemptions and to how statistics are calculated, a point repeatedly referenced by regional authorities and industry analysts (official press service reports).
In 2022, Kuban’s income from resort fees reached 747 million rubles. The previous year, 2021, brought in 165 million rubles, meaning the revenue grew by roughly 4.5 times. The 2022 result stands out as a record within a five-year period of the resort tax experiment. Analysts point out that part of this growth stems from an increased tax rate, in addition to more tourists paying the fee.
Data show that about 3.6 million travelers paid the facility fee in the Kuban during the year, representing a 16 percent rise from the prior year. Overall, roughly 17.4 million visitors spent time in the region over the year, highlighting the region’s strong tourist draw despite the fee structure.
The gap between paying visitors and total tourists is explained by several factors. Exemptions apply to certain categories, and some observers suggest the way statistics are compiled may skew results. In Sochi, for example, day tourists, guests in short-term stays, apartment renters, campers, and property owners in resort towns may be counted as visitors even if they do not pay the tourism tax. Market participants also acknowledge a gray-area dynamic, driven by competitiveness and reporting practices that may influence the recorded figures.
In Crimea, leadership signals a cautious stance on the resort tax. In early December, Vladimir Konstantinov, president of the State Council, stated that republican authorities plan to extend the moratorium on implementing a resort fee in the region. He clarified that authorities are not categorically opposed to a resort tax, but current conditions make it premature to enforce one in Crimea at this time. This stance reflects broader regional considerations about how such fees affect tourism flows and local economies (official statements).