India considers visa-on-arrival and simpler eVisa portal for tourists

A NITI Aayog report identifies strict visa rules as the biggest barrier to tourism growth and proposes both a phased visa-on-arrival rollout and a streamlined eVisa system

India is weighing two major changes to how foreign tourists enter the country: a phased expansion of visa-on-arrival access and a significant overhaul of the eVisa system. Both proposals come from a report published by NITI Aayog (the National Institution for Transforming India), which found that tangled entry requirements and layers of regulation are doing more damage to India's tourism ambitions than any other single factor.

As things stand, India's entry options for tourists are limited. Visa-on-arrival is only available to travelers from Japan and South Korea, and visa-free access covers just Nepal, Bhutan, and the Maldives. The eVisa, while available to a much wider pool of nationalities, is split across nine sub-categories and runs through a portal that the report considers difficult to use. India ranks behind most countries worldwide when it comes to how accessible its borders are to visitors, putting it at a disadvantage against regional competitors.

What the report recommends

On visa-on-arrival, the proposal is to open up a 90-day option that allows repeat visits, starting with a targeted group of nationalities and scaling from there. The rollout would be paired with biometric registration and digital authorization so that security screening keeps pace with easier access. The report highlights Singapore's SG Arrival Card and the US ESTA program as systems that have struck that balance effectively.

On the eVisa side, the recommendation is to collapse the nine existing sub-categories down to five and rebuild the application portal so that travelers can navigate it without confusion. The current structure forces applicants to work out which of the nine categories fits their situation, a process the report sees as an unnecessary source of friction and drop-off.

Together, the two changes would give India a wider front door for short-stay visitors while making the digital route that most tourists already use considerably less painful.

Tourism minister backs the push

Union Tourism Minister Gajendra Singh Shekhawat spoke at the report's launch and framed the reform moment in clear terms. He said that "Indian tourism has now reached a stage where institutional efficiency becomes more powerful than investment" and argued that clearer policy and faster decisions would give private investors the confidence to commit.

The targets behind the reforms

The report, titled "Unlocking Growth in Tourism and Hospitality Sector," was prepared by NITI Aayog's Tourism and Culture Division working with the Ministry of Tourism and other government bodies. It maps out how India could reach 100 million international tourists and build a $3 trillion tourism economy by 2047.

The core argument is that reaching those numbers is less about government spending and more about untangling the approval processes and regulatory knots that currently hold the industry back.

Red tape choking the hospitality sector

The visa proposals sit within a larger reform agenda aimed at India's hospitality industry. The report found that hotel projects can require close to 50 approvals across their lifetime, with operators needing at least 60 separate licenses from local, state, and central authorities. Getting a hotel from approval to opening takes 36 to 48 months in India, compared to just 12 to 18 months in competing ASEAN markets.

The report recommends merging multiple licenses into a single authorization, raising base floor area ratios, and loosening parking requirements. For homestays, it proposes lifting the room cap from six to nine and removing the requirement to get a No-Objection Certificate from local bodies before registering.

Domestic tourism also underperforming

A separate report by CRISIL Intelligence found that India's domestic tourism market is punching below its weight economically, held back by patchy infrastructure, uneven service standards, and small operators who lack the resources to scale.