CSO reports 654,500 visitors to Ireland in June as US tourism rebound continues
The Central Statistics Office Inbound Tourism statistics for June 2025 show that 654,500 foreign visitors departed Ireland on overseas routes in June 2025, down 2% compared with June 2024 and up by 6% compared with June 2023.
The number of nights spent by foreign visitors in June was almost 5.2m nights, an increase of 6% compared with June 2024 and up 14% compared with 2023.
In June 2025, the greatest number of visitors came from Great Britain (34%), followed by Continental Europe (31%), North America (30%) and the Rest of the World (5%). "When compared with June 2024, visitors from Great Britain fell by 1%, visitors from Continental Europe decreased by 6%, and visitors from the Rest of the World declined by 20%. In contrast, visitors from North America were up 5%," said CSO statistician in the Tourism and Travel Division, Gregg Patrick.
Visitor numbers from North America had declined by as much as 18% in March. The chief executive of the Irish Tourism Industry Confederation Eoghan O'Mara-Walsh said the continued resurgence of this sector reported by the CSO is "encouraging".
"After a first quarter of the year of double digit decline, it's now much more stable. North America was a star performer," said Mr O'Mara-Walsh, who noted visitors from the North American market are often high spenders. "They tour the regions and have been buoying Irish tourism over the summer months. Hopefully the upward trajectory will continue into July and August."
The visitors' expenditure in Ireland (excluding fares) was €647m in June 2025. Visitors from Great Britian accounted for €118m (18%) of this spend, Continental Europe for €200m (31%), North America for €283m (44%), and visitors from the Rest of the World for €47m (7%). Taken together, this represented a fall of 6% compared with June 2024, and a rise of 8% compared with June 2023.
The most frequent reason for the visitors' trips was for holiday or leisure (47%), while almost one in three trips (30%) were to visit friends or relatives.
The CSO data is based on the CSO Passenger Survey collected from approximately 13,000 departing passengers per month at the country's international ports and airports.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RTÉ News
an hour ago
- RTÉ News
Trump claims victory on trade - but EU had little choice
In many respects US President Donald Trump achieved his aims by introducing a swath of tariffs with America's main trading partners around the world. The European Union has a population of 448 million compared to the US which has 340 million. However, the US economy is larger. Many have been surprised at the way Donald Trump has appeared to be able to dictate terms to Europe. His announcement yesterday that he would commence the new tariff arrangements from 7 August appeared to be his decision with little input from the EU. President of the European Commission Ursula Von Der Leyen has defended the deal, which will see tariffs of 15% imposed on EU goods. There are two reasons why the EU did not want a full blown trade war with Mr Trump. Firstly, European businesses were opposed to a prolonged period of tit-for-tat tariffs with enormously damaging consequences. Secondly, if relations with Mr Trump soured, he could threaten to row back on defence commitments. The EU is highly reliant on the US for arm supplies, funding for NATO and military support for Ukraine. But looking at scale of tariffs imposed on other countries the EU's 15% does not seem too damaging compared to India's 25%, Canada's 35% and Switzerland's 39%. Most of the US' main trading partners have rates of 15% or 20%. The exception is the UK's 10% tariff. However, this is not an all-inclusive rate. In other words, other rates can be added to it. Nor does Britain have a written agreement capping pharmaceutical tariffs unlike the EU. It is worth bearing in mind that while tariffs on European goods go up, Mr Trump stated the EU would be "opening up their countries at zero tariffs" for US exports. Unanswered questions From the Irish point of view there are still many unanswered questions. There is no agreement on alcohol exports to the US. That sector was expected to be covered by a zero-for-zero tariff arrangement but that has not yet been confirmed. This is critical for Ireland's whiskey industry and the EU's wine exports. It seems clear that pharmaceuticals and computer chips will face tariffs of up to 15%, but the timing is still uncertain. Both are subject of so-called Section 232 investigations because Mr Trump believes the US' use of imports is a national security issue. Tánaiste Simon Harris said the tariffs for sectors under investigation will not become clear until those processes are concluded. For pharmaceuticals that is expected to happen in two weeks. But the fact that the EU-US agreement won't exceed 15% does provide some clarity for the industry. Bank of Ireland pointed out that drugs are relatively inelastic, which means if prices go up people still buy them because they are prescribed by doctors. The new swath of tariffs come at a time when the dollar has been weakening and making EU exports to the US more expensive at the worst possible time. Then there is the question of what this all means for the Irish economy. In March, the Department of Finance and the Economic Social Research Institute published research on the impact of tariffs on the Irish economy. It looks at a range of scenarios from tariffs of 10% to 25%. Based on that analysis, officials at the Department of Finance told business leaders yesterday that the economy would continue to expand, but at a slower pace than previously expected. Employment will grow but at a slower rate. The Government will now have to decide how all this will impact the Budget in October. But while Mr Trump may believe he has achieved his aims on tariffs, in the long run his actions carry the risk of higher inflation in the US and undermining the American economy.
Irish Times
3 hours ago
- Irish Times
How much do landlords in Ireland really earn? You might be surprised
How much do landlords in Ireland actually earn? To listen to the many lobbying groups who dominate the property sector in Ireland, the answer is not nearly enough to compensate for all the regulations and bureaucratic hurdles they face. This, it is argued, explains what is often characterised as the ' mass exodus ' from the private rental sector although the number of registered landlords has actually increased in recent years . More than 80 per cent of Irish landlords have one or two tenancies and, we're frequently told, are mostly ordinary people whose livelihoods depend on rental income. This narrative suggests landlords are mere, to use the international term, 'mom-and-pop' investors who are 'struggling' or 'earning pin money' (an argument used by short-term let lobbyists as well). Or they are 'accidental landlords', sometimes represented as almost victims of the housing crisis themselves. This is not borne out by the data. The reality internationally, as well as in Ireland, is that small landlords have higher household income and wealth levels. Here, data made available on request from the CSO's 2024 Survey on Income and Living Conditions shows that the gross household income of those with a rental income from a second property or rent-a-room is €133,800, or 85 per cent higher than households without a rental income, who earn €72,500. And their net income is 56 per cent higher. READ MORE Average income premium of households with rental income At the other end of the scale, Ireland's largest landlord, Ires Reit , averaged €21,768 rental income per annum from each of its 3,668 units in 2024. And it was able to shelter all this income from tax via a special company structure . The reason such narratives continue to be so pervasive is partly down to the effectiveness of several large lobbying groups that dominate the property sector in Ireland. Representing professional bodies, there's the Institute of Professional Auctioneers and Valuers and the Society of Chartered Surveyors Ireland . Ireland's small landlords are represented by the Irish Property Owners' Association. Property Industry Ireland is part of Ibec . Irish Institutional Property represents large landlords and is run by a former secretary general of Fianna Fáil and senator, Pat Farrell . Influencing policy since 1935 is the Construction Industry Federation, which was recently in the headlines after a terrace it owned in Dublin 6 partly collapsed . It was run for many years run by a former Progressive Democrats minister, Tom Parlon. Banking and Payments Federation Ireland is run by a former Fine Gael minister, Brian Hayes, and Airbnb is represented by a former Labour TD, Derek Nolan. All the former politicians have unfettered entry to Leinster House, allowing what Róisin Shortall called ' undue access ' to Ministers and influential politicians. Other groups peddle policy ideas mostly imported from elsewhere. Progress Ireland, which recently proposed garden cabins without planning permission as housing, was reportedly offered a meeting with senior Government advisers less than 24 hours after sending an email to Micheál Martin 's office. There is an obvious irony here: lobbying bodies demand " policy certainty " and stability for their members, and yet it is their function to lobby for policy change. Certainty and stability for developers is coincidentally mentioned in 2021's Housing for All policy, after which the Government went on to make numerous industry-friendly changes, including restricting access to judicial review and introducing inferior apartment standards - changes for which the Minister for Housing James Browne can unfortunately provide no credible evidence . This is not a uniquely Irish phenomenon. As nations' economies globalise, so too has the reach of international property money and its lobbyists. In the private rented sector internationally, global investors were enticed back post 2008 by tax-free rental income and the promise of significant profits. As housing for sale and mortgage credit dried up, the private rented sector became the tenure of necessity and grew significantly. Calls for meaningful changes to the sector to allow for it to become a better option for tenants were and are strenuously resisted everywhere. What is interesting about resistance to change is the consistency of narratives across countries. Research from Sweden's Uppsala University show three main arguments appear repeatedly: the 'vulnerable landlord', the 'counterproductive effects' and the 'violation of property rights'. This is a lobbying playbook. We've seen how the vulnerable landlord argument works in Ireland. The counter-productive effects argument claims that pro-tenant measures ultimately harm tenants by disincentivising rental housing supply and maintenance. This claim works on the basis that there is perfect competition in the housing market and that all other factors remain equal, what economists call ceteris paribus . But there's little competition in housing markets due to the fact that the supply of market land is limited and also privately owned, and other factors such as demand and interest rates are always changing, so nothing remains equal. Property lobbyists and right-of-centre politicians argue that the problem of high rents can be solved by expanding the supply of private rental housing. The logic is that high rental prices stimulate new supply, which will eventually lower rents. This sounds very familiar. Even if you ignore the interim financial pain of rising rents for existing tenants, this argument is ropey. Whereas rising prices may make the construction of housing for sale or rent more attractive, rising prices also make waiting around, or hoarding, just as attractive (as does increasing the density of housing). Owners of valuable land, who are unsurprisingly keen to extract the most profit from it, will not necessarily crystallise their risk by commencing construction, and so will not necessarily supply housing any faster. There is currently permission granted for about 70,000 new houses and apartments nationally that are lying around not commenced. As land prices rise, a natural brake is applied to new housing supply. The third argument found internationally concerns the violation of property rights. Such absolutist views ignore the social function of property. This violation-of-rights argument was recently deployed by a landlord who illegally evicted a tenant, saying at the Residential Tenancies Board hearing that ' no external authority may dictate his housing decisions '. The RTB disagreed. No matter what measure is proposed – tenants' rights, changes to planning rules or regulations – the playbook of counter arguments is automatically mobilised. There is little detailed critiquing of individual proposals. Instead, we're offered off-the-shelf responses driven by ideology, entrenched beliefs, and profits. The real contest here is between the needs of the market and the needs of society. This permanent tension is going to arise when a Government's strategic approach - as is there case here - is to rely on the market for the supply of most of its housing, private and public. Dr Lorcan Sirr lectures in housing at Technological University Dublin
Irish Independent
4 hours ago
- Irish Independent
Irish influencer ‘unaware of Central Bank probe' into promotion of unregulated offshore trading platform T4Trade
Irish influencer Jonathan Finlay has said he is 'not aware of any ongoing investigation by the Central Bank into his affairs' or his promotion of an unregulated trading platform.
