Some European companies are increasingly hesitant to send employees to the United States, driven by a complex set of factors, including evolving immigration policies, heightened scrutiny by border control authorities, and growing concerns over employee safety. This shift reflects a broader climate of uncertainty following significant policy changes during the Trump administration, which has led to fears about travel restrictions and potential detentions.
Despite some businesses maintaining regular travel schedules to the U.S., particularly in sectors like engineering and accounting, others engage in more politically sensitive activities and express valid concerns regarding employee welfare. They have begun implementing new travel protocols, advising employees to be cautious when bringing electronic devices and suggesting alternate routes into the U.S., such as traveling through Canada. In more extreme cases, companies are urging employees to consider attending conferences and other professional events virtually rather than risk potential complications at the border.
Business travel constitutes a crucial revenue stream for the U.S. economy. According to a report from the Global Business Travel Association (GBTA), spending in this sector reached approximately $421 billion in 2022, generating about $119 billion in tax revenue. This activity supports an estimated 6 million jobs and accounts for a significant percentage of airline profits, often between 50% to 75%. However, a recent survey of 900 global travel buyers indicated that 29% anticipate a decrease in business travel volumes at their firms by 2025 due to U.S. policies related to travel and tariffs. This declining optimism is compounded by broader trends that predict a downturn in international tourism, estimated to result in an economic loss of $12.5 billion in spending partially attributable to negative perceptions surrounding U.S. trade and immigration policies.
The complexities of U.S. border control and visa issuance have escalated tensions since the beginning of the Trump presidency. Reports have surfaced highlighting prolonged detentions of foreign visitors, escalating the apprehension among international travelers. The White House has made clear its intent to enforce stringent vetting processes for those seeking entry into the United States. This wave of scrutiny has also affected the academic sector, where relations between the U.S. government and the scholarly community have soured following decisions to halt the issuance of international student visas and aggressive revocation of visas for certain groups, particularly students from China. Instances of foreign students facing detainment based on perceived political affiliations have further fueled this unease.
Prashray Kala, a partner at the management consultancy Everest Group, remarked that international travelers are increasingly concerned about visiting the U.S. due to enhanced scrutiny, which includes background checks on social media activity and incidents of detention, even for individuals with valid documentation. He noted that those with significant online visibility are particularly cautious, especially in light of the recently announced “Catch and Revoke” policy. This policy stipulates that individuals holding a U.S. visa could lose their immigration status after any violation of U.S. laws, regardless of severity, effectively heightening the stakes for those traveling to the U.S.
A European fund manager who frequently travels for business expressed concerns that changing political sentiments could impact his travel plans more than formal policies. He described a significant shift in the ease of travel previously afforded by the Electronic System for Travel Authorization (ESTA), reflecting a growing sentiment among international travelers who express trepidation about potential detours in their plans due to immigration authorities’ evolving attitudes.
An executive from an international non-governmental organization (NGO) based in London shared that the organization has implemented a new travel protocol for employees traveling to the U.S. This policy, which surpasses their usual requirements, addresses concerns about physical safety and data security for staff involved in investigative work covering sensitive topics such as climate change and corporate malpractice. The organization’s chief executive indicated that while preparations for such travel should not raise significant alarms, the need to implement heightened security protocols for trips to the U.S. feels disconcerting and unexpected.
Such protocols might include instructing employees to use “burner” phones—devices solely for travel use—to mitigate the risk of digital surveillance and preparing them for intense scrutiny regarding their travel intentions or prior publications. Such adjustments indicate a shift in how organizations prepare their employees for travel to what was previously considered a secure destination.
In addition to feedback from NGO executives, academic researchers have also reported increased caution. A researcher from Switzerland highlighted the strategic advice provided to their team, suggesting they enter the U.S. through Canada whenever feasible or opt for virtual participation in conferences to avoid visa complications. Though some colleagues have traveled to the U.S. successfully, others have experienced prolonged questioning at the border, leading to a decision by some to refrain from attending significant summer conferences.
Amidst these diverse experiences, respondents across various sectors echoed a prevailing sentiment of uncertainty surrounding U.S. travel. One NGO executive articulated the challenge of navigating this climate of apprehension, noting the tendency to allocate time and resources toward preparing for potential risks that may not materialize, weighing the seriousness of apprehensions against the broader political backdrop.
The interaction between evolving U.S. travel policy and international relations has broader implications. The growing reluctance among European companies to send employees to the U.S. may create ripple effects in business sectors that rely heavily on cross-border interaction, potentially reshaping future investment decisions and altering the landscape for international relationships. As such, while certain industries may continue to thrive, others may face challenges due to the complex and shifting dynamics behind U.S. travel policies and the consequences of stringent border control measures.
This evolving situation underscores the pressing need for businesses and travelers alike to adapt to a more complex and possibly fraught environment when dealing with U.S.-based operations.