A disputed charge involving a renowned underwater filmmaker and YouTuber has brought renewed attention to a long-running problem for visiting photographers—and this time Mexico's dive industry and authorities are responding.
A long-running customs issue affecting underwater photographers travelling to Mexico is attracting renewed scrutiny.
Complaints about Mexican customs charges on visiting underwater photographers are not new. X-Ray Mag first investigated the issue five years ago after one of our principal photojournalists, Scott Bennett, was charged US$570 for bringing his own underwater photographic equipment into the country.
Now another case—this time involving well-known underwater filmmaker Jonathan Bird—has brought the issue sharply to the fore. The reaction has spread through international diving communities, prompting some divers to avoid Mexico and leading Cozumel's diving sector to seek government intervention.
Almost MXN 8,000 for camera equipment
Bird, founder of BlueWorldTV and previously profiled by X-Ray Mag, described his experience on social media under the name Jacques Oiseau.
According to his account, as reported by Mexican news outlet Noticaribe, he arrived in Cozumel from the United States with one camera, an underwater housing and three lenses. Customs officials reportedly classified part of the system as excess professional equipment and charged him almost MXN 8,000, calculated as 19 per cent of the value they assigned to it.
Bird said he presented documentation showing that the equipment belonged to him, including evidence of a previous customs payment, but was unable to have the new charge reviewed before leaving Mexico.
X-Ray Mag has not independently examined Bird's customs documentation or received the Mexican customs authority's account of the incident.
A problem we encountered before
Bird's experience closely resembles a case X-Ray Mag reported in 2021.
Scott Bennett was travelling to photograph the Socorro Islands when customs officials at San José del Cabo objected to his carrying two underwater camera housings. With his liveaboard waiting to depart, Bennett ultimately paid US$570 to bring his equipment into Mexico.
X-Ray Mag subsequently approached Mexican authorities for clarification. After repeated enquiries, the Mexican Embassy in Toronto confirmed that tourists could bring two photographic or video cameras and photographic material into Mexico without paying tax.
The response, however, left an important question unanswered: how should underwater housings, ports, strobes, lenses and other components of a photographic system be classified?
Current Mexican customs guidance continues to permit two cameras and photographic material as personal baggage, but does not provide comparable detail about specialised underwater photography equipment.
Backlash reaches Cozumel's dive industry
What appears different this time is the scale of the reaction.
Noticaribe reported that Bird's Facebook account of the incident received around 85,000 views and circulated through diving communities. Bird called on divers to avoid Cozumel, while others have expressed similar sentiments.
This does not constitute an organised boycott, but concern has become serious enough for the Sindicato de Buzos del Caribe to appeal to President Claudia Sheinbaum and Quintana Roo Governor Mara Lezama.
The organisation warned that uncertainty and unexpected charges are damaging confidence in Cozumel among divers and underwater photographers. It claims the problem has contributed to cancellations and fewer returning visitors, although those economic effects have not been independently quantified.
Authorities respond
There are signs that the latest controversy is receiving a more constructive official response than X-Ray Mag encountered several years ago.
According to Noticaribe, the Quintana Roo Tourism Secretariat has discussed the issue with Cancún customs. Customs official Luis Antonio Balcázar Bustos reportedly agreed to provide information on requirements for the temporary entry of photographic equipment and to work with specialists on a proposed list clarifying which equipment should be permitted.
That does not yet resolve the underlying problem, nor has there been a reported review of the customs practices that prompted the complaints. But official engagement is a significant development.
A counterproductive outcome
Mexico has every right to enforce legitimate customs regulations and prevent undeclared commercial imports. The difficulty is uncertainty over how those regulations are interpreted when visiting photographers carry their own specialised equipment.
There is a particular irony in the cases of Bennett and Bird. Both are experienced underwater image-makers whose photographs, articles and films expose international audiences to dive destinations.
Discouraging such visitors can therefore have consequences beyond losing their own tourism spending. It may also mean losing the images and stories that encourage other divers to visit.
For destinations such as Cozumel, Socorro and the Sea of Cortez, whose extraordinary underwater attractions lend themselves particularly well to visual storytelling, that seems especially counterproductive.
The response now emerging from Quintana Roo suggests that some Mexican officials recognise the problem. The important question is whether that dialogue will finally produce clear rules for underwater photographic equipment—and ensure that they are applied consistently.
