We’re doing something unusual for a tourism company: we’re publishing every baht we paid in corporate income taxes last year.
We aren’t trying to start a fight. We just believe that transparency matters. But when we compared our numbers to a sample of industry data, we discovered something that completely changed how we think about sustainable tourism.
Why We’re Doing This: The Economic Distribution Disclosure Initiative (EDDI)
This disclosure forms part of our Economic Distribution Disclosure Initiative (EDDI). Phase 1 mapped the direct economic benefit of over 80 of our day tours and half-day tours. This publication (think of it like Phase 1.5), starts to look at how corporate income tax reinforces or erodes local contribution. Phase 2, planned for later this year, will publish details on our non-tour related economic contribution and leakages from our corporate operations, setting an unparalleled new standard for accountability in tourism and creating shared value for tourism destinations.
The Thailand Context: Where Tax Meets Tourism
Thailand is estimated to lose around 5.6% of GDP annually to tax gaps, the difference between what should be collected and what actually is, according to the World Bank’s 2023 assessment. For context, that’s more than the entire national education budget disappearing each year, and five times more than the annual cost of Thailand’s National Energy Plan (NEP) requiring 2.9 trillion baht from 2024-2037 to transform the energy sector and achieve 51% renewable energy by 2037.
Meanwhile, the Tax Justice Network calculates that multinational corporations cost Thailand $1.93 billion annually in lost tax revenue through profit-shifting alone. That’s around ฿62 billion every year that should be funding public services.
The numbers get more stark when you look at tourism specifically. The notorious “zero-dollar tours” scandal alone involved an estimated $2 billion in undeclared revenue annually at its peak, representing hundreds of millions in lost tax revenue from just one scheme. And the problem runs far deeper across the entire industry. Government investigations in 2024-2025 uncovered 820 illegal nominee businesses causing ฿12.5 billion in losses, with European companies, not Chinese operators, representing the majority of foreign ownership violations. Tour operators and DMCs routinely use Thai nationals as nominee shareholders, listing accountants and other employees as company shareholders, to circumvent the 49% foreign ownership law while maintaining actual control and total financial benefit.
What We Found When We Looked at Our Industry
Using publicly available filings from Thailand’s Department of Business Development, we analysed 17 major licensed tour operators and DMCs (including Tripseed). We expected companies with sustainability certifications to lead in responsible business practices.
We were wrong.
Here’s what THB 100 in reported tourist spending contributes to Thailand’s public services through corporate income tax:
- Tripseed: THB 2.36
- Sampled uncertified companies’ average: THB 1.13
- Sampled Travelife Partner average: THB 0.76
- Sampled B-Corporation certified average: THB 0.60
- Sampled Travelife Certified companies: THB 0.00
Our sample analysis found that all Travelife Certified companies examined, reported zero corporate income tax for 2024. We present this as an observed pattern requiring further research, not as evidence of misconduct.
Note: Category averages use the positive-tax subset (Method A, ratio-of-totals)
Our Numbers in Context
Tripseed contributes THB 2.36 for every THB 100 in revenue. That’s:
- 3.1 times the sample average (THB 0.76)
- 3.1 times more than sampled Travelife Partner awarded companies
- 3.9 times what sampled B-Corps contribute (THB 0.60)
- Infinitely more than sampled Travelife Certified companies (THB 0.00)
Despite generating only 0.94% of sample revenue, we pay 3.83% of the positive-tax pool, a 4.08x over-contribution to our proportional share.
Breaking Down the Disparities
Our analysis revealed:
- 20% (3 of 15) of mid-to-large multinational operators recorded multi-million-baht profits while paying zero/negative corporate income tax.
- B-Corporation certified companies rank second-to-last in tax contributions among all categories
- Peers excluding Tripseed: 99.06% of revenue but 96.17% of the positive-tax pool.
- Travelife Partner (skew): 2 firms ≈95% of the category’s positive-tax pool (at 2.68% and 1.66% tax-to-revenue); the other six combined ≈5%.
The Uncertified Leaders We Didn’t Expect
Among the 17 companies analysed, the top three contributors were surprising:
- 1st place: THB 2.68 per THB 100 (a Travelife Partner company, an outlier in that category)
- 2nd place: THB 2.36 per THB 100 (Tripseed, uncertified)
- 3rd place: THB 2.28 per THB 100 (another uncertified company)
Two of the top three contributors have no sustainability certifications (technically Tripseed still hold Travelife Partner status, but we are leaving, more on that later this year). Meanwhile, every single B-Corp and Travelife Certified company falls below THB 1.07 per THB 100.
The pattern holds no matter how you look at it. When we count only companies that actually paid tax, uncertified firms average 1.13 baht per 100 baht of revenue, compared to 0.60 baht for B-Corps. When we include everyone in the sample, even those reporting zero tax, the averages fall further — 0.72 baht for uncertified, still 0.60 baht for B-Corps, and 0.00 baht for Travelife Certified companies.
Patterns in Certification and Tax Contribution
Our analysis showed a negative association between sustainability certifications and tax contribution rates in our sample. We observe patterns, not causation. Various factors including business models, loss carryforwards, and timing affect tax payments.
The UN’s 2024 Financing for Sustainable Development Report identifies domestic revenue mobilisation as critical to closing the US$4 trillion annual SDG financing gap. The UNWTO’s recommendations on tourism and SDGs emphasise governance and economic contribution, yet most tourism certifications focus primarily on operational practices.
Why Tax-to-Revenue Matters More Than Tax Rates
Most companies tout their “effective tax rate”, taxes as a percentage of profits. But when you can legally minimise “profits” through management fees, royalties, and inter-company charges while extracting millions in revenue from destinations, that metric becomes meaningless.
Tax-to-revenue shows what actually stays in Thailand per tourist dollar to manage tourism’s impacts. The roads still need repair. The waste still needs management. The communities still need support.
The Stakes for All Stakeholders
Tax revenue doesn’t just fund tourist infrastructure. It supports:
- Local communities managing tourism’s pressures on housing, water, and public spaces
- Environmental protection addressing tourism’s ecological impacts
- Public health systems serving both residents and visitors
- Education and training developing local tourism workforce
- Cultural preservation maintaining heritage sites
When tourism companies minimise tax contributions, these stakeholders bear tourism’s costs without receiving proportional benefits.
The CSR Smokescreen
Overall, corporate philanthropy in Thailand is characterised by many one-off charitable initiatives, such as funding school buildings, community centres, or other infrastructure, rather than long-term philanthropic endowments. Too often these projects are designed to be photogenic for impact reports, but not sustainable for local use. We’ve seen this first-hand: a playground donated to a rural school by a DMC had quickly fallen into disrepair, leaving cracked metal and rusted bolts that turned a gift into a health hazard. For the local community, the real legacy wasn’t joy but ongoing maintenance costs they could not afford.
Here’s where it gets interesting. Research shows that corporate philanthropy can “significantly reduce” reputational damage from regulatory violations. In other words, CSR spending works as reputation insurance. Donate visibly here, extract invisibly there.
Supporting Genuine Philanthropy
Let’s be clear: we’re not against corporate philanthropy. We believe deeply in giving back. As a social purpose business registered with Social Enterprise Thailand, we reinvest a minimum of 50% of our profits into social and environmental initiatives. But here’s the crucial difference: this comes AFTER fulfilling our tax obligations, not instead of them.
Responsible tax practices must come first. CSR should amplify your contribution to society, not substitute for it. When companies minimise their tax contributions then point to CSR programs as evidence of their social responsibility, they’re essentially choosing which public goods to fund while starving democratically controlled public services. That’s not philanthropy; it’s a privatisation of public resource allocation.
True corporate responsibility means both paying your fair share of taxes AND investing in additional social initiatives. One doesn’t excuse the absence of the other. Democratic institutions, not corporate boards, should determine how public revenue serves community needs. CSR should be the extra mile you go after meeting your basic obligations, not a detour around them.
The Math of Extraction vs. Responsibility
Let’s be crystal clear about scale:
- A typical CSR initiative for an annual report: US$10-50k.
And that’s often the entire CSR budget for a year, spread across multiple projects and sometimes multiple countries. The benefit to any single community is usually modest. - Potential tax uplift in Thailand from our sample alone (if every firm in our anonymised 2024 sample matched the top observed 2.68% tax-to-revenue ratio):
≈ THB 111.6m (≈ US$3.2-3.5m). - Translation: That’s ~60-300× bigger than an average single firm’s CSR budget, and still ~4× larger than if every company in the sample ran a US$50k project at the same time.
And here’s the kicker: this isn’t even all of Thailand’s tourism industry. It’s just our anonymised sample of 17 travel companies. Imagine the magnitude if we scaled this across hundreds or thousands of operators in Thailand, and then across every country in the region.
What makes this harder is that our numbers only reflect companies that declare revenue in Thailand. In reality, some industry structures, like offshore hubs or nominee shareholders, mean that a significant share of Thailand-attributable travel revenue, from companies that operate here, never even appears in local accounts. So, our analysis likely understates the true gap by a wide margin.
A school library project makes for great photos. But the equivalent in tax could fund entire education programs. CSR matters, but when small projects are used to overshadow far larger shortfalls in tax contribution, that isn’t genuine contribution.
It’s reputation laundering.
What Real Contribution Looks Like
This is why we are publishing our tax data as part of our Economic Distribution Disclosure Initiative. Not because we’re perfect, but because transparency is the foundation of accountability. When companies spend a fraction on CSR of what they avoid in taxes, when they build facilities without funding their upkeep, when they claim “sustainability” while extracting value from communities, that’s not contribution, it’s extraction with better marketing.
The math is simple: If you’re avoiding ฿100 in taxes and spending ฿10 on CSR initiatives that communities then have to maintain, you’re not giving back. You’re taking ฿90 and leaving communities with ongoing costs they never asked for.
Join Us
To DMCs and tour operators, operating on the ground: Join us in moving beyond greenwashing. If you truly believe in sustainable tourism, prove it with transparency. Publish your tax data using GRI 207 standards. Show where you’re registered, where you operate, and what you contribute. No more grandstanding about “giving back” while extracting value. If smaller companies like us can do this, what’s your excuse? Real sustainability includes fiscal responsibility. Be brave enough to show your real numbers.
To international travel buyers: Due diligence means more than checking licenses. Ask your DMC partners: Where do they pay taxes? What percentage of revenue stays in-country? How do you measure economic contribution? Your procurement shapes the industry. Use that power to reward genuine contribution over extracted value.
To travellers: The tour operator or travel agent you book with makes critical choices about which local partners to use in each destination. These partnerships determine whether your travel spending supports or extracts from local communities. Ask your booking agent: Do they verify their local partners’ tax compliance? Can they show how much of your payment stays in the destination? Do they work with DMCs that publish financial transparency reports? Responsible travel starts with choosing operators who take due diligence seriously and partner with companies that demonstrably contribute to public services. Your choices reward either transparency or extraction.
To certification bodies: You claim to certify “governance,” “community development,” and “economic sustainability.” Where’s the evidence? Most programs barely address fiscal governance or legal compliance. If you’re certifying responsibility, that must include responsibility to public finances. Either require multi-year, country-by-country tax transparency and verify legal compliance including ownership structures, or stop claiming you measure economic sustainability. Your credibility depends on closing this gap.
Moving Forward
Thailand’s tourism sector generated over THB 2 trillion in 2019 (pre-pandemic peak). If all operators matched our 2.36% tax-to-revenue ratio instead of the sample average of 0.76%, Thailand would gain billions in additional resources for education, healthcare, and infrastructure which would benefit all stakeholders, locals and tourists alike.
This isn’t about perfection. Different business models, genuine losses, and market conditions affect tax payments. But transparency allows for honest conversation about who contributes what.
We’ve published every number, every calculation, every comparison. This is responsible tourism with the marketing removed.
Who’s next?
Access our complete 2024 Tax Transparency & Industry Leadership Report.
Methodology and GRI 207-compliant disclosures included.
For further updates on our Economic Distribution Disclosure Initiative covering our complete economic footprint, subscribe to our newsletter below.
