IATA Calls for Fairer Approach to Inadmissible Passengers

Macao – The International Air Transport Association (IATA) called for a fairer balance of responsibility and costs between governments and airlines when passengers are refused entry on arrival.  

Airlines play an important role in preventing inadmissible passenger cases by checking travel documents before departure, but not every refusal can be prevented by an airline. Passengers can be refused entry for reasons beyond an airline’s reasonable control. These include cases where airlines do not have all the necessary information, complex fraud, changing migration trends, and government immigration or security decisions.

While rules agreed by governments through the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) stipulate that airlines are responsible for custody and care costs when passengers are refused entry because of improper documentation, a newly released IATA report (pdf) indicates a lack of transparency by governments in providing reasons for entry refusals. Together with that need for transparency for entry refusals, the report also highlights the need for better information before departure, and clearer allocation of responsibility and costs.

“Despite document checks by airlines, some travelers are refused entry at their destination. This can result in airlines bearing significant costs, including fines. Research shows that airlines often receive a bill or fine without any specification of the reason for inadmissibility. To help prevent recurrence, more transparency is essential. And in some cases, where airlines have done all that can be reasonably expected to ensure appropriate documentation, a fairer approach to sharing costs is needed,” said Nick Careen, IATA's Senior Vice President Operations, Safety and Security. 

What the Report Found

The report, based on a survey of 49 airlines and 22 border authorities, found:

• Why passengers are refused entry: Most airlines said that documentation and processing errors accounted for about 20–30% of inadmissible passenger cases.
• Lack of information: 40 of 49 airlines reported cases in which immigration authorities did not disclose why a passenger had been refused entry, leaving airlines to manage the passenger’s removal without knowing the reason for the decision.
• Airlines often pay: Under ICAO rules, airlines cover custody and care costs when passengers are refused entry because of improper documentation, while governments cover these costs when passengers are refused entry for other reasons. Yet airlines reported paying at least some costs that should have been borne by governments in more than 90% of cases.
• Operational disruption: Cases where an individual is denied entry to a country can lead to delays, rebooking, aircraft and crew issues, escort requirements, and lengthy coordination between airlines and authorities. All airlines said they had experienced operational delays related to inadmissible passengers.
• Significant costs: Average costs per passenger ranged from around $4,000 in North Asia to $14,000 in Europe.
• Wide variation of national rules: Responsibilities, services, removal timelines, and penalties vary considerably between countries, and sometimes between airports in the same country.

In one example of the costs involved, one survey participant noted that they were charged nearly EUR 60,000 (EUR 300/day for six months) for care while an inadmissible passenger was in government custody awaiting cooperation from the relevant embassy.

“This extreme case illustrates the need for a fairer solution. We’ll take responsibility when it is our error. But airlines should not face such large and open-ended costs when a situation is totally out of their control,” said Careen.

What IATA Is Calling for

IATA is urging governments to:

• Clarify responsibility: Distinguish between cases where an airline failed to take the necessary precautions and those beyond its reasonable control.
• Make penalties and costs proportionate: Link penalties and cost sharing to due diligence, control, and the specific reason for inadmissibility.
• Improve transparency: Tell airlines why a passenger was refused entry, within legal limits, so that they can understand what went wrong and help prevent recurrence.
• Strengthen prevention: Make greater use of interactive Advance Passenger Information (iAPI), digital verification, Immigration Liaison Officer support, and real-time escalation channels to resolve questions as early as possible.
• Improve coordination on removals: Ensure timely notification and effective cooperation between States and airlines when an inadmissible passenger needs to be removed.

“Governments and airlines want the same outcome: secure borders and smooth travel. The best approach is to establish whether a passenger is admissible as early as possible, before travel, while ensuring that when things do go wrong, responsibilities and costs reflect what each party can reasonably control. Better information, digital tools, and consistent application of global standards can help achieve both,” said Careen.

> Read the full report (pdf)

For more information, please contact:

Corporate Communications

Tel: +41 22 770 2967

Email: corpcomms@iata.org