Carbon tax: higher prices for tickets and controversy

[sn26567]

The EU has introduced a carbon tax on 1 January 2012 in the framework of the emissions trading scheme (see e. g. Lufthansa press release: viewtopic.php?p=258768#p258768). The tax will be related to their carbon emissions. The airlines must buy certificated covering 15% of their emissions in 2012 and 18% of their emissions between 2013 and 2020.

The airlines will pass on the tax to consumers: the fuel surcharge will be increased. Brussels Airlilnes has already announced an increase of 3 to 10 euros depending on the destination (3 euros in Europe, 10 euros for intercontinental flights). Delta Air Lines has increased the cost of a return ticket to Europe by 6 dollars. There is no doubt that other airlines will follow. Lufthansa has announced it, without stating a date for the inception of the measure.

The Chinese airlines however are refusing to pay the tax. This could lead to fines by the EU and to a trade war: China has already said that it will take measures agaionst Airbus if its airlines are compelled to pay.

The US, Canada and Austrralia also have strong reservations against the tax.

We shall see how the disputes will be resolved.

[Squelsh]

That is like a tax on breathing.

[earthman]

In the Netherlands there used to be tax on wind (for windmill owners), and also on the view from street-facing windows (which is why some houses had windows mounted at 45 degrees at the corners, these didn't count for the tax but you could still see the street from them).

[regi]

In the Netherlands there used to be tax on wind (for windmill owners), and also on the view from street-facing windows (which is why some houses had windows mounted at 45 degrees at the corners, these didn't count for the tax but you could still see the street from them).

okay, off topic, but I could not resist to point to effects of awkward taxes:
the mansarde roof design.

http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mansardedak

explanation: owners of a house were taxed on the amount of levels they had. Everything under a roof was not taxed. So they came up with silly designs where there was just 1 ground floor and on top a roof which sometimes contained 3 extra floors

Subjects to taxation have always tried to get around it. Untill some years ago, you saw quite some luxury cars in Belgium with plates from Luxembourg. Dutch passengers left their airports because of the extra tax and went en masse to Düsseldorf, Brussels and Charleroi.

China swings the big hammer and threatens immediately with retaliation towards Airbus ( which is assembling airplanes in China ) But that would be against WTO regulations. And in case of non compliance, the EU would have to find a way to enforce payment of fines.
( I bet that visa fees for China will be increased, that is not WTO regulated )

Difficult matter. And sometimes I wonder if a taxation doesn't cost more than it rewards
Hey, in the past we had to pay every year for a bicycle number plate.
The state abolished it because the production, distribution , control and punishment costed more than the profits.
For those who have no clue:
http://www.2dehands.be/verzamelen/overi ... mmerplaten

[airtrainer]

Anything is good for a new tax for the customer... Where will it end ?

[airazurxtror]

Rising the price of the ticket is not a sure way to increase the number of passengers.
Savings on costs would perhaps be more intelligent.
And, to begin with, fire one of the two (!) CEOs.
(Of course, when small companies like Air France or British Airways have only one CEO, one can understand that giant outfits like Brussels Airlines need at least two).

[B.Inventive]

airazurxtor
seriously how can you make THIS a problem of b.air management?
If you buy a TV do you expect f.e. Samsung to pay for your tax on it?

LOL
(agreed abut the CEO's though )

[airazurxtror]

Mr Isaac Valero-Ladron, spokesman of Ms. Connie Hedegaard (EU Commissioner in charge of the climate), declared that the cost of the new tax on CO2 for the airlines should be "between one and two dollars per passenger" on a flight New York - London.
(in "Le Soir" today, page 20).

[sn26567]

United and Continental Airlines last night matched Delta's $3 surcharge on one-way tickets from the United States to Europe. A far cry from the 10€ imposed by Brussels Airlines...

[TCAS_climb]

If I'm not mistaken the carbon tax does not (yet?) take into consideration the type of fuel used to perform the flight, which seems odd to me if the objective is to promote "greener" air transport.

On the other hand we still don't know where the money goes. Perhaps to support farmers and their 4-legged fart generators that significantly contribute to the climatic mess? How ironic!

[earthman]

The money, of course, goes to save lazy south-european countries with holes in their pockets.

[fretn]

I don't really understand this EU-law, but it would have been better if they taxxed certain types of airplanes flying into the EU; that way they could promote the sale of more environment-friendly types like the A380, A350, the NEO, etc...

[sn26567]

American Airlines and US Airways have followed Delta's lead and are now also imposing a surcharge of $3 per one-way flight to/from Europe.

In Europe itself, only Brussels Airlines has announced an increase of the fuel surcharge, although Lufthansa has announced it would pass on the carbon tax to the passengers at a yet unspecified date.

[RoMax]

In Europe itself, only Brussels Airlines has announced an increase of the fuel surcharge, although Lufthansa has announced it would pass on the carbon tax to the passengers at a yet unspecified date.

Also KLM's CEO said they will charge extra costs to their pax for this carbon tax.

For other airlines outside Europe I can also remember Cathay Pacific that said they will charge their pax this new tax. I'm sure much more will follow... This is a tax not any airline wants to pay themself completely...

Mr Isaac Valero-Ladron, spokesman of Ms. Connie Hedegaard (EU Commissioner in charge of the climate), declared that the cost of the new tax on CO2 for the airlines should be "between one and two dollars per passenger" on a flight New York - London.
(in "Le Soir" today, page 20).

I heard someone of the EU saying on TV it would be around 10 Euro/pax for a flight between BRU and NYC to fully cover the tax... So...what's true now?

[LJ]

The airlines will pass on the tax to consumers: the fuel surcharge will be increased. Brussels Airlilnes has already announced an increase of 3 to 10 euros depending on the destination (3 euros in Europe, 10 euros for intercontinental flights). Delta Air Lines has increased the cost of a return ticket to Europe by 6 dollars.

Does this mean that SN a) cannot calculate the exact tax for an intercontinental flight, b) SN just has to pay more per flight than Delta Airlines or c) SN sees an opportunity to get some extra revenue by asking more than it pays?

[airazurxtror]

SN sees an opportunity to get some extra revenue by asking more than it pays

Seems obvious.

[RoMax]

Does this mean that SN a) cannot calculate the exact tax for an intercontinental flight, b) SN just has to pay more per flight than Delta Airlines or c) SN sees an opportunity to get some extra revenue by asking more than it pays?

d) DL is not asking the full tax to their pax...

Don't know, just a possibility...but DL is only impacted on the flight to Europe while European airlines are impacted on their full network... DL (and other non-EU airlines) may decide not to ask the full tax to keep the ticket prices lower than the competition. For an EU airline this is more difficult as they are affected on their whole network. But ok, this is just an idea...

[RoMax]

SN sees an opportunity to get some extra revenue by asking more than it pays

Seems obvious.

We know you don't like SN, but maybe you should not judge before you know the full story? Yes this is a possibility, but I wouldn't judge...

[Squelsh]

The money, of course, goes to save lazy south-european countries with holes in their pockets.

.
Not this time
.
Carbon tax touted as Single European Sky finance source
.
http://www.airtrafficmanagement.net/vie ... sp?ID=4717
.

The European Commission late last month decided on how it planned to fund the deployment of the Single European Sky air traffic research initiative called SESAR.
(..)
“SESAR implementation projects will require high financial risk-taking that private financial markets either price very high or would not accept at all. As a result, operators are inclined to be reactive rather than proactive,” said the Commission.
(..)
Brussels therefore wants to attract the crucial private sector funds by putting up €3 billion in public money between 2014-2024.
“EU funding should support SESAR implementation by facilitating synchronisation and coordination between stakeholders for essential deployment identified in the Master plan including, as far as it is allowed by the relevant funding instruments, those involving third countries,” it said.
“Other potential sources of financing need to be explored, such as loans from the European Investment Bank, the Single European Sky Charging Regulation and the Emissions Trading Scheme,” said the Commission.
The United States, China, India and others have attacked the scheme on the grounds that it infringes their sovereignty and that the EU should not act alone and have warned of possible counter-measures.

.

[airazurxtror]

We know you don't like SN, but maybe you should not judge before you know the full story? Yes this is a possibility, but I wouldn't judge...

The story so far :

Mr Isaac Valero-Ladron, spokesman of Ms. Connie Hedegaard (EU Commissioner in charge of the climate), declared that the cost of the new tax on CO2 for the airlines should be "between one and two dollars per passenger" on a flight New York - London.

Brussels Airlilnes has already announced an increase of (...) 10 euros for intercontinental flights.

(10 euros = 7,7 dollars)