More air ticket taxes

[Carolinian Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close Carolinian]

Air passengers seem to be the whipping boy for ever increasing air ticket taxes, which already make up way too much of the cost of a ticket.

The latest imiplemented last month was a new air ticket tax imposed in the UK after it was promoted by Gordon Brown, the likely successor of the current prime minister and now Treasury head. The stated purpose was to discourage air travel to combat so-called global warming. The result is a 50% increase in the cost of what I have been paying for LCC tickets that originate or terminate in the UK.

Earlier, Jacques Chirac of France got his country to impose a new air ticket tax, the proceeds of which are earmarked for social programs abroad. Why in the world should air travelers be stuck with paying for that???

All of this should encourage thinking air travellers to arrange your connections someplace like Germany (my next tickets DO connect through that country) rather than the UK or France.

The problem is that the EU bureaucrats (or ''eurocrats'' as they are called) are already trying to push for Brown's nutty tax throughout the contenent.

[Carolinian Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close Carolinian]

The latest on the new UK tax is that all of the airlines except BA are insisting that passengers who have already bought tickets pony up the difference ($40 per long haul segment, $10 per short haul segment) before they fly. Some are requiring payment before a passenger even gets to the airport. Even BA has announced that it is rethinking whether it will absorb the tax for tickets already sold, as that will cost them millions of pounds.

Shame on Gordon Brown!

[short Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close short]

Money talks.

I don't really see a problem with this. Taxes are used all the time to give folks an incentive to do something or not do something.

This is like the gas tax we pay everyday to drive our SUV's.

Flying is not a neccesity of life (except here on tug and flyer talk) so I don't really see a problem with thinning airtraffic.

Short

[Carolinian Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close Carolinian]

Then you seem to beleive that government should use its oppressive powers like overtaxation to stop people from travelling. To what extent? Taking away passports would be more thorough! And of course, free speech is not technically a necessity either. Do you have a problem with government ''incentives'' to discourage that?

If one really beleived the theory of global warming and wanted to really reduce these carbon emissions, the most efficient place to do it is not with the little guy, like this regressive tax does, but with the big wasters. In air travel that means the executive jets where there are far more emissions per passenger. Wouldn't it do more for the supposed cause to place a draconian tax on executive jets or maybe just ban them????? Make those guys fly commercial.

I don't really see a problem with this. Taxes are used all the time to give folks an incentive to do something or not do something.

This is like the gas tax we pay everyday to drive our SUV's.

Flying is not a neccesity of life (except here on tug and flyer talk) so I don't really see a problem with thinning airtraffic.

Short

[timeos2 Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close timeos2]

A rose by any name might still go bad

Then you seem to beleive that government should use its oppressive powers like overtaxation to stop people from travelling. To what extent? Taking away passports would be more thorough! And of course, free speech is not technically a necessity either. Do you have a problem with government ''incentives'' to discourage that?

If one really beleived the theory of global warming and wanted to really reduce these carbon emissions, the most efficient place to do it is not with the little guy, like this regressive tax does, but with the big wasters. In air travel that means the executive jets where there are far more emissions per passenger. Wouldn't it do more for the supposed cause to place a draconian tax on executive jets or maybe just ban them????? Make those guys fly commercial.

Just wondering why it is less oppressive for the Government to "Make those guys fly commercial" than it is to tax the general public? Oppression isn't as bad if its used against "them" rather than "us"?

[Carolinian Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close Carolinian]

''Those guys'' include government officials like Gordon Brown, himself. And, apparently, the executive jets, which involve A LOT more carbon emissions per passenger than scheduled airliners, are exempt. At the very least, they should be charged proportionately, based on the carbon emissions, don't you think?

Just wondering why it is less oppressive for the Government to "Make those guys fly commercial" than it is to tax the general public? Oppression isn't as bad if its used against "them" rather than "us"?

[short Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close short]

Sin taxes

We have tax credits to encourage folks to insulate and buy energy efficient doors, windows and such.

We have sin taxes on cigarettes and booze to try and reduce consumption of things that are not good for you.

So I see nothing wrong with having more taxes on airline tickets to weed out the mileage runners and the like.

If you don't like the tax then boycott the airlines/countries that charge it.

By the way if you do boycott you will actually help them accomplish what they are trying to do which is to get travel reduced.

Short

[katiemack Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close katiemack]

We were investigating using some FF tickets that would use LGW as the final destination, but when we saw $220. tax for each, we began to think we should look elsewhere.

As for using taxes as a way to cut emission effects...this is ludicrous. It is just lazy....why aren't there more creative solutions being sought for the industry to cut emissions....at least Virgin Air's CEO made some promise of using profit to research such improvements. Bureaucrats have absolutely no creative thinking skills.

[Carolinian Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close Carolinian]

A tax that increases the cost of the lowest LCC tickets by 50% hurts consumers. Milage runners do not use LCC's because most LCC's do not have ff programs to begin with!

Actually, I am planning connections in Europe in the future in other countries, primarily Germany, but also Ireland. Some schedules will require an extra segment, which will still cost less by avoiding the UK. Thus MORE carbon emissions from Brown's stupid tax. When the UK is my final destination, I will fly long haul into Germany and then back to the UK on an LCC, minimizing the tax, but again flying an extra segment. Again, increased carbon emissions.

It is not a question of avoiding airlines, as airlines have no choice in collecting the tax. It is a question of routing travel away from the UK. I used to like overnighting in London on an LCC connection, but there are some nice towns around Frankfurt that I like too. Looks like that is where I will be overnighting on future connections. And, hey, I like Dublin, too. Luckily the upcoming trip that I had already booked is routed through Frankfurt anyway. I didn't know about the tax when I booked it. I just got lucky in that only the German LCC's served one of the cities I wanted to fly to. Otherwise, I would have routed through London and got skewered by Brown's tax.

And I am curious that someone on a travel-related board would suggest that travel is a ''sin''!!

We have tax credits to encourage folks to insulate and buy energy efficient doors, windows and such.

We have sin taxes on cigarettes and booze to try and reduce consumption of things that are not good for you.

So I see nothing wrong with having more taxes on airline tickets to weed out the mileage runners and the like.

If you don't like the tax then boycott the airlines/countries that charge it.

By the way if you do boycott you will actually help them accomplish what they are trying to do which is to get travel reduced.

Short

[gjw007 Member Find all posts View Profile Close gjw007]

We have tax credits to encourage folks to insulate and buy energy efficient doors, windows and such.

We have sin taxes on cigarettes and booze to try and reduce consumption of things that are not good for you.

So I see nothing wrong with having more taxes on airline tickets to weed out the mileage runners and the like.

If you don't like the tax then boycott the airlines/countries that charge it.

By the way if you do boycott you will actually help them accomplish what they are trying to do which is to get travel reduced.

Short

I have a simple question. At what point is taxes wrong or too high? You state its okay to tax item designated as sin (this could be applied to anything in your life if a government chooses to do so) and you agree that it's okay to tax transportation so that the poorer of us are affected more and have to give up a certain amount of freedom (you didn't mention income but it is the poor that bear the highest burden on any tax). In general most people are okay with taxes as long as it applies to others and not themselves.

Taxes is actually a tricky question because with the proper amount of taxes, our lifestyles are better. Can anyone imagine living with dirt roads again? It was done through taxes. I always get a chuckle out of comments made by people who say that it is not the government's right to determine morality but then go on to approve incentives that do determine morality. The key is that we don't want to promote moral issues that we each differ with but want the government to promote moral issues that we do agree with. The long-standing debate on national health insurance is an example.

[nursetanya1973 Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close nursetanya1973]

The catch-22 of this tax is that by trying to raise money, they may have actually lost money. Think about it, now people are planning to avoid the UK; thus their dollars are going elsewhere. And things that hurt the airlines, hurt the economy of the country. Silliness, pure silliness.

[short Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close short]

Yes likely this will hurt business.

The catch-22 of this tax is that by trying to raise money, they may have actually lost money. Think about it, now people are planning to avoid the UK; thus their dollars are going elsewhere. And things that hurt the airlines, hurt the economy of the country. Silliness, pure silliness.

I think you are right that this will to a certain extent hurt the UK economy.

I personally do not see anything wrong with squeezing some of the over exuberence from the airline market, or even the travel business as a whole.

Short

PS: New TUG motto. "Life, Liberty and Cheap Airfares"

[Carolinian Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close Carolinian]

With airlines loosing money, some bankrupt, why do you think it is OK to stick it to them, maybe sent some of them over the edge? WHY should governemnt do this?

I think you are right that this will to a certain extent hurt the UK economy.

I personally do not see anything wrong with squeezing some of the over exuberence from the airline market, or even the travel business as a whole.

Short

PS: New TUG motto. "Life, Liberty and Cheap Airfares"

[Carolinian Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close Carolinian]

I remember 8 or 10 years ago when Delta for several years running offered Fall, Winter, and Spring long weekend fares, Thursday to Tuesday or Wednesday to Monday, from Raleigh to London for under $300 including taxes , one year even running that fare to the first week in June. Fuel costs and taxes have made it a new world even before Brown's fare increase.

We were investigating using some FF tickets that would use LGW as the final destination, but when we saw $220. tax for each, we began to think we should look elsewhere.

As for using taxes as a way to cut emission effects...this is ludicrous. It is just lazy....why aren't there more creative solutions being sought for the industry to cut emissions....at least Virgin Air's CEO made some promise of using profit to research such improvements. Bureaucrats have absolutely no creative thinking skills.

[Carolinian Super Moderator Find all posts View Profile Close Carolinian]

The current US budget proposal is a refreshing change in air taxes. They are actually proposing to reduce taxes on commmercial aviation and shift them to fuel taxes for corporate jets and other private planes. If they really want to reduce the ''carbon imprint'', the private planes are the place to hit them, as there is a lot more pollution per passenger there.

The UK approach is backward if it is the environment they are really concerned about.