EU Tax on Jet A1
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 1999
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EU Tax on Jet A1
About 5 years ago a friend in C&E told me they were desperate to put VAT on Jet A1. Of course it was Robber Brown's plan, but the C&E had been tasked with the mechanics. I told him due to tanking it was impossible to enforce on commercial airlines. Bit like truckers or maritime business.
Today I read the EU has voted to start preparing the legislation to tax aviation fuel.
What effect will this have on aviation? How long till the green's have the western world reduced to the age of sail?
Today I read the EU has voted to start preparing the legislation to tax aviation fuel.
What effect will this have on aviation? How long till the green's have the western world reduced to the age of sail?
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,089
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"legislation to tax aviation fuel" - At my end of aviation (business not pleasure for the myriad tourists) I already pay very heavily on my avgas. Welcome to euroland, it will get worse. I do not think it is anything to do with the greens, just greedy chancelors needing more and more.
The greens and the greedy are out to get their pounds of flesh!
The Times July 05, 2006
Air fares 'to double' as Europe votes for green tax
By Ben Webster, Transport Correspondent
AIR passengers will be charged up to £40 extra for a return ticket within Europe to pay for the environmental impact of their journeys, under plans approved by the European Parliament yesterday.
MEPs voted in favour of the “immediate introduction” of a tax on jet fuel for flights within the 25 member states of the EU. The charge would double the cost of millions of budget airline flights.
They also accepted a recommendation for a special emissions trading scheme for the aviation industry, which would see airlines buying permits to cover their output of carbon dioxide.
Aviation is the fastest growing source of greenhouse gases, and flights within Europe are on course to double by 2020 and triple by 2030.
British Airways and other European airlines have been lobbying for a more lenient scheme that would compensate for only a small portion of their emissions and cost the average passenger less than £1.50 per flight.
But the parliament rejected BA’s argument that the impact of aviation on the environment was not sufficiently understood and, therefore, the scheme should be limited.
MEPs voted by 439 to 74 to adopt proposals drafted by Caroline Lucas, the Green Party MEP for southeast England. There were 102 abstentions.
The main proposal was for airlines to be forced to buy emissions permits within a separate trading scheme dedicated to aviation, with a specific cap on the amount of CO2.
BA had wanted to be allowed virtually unlimited growth by being able to buy cheap surplus permits from other industries.
The parliament also dismissed BA’s proposal for airlines to be allocated free permits to cover their existing level of emissions. BA wanted the scheme to focus on additional flights.
The MEPs said that the scheme should cover all flights arriving at or departing from EU airports rather than just intra-EU flights, as had been proposed by BA. But the scheme is likely to be limited to flights within Europe in the early years to avoid legal challenges from the United States and other countries. MEPs also accepted the proposal for a separate environmental tax to cover the impact of nitrogen oxides and condensation trails emitted by aircraft.
When emitted at altitude, these emissions trap heat in the Earth’s atmosphere. The parliament accepted that aviation’s total contribution to global warming was two to four times greater than the impact of CO2 alone, and that airlines should be forced to pay for this.
The GreenSkies Alliance, a coalition of environmental groups that opposes the growth of aviation, said passengers would have to pay up to £20 per flight, or £40 return, to cover the cost of purchasing just the CO2 permits for flights within Europe. A jet fuel tax and an environmental tax would push ticket prices up even further but the costs are harder to quantify.
Jeff Gazzard, of the alliance, said: “The huge European Parliament majority shows that MEPs overwhelmingly recognise that air transport’s greenhouse gas emissions are out of control and urgent action to control them is long overdue.”
The parliament’s vote will strongly influence legislation being drafted by the European Commission and due to be debated later this year. The emissions trading scheme is due to be introduced in 2008 but commission officials admit it could be delayed until 2010.
The Times July 05, 2006
Air fares 'to double' as Europe votes for green tax
By Ben Webster, Transport Correspondent
AIR passengers will be charged up to £40 extra for a return ticket within Europe to pay for the environmental impact of their journeys, under plans approved by the European Parliament yesterday.
MEPs voted in favour of the “immediate introduction” of a tax on jet fuel for flights within the 25 member states of the EU. The charge would double the cost of millions of budget airline flights.
They also accepted a recommendation for a special emissions trading scheme for the aviation industry, which would see airlines buying permits to cover their output of carbon dioxide.
Aviation is the fastest growing source of greenhouse gases, and flights within Europe are on course to double by 2020 and triple by 2030.
British Airways and other European airlines have been lobbying for a more lenient scheme that would compensate for only a small portion of their emissions and cost the average passenger less than £1.50 per flight.
But the parliament rejected BA’s argument that the impact of aviation on the environment was not sufficiently understood and, therefore, the scheme should be limited.
MEPs voted by 439 to 74 to adopt proposals drafted by Caroline Lucas, the Green Party MEP for southeast England. There were 102 abstentions.
The main proposal was for airlines to be forced to buy emissions permits within a separate trading scheme dedicated to aviation, with a specific cap on the amount of CO2.
BA had wanted to be allowed virtually unlimited growth by being able to buy cheap surplus permits from other industries.
The parliament also dismissed BA’s proposal for airlines to be allocated free permits to cover their existing level of emissions. BA wanted the scheme to focus on additional flights.
The MEPs said that the scheme should cover all flights arriving at or departing from EU airports rather than just intra-EU flights, as had been proposed by BA. But the scheme is likely to be limited to flights within Europe in the early years to avoid legal challenges from the United States and other countries. MEPs also accepted the proposal for a separate environmental tax to cover the impact of nitrogen oxides and condensation trails emitted by aircraft.
When emitted at altitude, these emissions trap heat in the Earth’s atmosphere. The parliament accepted that aviation’s total contribution to global warming was two to four times greater than the impact of CO2 alone, and that airlines should be forced to pay for this.
The GreenSkies Alliance, a coalition of environmental groups that opposes the growth of aviation, said passengers would have to pay up to £20 per flight, or £40 return, to cover the cost of purchasing just the CO2 permits for flights within Europe. A jet fuel tax and an environmental tax would push ticket prices up even further but the costs are harder to quantify.
Jeff Gazzard, of the alliance, said: “The huge European Parliament majority shows that MEPs overwhelmingly recognise that air transport’s greenhouse gas emissions are out of control and urgent action to control them is long overdue.”
The parliament’s vote will strongly influence legislation being drafted by the European Commission and due to be debated later this year. The emissions trading scheme is due to be introduced in 2008 but commission officials admit it could be delayed until 2010.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
EU votes for Green tax on air fares
The Times: Air fares 'to double' as Europe votes for green tax
AIR passengers will be charged up to £40 extra for a return ticket within Europe to pay for the environmental impact of their journeys, under plans approved by the European Parliament yesterday.
MEPs voted in favour of the “immediate introduction” of a tax on jet fuel for flights within the 25 member states of the EU. The charge would double the cost of millions of budget airline flights. They also accepted a recommendation for a special emissions trading scheme for the aviation industry, which would see airlines buying permits to cover their output of carbon dioxide.......
MEPs voted by 439 to 74 to adopt proposals drafted by Caroline Lucas, the Green Party MEP for southeast England. There were 102 abstentions. The main proposal was for airlines to be forced to buy emissions permits within a separate trading scheme dedicated to aviation, with a specific cap on the amount of CO2......
The MEPs said that the scheme should cover all flights arriving at or departing from EU airports rather than just intra-EU flights...... But the scheme is likely to be limited to flights within Europe in the early years to avoid legal challenges from the United States and other countries. MEPs also accepted the proposal for a separate environmental tax to cover the impact of nitrogen oxides and condensation trails emitted by aircraft......
The GreenSkies Alliance, a coalition of environmental groups that opposes the growth of aviation, said passengers would have to pay up to £20 per flight, or £40 return, to cover the cost of purchasing just the CO2 permits for flights within Europe. A jet fuel tax and an environmental tax would push ticket prices up even further but the costs are harder to quantify.......
The parliament’s vote will strongly influence legislation being drafted by the European Commission and due to be debated later this year. The emissions trading scheme is due to be introduced in 2008 but commission officials admit it could be delayed until 2010.......
AIR passengers will be charged up to £40 extra for a return ticket within Europe to pay for the environmental impact of their journeys, under plans approved by the European Parliament yesterday.
MEPs voted in favour of the “immediate introduction” of a tax on jet fuel for flights within the 25 member states of the EU. The charge would double the cost of millions of budget airline flights. They also accepted a recommendation for a special emissions trading scheme for the aviation industry, which would see airlines buying permits to cover their output of carbon dioxide.......
MEPs voted by 439 to 74 to adopt proposals drafted by Caroline Lucas, the Green Party MEP for southeast England. There were 102 abstentions. The main proposal was for airlines to be forced to buy emissions permits within a separate trading scheme dedicated to aviation, with a specific cap on the amount of CO2......
The MEPs said that the scheme should cover all flights arriving at or departing from EU airports rather than just intra-EU flights...... But the scheme is likely to be limited to flights within Europe in the early years to avoid legal challenges from the United States and other countries. MEPs also accepted the proposal for a separate environmental tax to cover the impact of nitrogen oxides and condensation trails emitted by aircraft......
The GreenSkies Alliance, a coalition of environmental groups that opposes the growth of aviation, said passengers would have to pay up to £20 per flight, or £40 return, to cover the cost of purchasing just the CO2 permits for flights within Europe. A jet fuel tax and an environmental tax would push ticket prices up even further but the costs are harder to quantify.......
The parliament’s vote will strongly influence legislation being drafted by the European Commission and due to be debated later this year. The emissions trading scheme is due to be introduced in 2008 but commission officials admit it could be delayed until 2010.......
N4790P
Very ‘sensible’ tax on an industry that, according to IATA lost US$7.4 Billion globally in 2005.
Goodness knows what would happen if our industry ever returns a profit?
Goodness knows what would happen if our industry ever returns a profit?
Another barmy scheme to make European flying the most expensive and therefore least attractive to customers.
If they are really trying to go green rather than just pour money into the various chancellor's coffers surely an "environmental" charge would be better than VAT on fuel. At least this would throw an equal cost burden on non-European airlines operating into Europe.
Still think the overall concept is pish though.
If they are really trying to go green rather than just pour money into the various chancellor's coffers surely an "environmental" charge would be better than VAT on fuel. At least this would throw an equal cost burden on non-European airlines operating into Europe.
Still think the overall concept is pish though.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: planet igloo
Posts: 294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nicely done, slap an "environmental" tax on an industry that contributes just under 2% of the worlds green house emissions
Good old EU...rather than offering incentives to reduce emissions..just make some money off it
Good old EU...rather than offering incentives to reduce emissions..just make some money off it
That's Life!!
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Out of the sand pit, carving a path through our jungle.
Age: 72
Posts: 396
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Where will these taxes go? How do you wipe out contrails with money? Pound to a pinch of sh1t, the chancellors who hold the purse strings will not be feeding it into making a 'greener' environment. Wonder what the Green Party will do when they see the cash being used for any other purpose?
Paxing All Over The World
LowNSlow
That will not happen any time soon. The complaints from the rest of the world would prevent the legislation getting through. Folks like Qantas would be having hysterics at their costs of getting freight and slf to Europe, so the legal challenges would go to the WTO and the USA would prevent them.
When this eventually starts (proposed for 2008 and probably 1010), it will be the global trial which, if deemed successful, will then be taken up by other countries and zones. It may not be nice but we can either use up the oil in the planet quickly or slightly less quickly.
this would throw an equal cost burden on non-European airlines operating into Europe.
When this eventually starts (proposed for 2008 and probably 1010), it will be the global trial which, if deemed successful, will then be taken up by other countries and zones. It may not be nice but we can either use up the oil in the planet quickly or slightly less quickly.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A dark day indeed, I hold my head in my hands ......
The extra taxes will be dissipitated into thin air and will contribute to nothing and almost no one. Let's not forget the country is at war in the Middle East and therefore needs to pay massive amounts every month. Coupled with the unstrained spending on needless social projects we are heading for a BIG hangover after and the mess of last night's party will have to be cleared up by someone, somewhere.
The taxes will hurt the economy quite hard and will have no environmental benefit. Other continents are racing away and we are going the opposite way. Looks like US, China, India and anyone else with more than one brain cell will be able to fly in and out of Heathrow without this burden and give rise to an unlevel playing field. We pay nonsense taxes on air travel anyway so why this bull. Labour (whether old or new) will never be the party of economics or prosperity. It's enough to make you want to throw up ... hopefully over Gordoan Brown's suit (though in this day and age that would be classed as terrorism).
The extra taxes will be dissipitated into thin air and will contribute to nothing and almost no one. Let's not forget the country is at war in the Middle East and therefore needs to pay massive amounts every month. Coupled with the unstrained spending on needless social projects we are heading for a BIG hangover after and the mess of last night's party will have to be cleared up by someone, somewhere.
The taxes will hurt the economy quite hard and will have no environmental benefit. Other continents are racing away and we are going the opposite way. Looks like US, China, India and anyone else with more than one brain cell will be able to fly in and out of Heathrow without this burden and give rise to an unlevel playing field. We pay nonsense taxes on air travel anyway so why this bull. Labour (whether old or new) will never be the party of economics or prosperity. It's enough to make you want to throw up ... hopefully over Gordoan Brown's suit (though in this day and age that would be classed as terrorism).
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: @work
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sweden has its own version of it already, although not yet implemented. It's "#€ bull**** is what it is. Hey, if we're really lucky we might get slapped with EU taxes and then swedish taxes on top of it all! Right before we go back to horse and carriage/sailboats. Christ...
Guest
Posts: n/a
Before you get all jingoistic, this measure has been steered almost single-handedly by a Member of the European Parliament elected democratically by a British constituency (Caroline Lucas MEP).
As far as she is concerned, it has got nothing to do with raising exchequer revenue and everything to do with reducing the amount of flying by - how much? Only she knows. Probably at least 30%, maybe 50%.
The European Commission, the 'unelected bureaucrats' so beloved of the Little Englanders, think her package of measures stinks.
As far as she is concerned, it has got nothing to do with raising exchequer revenue and everything to do with reducing the amount of flying by - how much? Only she knows. Probably at least 30%, maybe 50%.
The European Commission, the 'unelected bureaucrats' so beloved of the Little Englanders, think her package of measures stinks.
Originally Posted by The SSK
Before you get all jingoistic, this measure has been steered almost single-handedly by a Member of the European Parliament elected democratically by a British constituency (Caroline Lucas MEP).
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: 'An Airfield Somewhere in England'
Posts: 1,094
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anyone who has had the misfortune to listen to any 'debate' in the European Parliament will have noted how similar an occasion it is to the Madhatter's Tea Party in 'Alice in Wonderland'. It has become a losers' paradise where any sniff of common sense is outlawed in favour of Planet Tharg policies championed by the Greens. Many of these people would only feel happy if we were all living in tents woven from spider silk and sat around in the lotus positing meditating on some book that brings us closer to the 'inner self'. The purists among them would, of course, dispense with the book since it is a wicked implement of technocracy, only made possible by the murder of an innocent tree.
The truly dreadful thing is that the nutter fringe now hold considerable sway in our society. Whilst countries like India and China are industrialing at a staggering rate, the Buffoons of Brussels proudly reduce us to agricultural economies that have no possibility of competing in the global market. Their 'head in a shoebox' mentality fails to grasp the huge industrial strides being made by our competition who have no such scruples. To embrace concepts of profit and loss is to admit to being yesterday's man. As our inexorable rush to industrial disaster continues, we will find ourselves with less technical know-how than other nations who see oil as a commodity to be used. The end result will be a second rate society eclipsed on every side by harder working, more informed nations. No doubt the bunnies will be bouncing in their burrows in delight at the thought of no roads, no ships, no cars, no planes, no noise and no fumes. Their joy will in the final analysis be tempered by the harsh reality of no jobs, no industrial base, no enterprise culture and no hospitals to treat the sick as we have no economy to pay for them. Not to worry though, the Chinese and the Indians will be dominating every aspect of the world economy by then and you may find that they have a slightly different perspective on how to run things!
The truly dreadful thing is that the nutter fringe now hold considerable sway in our society. Whilst countries like India and China are industrialing at a staggering rate, the Buffoons of Brussels proudly reduce us to agricultural economies that have no possibility of competing in the global market. Their 'head in a shoebox' mentality fails to grasp the huge industrial strides being made by our competition who have no such scruples. To embrace concepts of profit and loss is to admit to being yesterday's man. As our inexorable rush to industrial disaster continues, we will find ourselves with less technical know-how than other nations who see oil as a commodity to be used. The end result will be a second rate society eclipsed on every side by harder working, more informed nations. No doubt the bunnies will be bouncing in their burrows in delight at the thought of no roads, no ships, no cars, no planes, no noise and no fumes. Their joy will in the final analysis be tempered by the harsh reality of no jobs, no industrial base, no enterprise culture and no hospitals to treat the sick as we have no economy to pay for them. Not to worry though, the Chinese and the Indians will be dominating every aspect of the world economy by then and you may find that they have a slightly different perspective on how to run things!
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This has been coming for a long time. It's going to place serious pressure on airlines especially the low cost market which has been resisting fuel surcharges. The threat of VAT on fuel may even tip a few over the edge. I’m worried I work for one.
I’m sure some of the old European Legacy airlines will be looking after the European MEP’s making sure VAT on fuel does come into force, nothing a few first class seats can’t persuade!
….but of course, this will apply to only routes flown in Europe and long haul flights will escape VAT for a little longer
I’m sure some of the old European Legacy airlines will be looking after the European MEP’s making sure VAT on fuel does come into force, nothing a few first class seats can’t persuade!
….but of course, this will apply to only routes flown in Europe and long haul flights will escape VAT for a little longer
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 1,114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So who gets the money and what is it going to be used for? I didn't think there was anyway to mend the Ozone layer or whatever these people think aircraft emissions are harming. Perhaps they will give the cash to engine manufacturers or fuel companies to improve the efficiency? Er no...on second thoughts they will probably throw it into the EU coffers and spend it. Remember those are the EU coffers that haven't once had an unqualified audit report issued as the auditors cannot validate where vast sums of our taxes have gone to. Nice.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by easyprison
I’m sure some of the old European Legacy airlines will be looking after the European MEP’s making sure VAT on fuel does come into force, nothing a few first class seats can’t persuade!
Ms Lucas yesterday in the Guardian:
When six of the most powerful airline representatives in Europe club together to call your work "unbalanced" and "misinformed", you suspect they're feeling just a bit defensive. And, as a legislator, you also begin to suspect you're on the right lines.
Being the draughtswoman of European parliamentary proposals to tackle the aviation industry's growing contribution to climate change, I have been the subject of a concerted lobbying effort by the Association of European Airlines (AEA) as its members wake up to the fact that they might be forced to cut their emissions, and therefore their expansion plans, as early as 2008.
Being the draughtswoman of European parliamentary proposals to tackle the aviation industry's growing contribution to climate change, I have been the subject of a concerted lobbying effort by the Association of European Airlines (AEA) as its members wake up to the fact that they might be forced to cut their emissions, and therefore their expansion plans, as early as 2008.
Surcharges have become a rip-off. If this load of s**te comes to pass, I'll stop flying to Munich to visit my family and drive instead. Four litres of supercharged fun, 400bhp, 23mpg and sod the po-faced Caroline Lucas and her misguided Greens. 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Where my head rests
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Believe it or not the ozone hole in the atmosphere over parts of the Sounthern Hemisphere have began to shrink. But as for what has caused this to happen I don't know. The greens will of course say it's because we are more green now but if that was the case then why did it happen to begin with as there's not many industrial countries down there.
As for the new tax I can only see that there will be more airlines going bankrupt and of course prices going up with the ones that remain. It will be interesting to see what the industry's reaction to this will be - none so far as I can see. Also if avaition is so bad for the environment then why is European money being spent to help airports increase in size eg Madrid, Barcelona to name just a few.....
As for the new tax I can only see that there will be more airlines going bankrupt and of course prices going up with the ones that remain. It will be interesting to see what the industry's reaction to this will be - none so far as I can see. Also if avaition is so bad for the environment then why is European money being spent to help airports increase in size eg Madrid, Barcelona to name just a few.....