Travel letters: Spain’s VAT on ship-board drinks

Value added? Not so much

Spain has found a convenient way to ease its troublesome budget deficit.

During a May transatlantic cruise, some 750 passengers on Holland America’s Prinsendam, including my wife and me, were notified that Spain had imposed a 7% value-added tax on shipboard purchases while in Spanish waters. The Prinsendam docked at the Spanish ports of Cádiz, A Coruña and Bilbao.

Of course, the VAT on-board would be in addition to the same tax we were charged for on-shore buys.

The Prinsendam’s hotel manager, Francois Birarda, told me the levy would apply only to beverages bought aboard. Still, this could contribute a nice little haul for Spain’s financial plight. As on all cruise ships, the Prinsendam’s bars were packed nightly, and wine with dinner is a ritual for many cruisers. Soft drinks were not free.

Adding to Spain’s good fortune, other cruise ships, some twice the size or more of our vessel, were anchored at the three ports. And think of those to come.

M.L. Stein, Irvine

Rail travel — the good and the bad

Jay Jones’ article about Las Vegas-L.A. rail [“Las Vegas Train: Lock or Longshot?” June 20] hit some good points but some controversial ones as well. Amtrak’s reluctance to restore service is puzzling. They mentioned new right of way, which is not necessary, because the Union Pacific tracks on which Amtrak once ran already exist. To restore service, it’s a simple matter of getting equipment and time slots in which to run. As far as Southern Californians abandoning their cars? Of course they would if given a viable option. An eight-hour train trip won’t do it, but a five-hour one would. We would get out of our cars in droves.

I haven’t spoken to anyone who wouldn’t bolt if there were a faster option. It all has to do with speed and price.

Richard Bent, Laguna Niguel

I must respond to Larry Levine’s comments on the Coast Starlight [Letters, June 27]. I have traveled thousands of miles on Amtrak, and I agree that no one who travels by train would say they are always on time. This is particularly true of long-distance runs. But I also must say that I can count on the fingers of one hand the number of times during those thousands of miles that the delay has been Amtrak’s fault. I have been sidetracked by freights; delayed by vandalism, grass fires and earthquakes; and held up by union regulations, but there has always been an apology, and when the delay has been a long one, a voucher for discounted future travel. Can anyone say that of airlines? I guess Levine has never had his trip delayed by an airline. Lucky him.

Virginia Elwood-Akers, Los Angeles

I have to agree with Larry Levine of Van Nuys that train travel in the U.S. is irregular and unreliable.

Last January, we traveled to Williamsburg, Va., en route to a wedding in Washington, D.C. We intended to take Amtrak from Williamsburg to Washington, but a storm dropped about 4 inches of snow on the tracks, preventing Amtrak from running — even though a freight train passed through 10 minutes before Amtrak was scheduled to run.

After traveling on a Eurail pass throughout Switzerland during December, I was amazed that we missed a wedding because of a few inches of snow.

Sharon Kelley, Simi Valley