Several East African destinations have already or are in the process of introducing mandatory travel insurance policies, sparking pushback from the tourism industry.
Zanzibar was first to move, imposing a mandatory insurance policy costing US$44 (€37) per adult and US$22 (€19) per child. This fee, charged regardless of existing personal coverage, has already prompted some tour operators to shift to alternative destinations.
“We’ve had guests who decided against visiting Zanzibar purely because of the insurance cost,” says Onne Vegter, MD of Wild Wings Safaris. “It feels like a tourism tax.”
According to many in the industry, the policy doesn’t provide meaningful value. “None of our guests have benefited from it,” Vegter adds. “It’s never used. They rely on their own trusted cover.” Worse still, it may invalidate existing policies as some insurers exclude claims where another policy is in place.
Recently, the Kenyan government announced that it could also be moving in a similar direction, requiring non-Kenyan residents staying under 12 months to register for travel health insurance under the Social Health Authority.
This measure, launched as part of the country’s Universal Health Coverage agenda, is intended to boost health equity and reduce the burden on public systems. In November 2023, Kenya’s Insurance Regulatory Authority was directed to identify private insurers to underwrite these policies.
Tanzania has also announced plans for a new compulsory travel insurance policy for all foreign visitors as part of the 2025/26 fiscal budget. The policy requires tourists to pay US$44 (€37) per person for insurance upon arrival – again regardless of existing coverage. At this stage, it is unclear whether travellers visiting Zanzibar will need to pay the additional insurance fee on top of the policy paid upon entry to Tanzania.
Industry pushback
Critics argue that travellers should not be forced into purchasing government-approved insurance, especially when most already have reliable private coverage.
The Tourism Confederation of Tanzania (TCT) has issued a statement expressing deep dissatisfaction with the policy and lack of consultation with the industry. TCT warns that the policy could severely damage Tanzania’s tourism brand, especially at a time when the region is trying to recover from pandemic losses and regain market share.
“Tanzania is now increasingly seen as engaging in stealth taxation. The insurance lacks the credibility, transparency and global standards expected by experienced international travellers,” says Lathifa Sykes, TCT Executive Director.
There is no harmonisation between Zanzibar’s existing scheme and mainland Tanzania’s proposed version, she adds.
“FIT segments, particularly high-value tourists who already carry insurance, are increasingly frustrated. Some agents have described Tanzania as becoming like a ‘checkout aisle’ where new charges appear at every step,” Sykes says.
She also notes lack of clarity with no formal documentation on coverage, claims procedures, reinsurance backing or recognised medical providers.
With no implementation roadmap, no stakeholder engagement and no clear communication from government, operators are left scrambling to inform guests and prepare for new costs mid-booking.
In addition, there is fear that it will make Tanzania less competitive. “While countries like Namibia allow tourists to show proof of existing insurance without mandating local coverage, Kenya, Rwanda, Botswana, Zambia and South Africa currently do not impose such mandatory travel insurance, opting instead for optional or internationally accepted models,” Sykes explains.
Richard Trillo, East Africa Manager at Expert Africa, says: “There’s a fine line between ensuring traveller safety and turning visitors away. The moment these policies begin to feel like revenue-generating tactics rather than protective measures, trust is lost.”
Travellers are already dealing with multiple entry requirements, he says. “When you add opaque, compulsory charges that offer no clear benefit, it becomes a disincentive. Tourists don’t see it as safety; they see it as being nickel-and-dimed.”
However, operators like Natural World Safaris have adopted a different stance on the matter.
Byron Thomas, Senior Destination Specialist at Natural World Safaris, says: “Most clients aren’t even aware of it, to be honest, until they’ve already made an inquiry, booked their trip and received our post-booking paperwork. As such, we don’t believe it significantly impacts tourist confidence or influences destination choices.”
