Ugandan businesses that depend on American clients, visiting specialists and international meetings face another month of travel uncertainty after the United States extended restrictions linked to the Ebola outbreak in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), keeping Uganda among the countries covered by its entry measures. The US Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) renewed the order on October 11 for 30 days, extending a policy that restricts entry for certain foreign nationals who have been physically present in Uganda, the DRC or South Sudan during the previous 21 days. The order covers the period into November and comes despite Uganda having declared its domestic outbreak over in July. For companies using Kampala as a base for regional operations, the immediate concern is not a blanket shutdown of travel. It is the additional planning required when employees, consultants and clients have different entry requirements depending on their nationality and recent travel history. The restrictions could complicate business trips, increase itinerary costs and delay face-to-face engagements. The extent of the economic impact, however, will depend on how many travellers and companies are affected. The CDC’s decision follows concerns about cross-border transmission from eastern DRC, where the Bundibugyo strain of Ebola continues to spread. The agency cited the case of a Kenyan man who travelled from the DRC through Uganda before flying from Kampala to Nairobi on October 2. Kenya announced his infection on October 6, and he died the previous day. The CDC also pointed to declining contact-tracing coverage in the DRC, reported at 80 per cent in early October, below the 95 per cent operational threshold cited by the agency. Uganda declared its domestic outbreak over on July 28 after recording 20 confirmed cases and two deaths. The country’s inclusion in the American order therefore reflects Washington’s assessment of regional transmission risks rather than a declaration that Uganda has an active domestic outbreak. The decision has drawn criticism from African public health leaders, who argue that broad travel restrictions can penalise countries that report outbreaks transparently and may not be the most effective way to control transmission. The distinction between entry restrictions and enhanced screening matters for employers arranging international travel. Under the current US guidance, certain foreign nationals who have been in Uganda, the DRC, or South Sudan within the preceding 21 days face restrictions on entry. US citizens and nationals who have been in Uganda or South Sudan, but not the DRC, are permitted to travel to the United States, with their itineraries routed through designated airports for public health screening. Travellers who have been in the DRC face stricter measures: those who were there within 21 days of departure cannot board commercial flights bound for the United States and are advised to remain outside the country for the required period. These rules are not equivalent to a universal 21-day quarantine for everyone travelling from Uganda. Companies must check the applicable requirements for each employee rather than assume that all passengers face the same restrictions. For businesses, the most immediate exposure is operational. A consultant unable to enter the United States, an executive whose itinerary must be changed, or an international client who postpones a visit can disrupt meetings, training, negotiations, and project schedules. Airline rerouting and rebooking may also increase travel costs for affected passengers. Companies with time-sensitive contracts could face further expenses if they must extend assignments, send replacement personnel or shift work to remote arrangements. Tourism operators, hotels and conference venues may also be vulnerable if the uncertainty discourages some American visitors or corporate delegations. But there is not yet sufficient evidence to quantify losses to Uganda’s tourism earnings, aviation revenues or foreign investment from this extension. For businesses, the practical response is to review upcoming travel, confirm eligibility and screening requirements before tickets are issued, and build flexibility into project schedules. Where appropriate, virtual meetings can keep negotiations moving while essential travel is rearranged. The extension also presents a challenge for Uganda’s efforts to attract international business. Travel rules can influence how companies assess the time, cost and predictability of sending people into and out of a market, even when the restrictions are precautionary. Uganda’s health authorities have emphasised that the country remains free of Ebola following the end of its outbreak, while continuing cross-border surveillance and preparedness measures. Consistent, verifiable updates will be important for informing foreign businesses without minimising regional health risks. The next policy review will determine whether the restrictions are extended again or adjusted in response to the outbreak. Until then, companies should plan around the rules currently in force rather than assume that Uganda’s domestic outbreak status will automatically lead to their removal. For Uganda’s business community, the challenge is to protect commercial relationships and maintain operational continuity while regional health authorities work to contain the outbreak.