The US passport is not as powerful as it used to be

The Henley Passport Index, which collects exclusive data from the International Air Transport Association (IATA), evaluates 199 different passports against 227 destinations around the world, considering visa-free or visa-on-arrival options. The US passport — once an undisputed leader in 2014 — now grants access to about 180 destinations. While that’s still a pretty good number, it reflects a drop from seventh place earlier this year.

The fall of the eagle’s wings

Singapore is currently in first place with access to 193 destinations, closely followed by South Korea (190) and then Japan (189). These three Asian countries have formed what you might call an impressive triumvirate. Behind them in fourth place, you’ll find a few strong European countries, including Germany, Italy, Luxembourg, Spain, and Switzerland – each offering 188 places. Britain, on the other hand, reached its lowest point in eighth (184 destinations), down two places since July.

What this quarterly change shows is that, effectively, there are now about 36 countries ahead of the US passport if you consider all connections. That’s humbling, especially for a superpower known for its relative freedom of travel.

Why does a US passport lose its edge?

The reduction is not just theoretical; This is the result of major policy changes by other countries. For example, a dispute with Brazil last April led to the cancellation of visa-free entry for Americans. This was primarily a response to what was seen as an imbalance in mutual access. China, which has been working to improve diplomatic ties, has extended exemptions to several European countries, such as Germany and France, but has notably excluded the United States. Of course, this means that the United States is deprived of a growing number of people without a visa. Similarly, updates from Papua New Guinea, Myanmar, Somalia (with the introduction of eVisa), and Vietnam contributed to the decline in the United States.

According to Dr. Christian H. Killen, director of Henley & Associates and creator of the index, this represents a significant change. “The weakening of the U.S. passport over the past decade indicates more than just a change in rankings; it indicates a fundamental shift in how international mobility and soft power work. Countries that embrace openness and cooperation are moving forward, while countries that rely on old interests are falling behind.”

A key issue is inequality: US passport holders have visa-free access to 180 countries, but the US offers the same to only 46 nationalities. As a result, the United States ranks only 77th on the Henley Open Index. Only Australia comes close to this level of disparity. Also, Canada, New Zealand, and Japan—which have similar issues—have seen passport strength stagnate or even decline, suggesting a possible connection.

Annie Pforzheimer, a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, believes the issue is significant: “Before Trump’s potential second term, U.S. policy was already inward-looking. The decline in passport authority appears to be a reflection of this isolationist mindset.” CNN’s Richard Quist seems to agree, noting “Can we make a connection with the Trump administration’s immigration policies? Yes, you probably can on some level.”

China’s movement movement

While the United States struggles, China has made gains over the past ten years, moving from 94th to 64th place. That’s an additional 37 destinations accessible without a visa. These achievements are the result of agreements with Russia, Gulf countries, South America and Europe. China has approved 30 more nationalities in the past year alone, ranking 65th in terms of openness in access to 76 different countries. It ranks 30th from the United States.

Dr. Tim Klatt, Grant Thornton’s partner in China, suggests that there could be wider implications: “Trump’s return to power has created new trade conflicts that reduce American momentum, just as China’s strategic opening policy strengthens global influence. These divergent paths will change the economic landscape.” The rise of the United Arab Emirates is also notable, jumping 34 places to eighth in a decade. However, a significant gap remains at the bottom, where Afghanistan (106, with access to 24 destinations), Syria (105, 26 destinations), and Iraq (104, 29 destinations) lag far behind the top ranks – a difference of 169 destinations indicating a significant mobility difference.

Americans are looking for an alternative

This growing instability seems to be creating an increasing interest in alternative citizenships. Data from Henley & Partners shows that US applicants will lead investment immigration programs in 2025. Inquiries in Q3 already exceeded 67% of the 2024 total, which itself represents a 60% increase from the 2023 figure.

According to Dominik Wollik, head of the private clients group at Henley & Partners, this phenomenon can be seen as “geopolitical arbitrage”: “Given the current uncertainty, investors and wealthy American families are increasingly choosing a strategy … aimed at securing additional residences and citizenships, they are looking for potential risks. The different ones offered by different countries Benefits to improve their personal, financial, and life chances.”

Temple University School of Law Professor Peter J. Spiro suggests that this trend is becoming more common: “While US citizenship retains significant value, it may not be sufficient as a sole option. In the coming years, it is likely that more Americans will seek to obtain a second citizenship, using any means they can. Having multiple citizenships is becoming increasingly common in American society.

With tightening travel restrictions and shifting international alliances, the Passport Index serves as more than just a ranking—it serves as a reflection of global influence. For Americans, perhaps, this illustrates an important point: in an increasingly multipolar world, relying on a single passport may no longer be enough. Open skies, previously unrestricted, may now require a contingency plan.