Airport Passenger Duty
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Eas Anglia
Age: 64
Posts: 812
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airport Passenger Duty
Interesting article in the December Airport Magazine with reference to Airport Passenger Duty and how it is effecting UK regional airports.
Spun a bit too heavily toward Manchester but I guess it is the only place which could provide major levels of capacity immediately without new runways , or additional terminals.
Must confess I didn't realise that if you fly in and out same day from one international destination to another international destination, no APD is payable to the UK treasury.
It is therefore somewhat bizarre that we are in effect talking about the need for at least 1 maybe 2 new runways at LHR but a significant proportion of the passengers who use it i.e. tfr pax are the ones most likely to benefit, but seemingly are not contributing in any way shape or form to its cost !
Spun a bit too heavily toward Manchester but I guess it is the only place which could provide major levels of capacity immediately without new runways , or additional terminals.
Must confess I didn't realise that if you fly in and out same day from one international destination to another international destination, no APD is payable to the UK treasury.
It is therefore somewhat bizarre that we are in effect talking about the need for at least 1 maybe 2 new runways at LHR but a significant proportion of the passengers who use it i.e. tfr pax are the ones most likely to benefit, but seemingly are not contributing in any way shape or form to its cost !
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Ireland
Posts: 1,621
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is therefore somewhat bizarre that we are in effect talking about the need for at least 1 maybe 2 new runways at LHR but a significant proportion of the passengers who use it i.e. tfr pax are the ones most likely to benefit, but seemingly are not contributing in any way shape or form to its cost !
Must confess I didn't realise that if you fly in and out same day from one international destination to another international destination, no APD is payable to the UK treasury
Incidentally, I'm surprised that Airport Magazine hasn't managed to get the name of the tax correct - it's Air Passenger Duty.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Cape Town / UK / Europe
Posts: 728
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
-the following transfers are exempted:
* transfer interval of 24 hours when the following flight is international
* transfer interval of less than 6 hours when the following flight is domestic and arrival is before 17h00.
If following flight is domestic and arrival is at 17h00 or later, transfer interval is extended to 10h00 on following day.
*note: Open dated departures are considered as non- connecting and the apd is chargeable. Only when specific departure times are booked can a con- nection exemption be considered.
- when departure is scheduled on small aircraft less than 10 tons maximum take off weight -
the channel islands alderney (aci), guernsey (gci) and jersey (jer) are not part of the uk for apd purposes and do not apply air passenger duty on departures from those airports.
* transfer interval of 24 hours when the following flight is international
* transfer interval of less than 6 hours when the following flight is domestic and arrival is before 17h00.
If following flight is domestic and arrival is at 17h00 or later, transfer interval is extended to 10h00 on following day.
*note: Open dated departures are considered as non- connecting and the apd is chargeable. Only when specific departure times are booked can a con- nection exemption be considered.
- when departure is scheduled on small aircraft less than 10 tons maximum take off weight -
the channel islands alderney (aci), guernsey (gci) and jersey (jer) are not part of the uk for apd purposes and do not apply air passenger duty on departures from those airports.
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: France
Posts: 191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The OPs point remains valid, however. Heathrow's third runway is frequently justified by citing the "hub" argument, i.e. potential for international travellers to connect in London instead of Paris/Amsterdam/Frankfurt, but these passengers are exempt from APD so their benefit to the country is limited to whatever profit the airport can make from their presence.
Similarly, the supposed original purpose of APD was to encourage travellers to use alternative forms of transport, or compensate for the alleged environmental damage caused by those that refused to opt for an overland journey. Yet transfer passengers whose short and commercially insignificant stay in the UK is accompanied by the same take-off emissions as anyone else are exempt from APD while the small businessman in Kent or Devon who needs to travel to Scotland is penalised twice should he choose to prefer working to commuting.
Heathrow's third runway is frequently justified by citing the "hub" argument, i.e. potential for international travellers to connect in London instead of Paris/Amsterdam/Frankfurt
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Eas Anglia
Age: 64
Posts: 812
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's a very narrow definition of a hub's USP. Non-connecting passengers, both international and domestic, also benefit from the synergies that a hub offers whenever they fly on a route that needs transfer traffic to be viable.
But surely if we are led to believe London is suffering because of lack of slots and interconnectivity would it not be better to sacrifice some of these flights for say 2 direct point to point Chinese or Brazilian flights ?
Do we really need flights to New York every 30minutes ?
We all know that APD has sod all to do with emissions and more to do with "tax collect". BUT there is something radically with a system that is supposed to reduce emissions which has no impact on those passengers who supposedly make a contribution to that pollution but do not a jot of business in the UK ?
But surely if we are led to believe London is suffering because of lack of slots and interconnectivity would it not be better to sacrifice some of these flights for say 2 direct point to point Chinese or Brazilian flights ?
Do we really need flights to New York every 30minutes ?
We all know that APD has sod all to do with emissions and more to do with "tax collect". BUT there is something radically with a system that is supposed to reduce emissions which has no impact on those passengers who supposedly make a contribution to that pollution but do not a jot of business in the UK ?
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Middlesex (under the flightpath)
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote: "Similarly, the supposed original purpose of APD was to encourage travellers to use alternative forms of transport, or compensate for the alleged environmental damage caused by those that refused to opt for an overland journey. Yet transfer passengers whose short and commercially insignificant stay in the UK is accompanied by the same take-off emissions as anyone else are exempt from APD while the small businessman in Kent or Devon who needs to travel to Scotland is penalised twice should he choose to prefer working to commuting"
No, it was one of Ken Clark's 22 "stealth" taxes (along with VAT on insurance and fuel bills for example). The "stealth" taxes principle has been continued by Gordon Brown, Alister Darling and George Osborne.
It was introduced when we were in recession and came out of the ERM and before the so-called Clark/Brown "boom".
It had/has nothing to do with alternative forms of transport (for the most part, there aren't any), or the environment or anything else. For many years it was relatively modest, but since the recent recession, Brown, Darling and Osborne have been raising it out of all proportion.
No, it was one of Ken Clark's 22 "stealth" taxes (along with VAT on insurance and fuel bills for example). The "stealth" taxes principle has been continued by Gordon Brown, Alister Darling and George Osborne.
It was introduced when we were in recession and came out of the ERM and before the so-called Clark/Brown "boom".
It had/has nothing to do with alternative forms of transport (for the most part, there aren't any), or the environment or anything else. For many years it was relatively modest, but since the recent recession, Brown, Darling and Osborne have been raising it out of all proportion.
Do we really need flights to New York every 30minutes ?
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But surely if we are led to believe London is suffering because of lack of slots and interconnectivity would it not be better to sacrifice some of these flights for say 2 direct point to point Chinese or Brazilian flights ?
One bad year can kill any business.
A Runyonesque Character
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: The South of France ... Not
Age: 74
Posts: 1,209
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Wherever there is a similar tax - France, Germany, Netherlands for a while, transfer traffic is always exempted, otherwise it would totally distort comeptition between the home-based hub carrier and its competitors.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Eas Anglia
Age: 64
Posts: 812
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not being rude SSk but not sure what you mean ?
APD has pretty much been scrapped in most EEC countries , where it does exist the rates are so low that it makes little difference to total price.
This is why I guess Manchester is so animated !
Its not London BUT its not a regional airport either.
I understand it is heamorraging traffic to hubs like AMS FRA CDG simply because it is so much cheaper to fly via those airports thus avoiding the UK long haul element of APD by flying direct.
If that is true its not only increasing the number of uneccessary flights but the tax take is lower.....
Barmy beyond belief !
APD has pretty much been scrapped in most EEC countries , where it does exist the rates are so low that it makes little difference to total price.
This is why I guess Manchester is so animated !
Its not London BUT its not a regional airport either.
I understand it is heamorraging traffic to hubs like AMS FRA CDG simply because it is so much cheaper to fly via those airports thus avoiding the UK long haul element of APD by flying direct.
If that is true its not only increasing the number of uneccessary flights but the tax take is lower.....
Barmy beyond belief !
Last edited by Navpi; 19th Dec 2012 at 09:28.
A Runyonesque Character
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: The South of France ... Not
Age: 74
Posts: 1,209
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
APD type taxes are levied in France, Germany, Austria - at much lower rates than APD admittedly. Germany goes up to €53 max. Netherlands had one but withdrew it because it was costing the economy a lot more than it was bringing in. Belgium planned one but saw what was happening in the Netherlands and scrapped the plan.
Wrong. If you fly long haul from UK via one of these hubs you still pay long haul APD - unless you purchase two separate tickets (almost certainly more expensive and no protection in the case of missed connections.
I understand it is heamorraging traffic to hubs like AMS FRA CDG simply because it is so much cheaper to fly via those airports thus avoiding the UK long haul element of APD by flying direct
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Middlesex (under the flightpath)
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote: "APD type taxes are levied in France, Germany, Austria - at much lower rates than APD admittedly. Germany goes up to €53 max. Netherlands had one but withdrew it because it was costing the economy a lot more than it was bringing in. Belgium planned one but saw what was happening in the Netherlands and scrapped the plan."
Denmark also scrapped it and Ireland changed their's to Eu 3.00 (£2.50ish)
Quote: "Wrong. If you fly long haul from UK via one of these hubs you still pay long haul APD - unless you purchase two separate tickets (almost certainly more expensive and no protection in the case of missed connections."
Correct me if this wrong, but AFAIK, it can be done one ticket, by booking a multi-sector journey, with a 24 hour stopover at the European hub on the outward journey, e.g on KL: LHR-AMS on monday; AMS-NRT on tuesday.
Denmark also scrapped it and Ireland changed their's to Eu 3.00 (£2.50ish)
Quote: "Wrong. If you fly long haul from UK via one of these hubs you still pay long haul APD - unless you purchase two separate tickets (almost certainly more expensive and no protection in the case of missed connections."
Correct me if this wrong, but AFAIK, it can be done one ticket, by booking a multi-sector journey, with a 24 hour stopover at the European hub on the outward journey, e.g on KL: LHR-AMS on monday; AMS-NRT on tuesday.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Eas Anglia
Age: 64
Posts: 812
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for Clarification SSK
and yes
Correct me if this wrong, but AFAIK, it can be done one ticket, by booking a multi-sector journey, with a 24 hour stopover at the European hub on the outward journey, e.g on KL: LHR-AMS on monday; AMS-NRT on tuesday.
That was my take re outbound !
Plus the price differentials between using what can be descibed as "dumped capacity" is lower than premium service direct...its completly skewed when there are multiple examples of fares like;
£700 Manchester - Newark
£300 Manchester CDG - Newark
and yes
Correct me if this wrong, but AFAIK, it can be done one ticket, by booking a multi-sector journey, with a 24 hour stopover at the European hub on the outward journey, e.g on KL: LHR-AMS on monday; AMS-NRT on tuesday.
That was my take re outbound !
Plus the price differentials between using what can be descibed as "dumped capacity" is lower than premium service direct...its completly skewed when there are multiple examples of fares like;
£700 Manchester - Newark
£300 Manchester CDG - Newark
Last edited by Navpi; 22nd Dec 2012 at 10:12.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Cape Town / UK / Europe
Posts: 728
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
by booking a multi-sector journey, with a 24 hour stopover at the European hub on the outward journey, e.g on KL: LHR-AMS on monday; AMS-NRT on tuesday.
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Middlesex (under the flightpath)
Posts: 1,946
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote: "Some fare types don't allow a stopover, or charge for one, and then there is the extra money that one would possibly spend during the stopover, which would wipe out any saving on APD. There is only a benefit if you want to stop over in, e.g. AMS - as I invariably do."
Fair point.
As for AMS stopovers, it would be a shame not to!
Guess it's a case of pay your money take your choice: the money goes to Chancellor, or the money goes towards a pleasant time in Amsterdam.
Fair point.
As for AMS stopovers, it would be a shame not to!
Guess it's a case of pay your money take your choice: the money goes to Chancellor, or the money goes towards a pleasant time in Amsterdam.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Glasgow Scotland UK
Age: 76
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I understand that Belfast (BFS) will be exempt from UK Air Passenger Duty in 2013 on International flights. Till the end of this year pax only paid the domestic rate for these flights. This is all to do with competition from Dublin (DUB) where the UK APD did not apply. Airlines (well mainly United) had threatened to pull out unless something was done so the Northern Ireland Government has abolished APD on these flights.
The UK Government should take the same view to make UK airports in a stronger position Vs Europe and abolish APD now.
The UK Government should take the same view to make UK airports in a stronger position Vs Europe and abolish APD now.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Eas Anglia
Age: 64
Posts: 812
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Welsh have said they will abolish APD "if" they buy Cardiff !
AND if the Scots gain independence it will also be scrubbed at Glasgow and Edinburgh !
AND if the Scots gain independence it will also be scrubbed at Glasgow and Edinburgh !
