Loyalty carries a penalty
Returning repeatedly means paying repeatedly. Family visits and frequent travel accumulate a cost that an occasional visitor does not face to the same extent. [2]
Canada ↔ Colombia · A relationship that deserves better
Coming back to Colombia
shouldn’t mean
paying all over again.
We want to visit Colombia, reunite with our families and spend at local businesses. Charging again at every entry penalizes the very visitors who want to return.
The fee concerns Canadian travellers who are subject to it. Exemptions apply. This comparison is about biometrics, not the full cost of a visa. ↗
The difference is how often you pay
≠
Where is the equivalence?
Amounts are in different currencies. This is not a conversion at today’s exchange rate.
01 / The issue
The same justification.
Two very different rules.
Colombia expressly refers to Canada’s 85 CAD biometric fee to justify its charge. Our objection is to the repetition: matching a reference price does not make the treatment equivalent.
| What is compared | Canada: biometrics | Colombia: Canadian entry fee |
|---|---|---|
| Reference amount | 85 CAD per person [6] | 270,000 COP per chargeable entry [1] |
| Frequency | Data normally reusable for 10 years [5] | A new payment for every chargeable entry [2] |
| Family | 170 CAD cap for eligible families applying together [6] | Charged for each non-exempt person; no family cap in the reviewed rules [1][2] |
| What is excluded | The visitor visa application costs an additional 100 CAD [7] | Flights, accommodation and other fees or procedures |
Six reasons to review this policy
Families multiply the bill
Four non-exempt travellers pay 1,080,000 COP for one shared arrival. Three trips by the same group total 3,240,000 COP at the 2026 rate. [1]
A welcome that can put people off
A charge perceived as unfair can bring bad publicity, fewer recommendations and bookings elsewhere. This is a risk to the destination’s image, not a loss already measured.
A public assessment is needed
We ask for fee revenue to be compared with collection costs and possible effects on visits and spending. The cited rules do not quantify how many tourists this policy deters.
02 / The cost to Colombia
When travellers choose another country,
their spending follows them.
Our position is clear: this repeated charge is unfair and harms Colombia’s tourism image. It may push many Canadians to travel and spend elsewhere. The risk reaches hotels, restaurants, guides, drivers and shops that depend on welcoming visitors.
- 01
One fewer booking
Fewer room nights and tours booked.
- 02
Less local spending
Fewer meals, rides, purchases and services.
- 03
Fewer opportunities
Less income for local businesses and families.
“A policy that charges the visitor may end up costing the host.”
San Andrés · Providencia · Santa Catalina
The government itself recognizes the tourism argument.
“con el fin de promover estos destinos turísticos y potencializar el turismo”This is the resolution’s stated rationale for exempting the archipelago: promoting those destinations and boosting tourism. We ask for the benefits of easier return visits to Cartagena, Santa Marta, Medellín, Bogotá and other regions to be assessed too. [1][2]
+1.7%2024 → 2025
What we know — and what needs measuring
MinCIT reports 103,466 foreign tourists arriving from Canada in 2025, compared with 101,703 in 2024: a 1.7% increase. These are flows from Canada, not a count of travellers subject to this fee. The figure does not prove an exodus caused by the charge, nor does it rule out additional trips that might have taken place without it.
Read the official report, page 95 ↗We ask for a causal assessment: cancellations attributable to the fee, willingness to return, local spending and collection costs. We do not invent testimonials or loss figures.
03 / Put numbers to the problem
What does wanting to return cost?
Calculate the fee for your group. Count only people and entries that are subject to the charge.
Scenario using the constant 2026 fee. It does not reconstruct past payments or forecast future fees. Bank charges and other spending are excluded. [1]
Total of this fee5 × 1 × 270 000 COP
Proposal: one payment per person270 000 COP
Difference from a single payment1 080 000 COP
Illustration of our proposal, not a current exemption. Assumes all entries take place within ten years, with 270,000 COP used as a hypothetical one-time charge.
What if the trip is booked elsewhere?
Simulation of spending that would not reach Colombian businesses. Adjust the assumptions; these are not observed data or a forecast.
Local spending that would not take place3 000 000 000 COP
Fee associated with those same trips270 000 000 COP
Formulas: trips × local spending; trips × 270,000 COP. Assumes one non-exempt traveller and one entry per trip. The amounts are not subtracted: private spending, public revenue and GDP contribution are different concepts. The net economic effect requires more data.
04 / Where the fee comes from
This rule can change.
- Dec. 1, 2014
The charge begins
Resolution 2146 of 2014 sets this start date. [4]
- May 1, 2019
The charge is removed
The legal status notes record its repeal through Resolution 348 of 2019. [4]
- Nov. 2023
- 2024
The amount is set in Colombian pesos
Resolution 1422 sets 270,000 COP and a payment for every entry. [2]
- 2026
The amount is maintained
Resolution 0599 retains 270,000 COP and the listed exemptions. [1]
05 / Who is affected
Not every Canadian has to pay.
These are the exemptions listed in the 2026 resolution. Check that your circumstances meet the conditions and keep supporting documents.
Age
Under 14 and over 79. Being exactly 14 or 79 does not qualify for this age exemption.
Valid Colombian visa
Canadians holding a valid Colombian visa. This is different from an ordinary tourist entry permission.
Archipelago
Entry and stay destination in San Andrés, Providencia or Santa Catalina, with an onward ticket to the final destination shown on arrival.
Airport transit
Where transit does not involve entering Colombian territory.
Diplomats and crews
Diplomatic and consular agents, official personnel and beneficiaries with qualifying travel documents; international crews with verifiable supporting records.
Cancelled or rescheduled flight
Where the fee was already paid, the event is treated as a single entry; the rule does not create a refund entitlement.
The 2024 rule provides for refusal of entry when a required payment is not made. Asking for reform does not suspend the current obligation. Consult Migración Colombia about your specific case. [1][2]
Read the 2026 resolution (PDF) ↗06 / Our proposal
Reciprocity that lasts.
Tourism that thrives.
We ask Migración Colombia and the Foreign Ministry to review the frequency of payment, with an assessment of tourism effects by MinCIT.
One payment valid for ten years
Our primary request is to recognize payment for ten years, consistent with the temporary-residence biometrics used as the reference.
A reasonable cap
Alternatively, set a time-based and family cap to avoid multiplying charges at every return.
Public data and clear rules
Publish revenue, costs, exchange-rate methodology, exemptions and an assessment of tourism effects.
A request you can adapt
Copy it, add your real experience if you wish, and submit it yourself through an official channel. This website does not send requests or register signatures.
I request a review of the reciprocity fee imposed on Canadian citizens under Colombian regulations. Resolution 1422 of 2024 links the fee to Canadian biometrics and requires payment at each entry; Resolution 0599 of 2026 maintains the amount of 270,000 COP. IRCC states that biometrics for temporary residence are normally valid for ten years.
I ask that the Colombian payment remain valid for ten years or, alternatively, that a reasonable time-based and family cap be introduced. I also request publication of revenue, administrative costs and an assessment of effects on repeat visits and tourism spending.
The exemption for San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina is expressly justified by tourism promotion. I request an assessment of an equivalent approach for other regions. A fee perceived as unfair can generate bad publicity and encourage visitors to book other countries, potentially depriving Colombian businesses of local spending.
This request for reform recognizes Colombia’s immigration sovereignty and does not claim that a court has ruled the fee illegal. I request a reasoned response on the proportionality of the payment frequency and on the proposed alternatives.
Documentation: https://reciprocidadjusta.com/en/#fuentes
I ask that the Colombian payment remain valid for ten years or, alternatively, that a reasonable time-based and family cap be introduced. I also request publication of revenue, administrative costs and an assessment of effects on repeat visits and tourism spending.
The exemption for San Andrés, Providencia and Santa Catalina is expressly justified by tourism promotion. I request an assessment of an equivalent approach for other regions. A fee perceived as unfair can generate bad publicity and encourage visitors to book other countries, potentially depriving Colombian businesses of local spending.
This request for reform recognizes Colombia’s immigration sovereignty and does not claim that a court has ruled the fee illegal. I request a reasoned response on the proportionality of the payment frequency and on the proposed alternatives.
Documentation: https://reciprocidadjusta.com/en/#fuentes
The important questions
Is this a visa or a general tourist tax?
Does Canada charge only 85 CAD?
Are biometrics still valid after a refusal?
IRCC says yes: for a temporary visa or permit, the data normally remain valid for ten years even after a refusal. This does not waive a new visa application fee. [9]
Is 270,000 COP always equal to 85 CAD?
No. The COP amount was set using an exchange-rate analysis; its CAD value varies. The rules allow adjustments. This website does not quote a live exchange rate or add bank charges to the official amount. [2]
Was there consultation before the 2024 rule?
The text refers to a consultation from February 15 to 20, 2024, and states that no comments were received. A lack of comments does not by itself prove agreement from all travellers. [2]
Has a massive loss of tourists been proven?
Not in the cited sources. MinCIT reports a 1.7% increase in tourists from Canada in 2025. We raise a risk of diverted trips and ask for it to be measured; we do not attribute a nonexistent decline to this fee. [8]
Can I sign a petition here?
This version lets you copy and download a request and open official channels. It does not collect signatures or display a support counter. Sharing the page is not a signature.
Who is behind this initiative?
Reciprocidad Justa is an independent citizen initiative supporting a proportionate policy and ties between Canada and Colombia. It does not represent a government or process visas or immigration payments.
07 / Open documents
Check every claim.
Primary sources consulted September 12, 2026. Numbers in the text refer to this list. Proposals and simulations belong to this initiative.
- 01Open source ↗
Resolución 0599 de 2026 · Migración Colombia
Current amount and exemptions. Pages 6 and 7.
- 02Open source ↗
Resolución 1422 de 2024 · Cancillería
Frequency, biometric rationale, conditions and consultation. Articles 1–4.
- 03Open source ↗
Resolución 2676 de 2023 · Cancillería
Reintroduction in 2023 and the 85 CAD reference.
- 04Open source ↗
Resolución 2146 de 2014 · Cancillería
December 2014 start and May 2019 removal.
- 05Open source ↗
IRCC · When to give your biometrics — temporary residence
Temporary-residence biometric validity and exceptions.
- 06Open source ↗
IRCC · Biometrics — fees
85 CAD individual fee and conditional 170 CAD family cap.
- 07Open source ↗
IRCC · Citizenship and immigration application fees
A visitor visa application costs 100 CAD separately.
- 08Open source ↗
MinCIT · Informe sobre los acuerdos comerciales vigentes 2025–2026
Tourists from Canada: 103,466 in 2025; +1.7%. Page 95.
- 09Open source ↗
IRCC · Biometrics after a refused application
Biometric validity after a refusal.