A Fair Tax on Flying
 

Have a look at this video produced by BALPA : which explains the damage being caused by the current (and future) levels of APD (Air Passenger Duty) being levied!

The campaign website : A Fair Tax On Flying allows you to enter a UK postcode and the system then automatically sends your MP an email.


Currently over 90,000 emails have been sent and the target is 100,000 for a debate to be triggered in Parliament - so let’s use our collective voices to hit that target!

And if you feel that you cannot send an email to a UK MP because you no longer live there then the website allows you to send an email to the Chancellor instead – you don’t even have to compose it – it has already been done for you!

I visited the site having been incited to do so by Steve Ridgway and sent an email to my (Conservative) MP and got a very prompt response from the House of Commons which told me in so many words to go away.

It looked like a pretty standard letter maybe with a few options inserted (depending what I was complaining about) which talked about the biggest structural defecit in history being inherited from the last Labour government and something had to be done about it and this was one way. It also said the departure tax was being extended to cover "business jets".

Done and linked to my FB page

Good Luck with your cause.
 

The government that can and promises to “give” you everything can “take” everything as well.

It seems like those in positions of political power view commerce and the masses as servants to their whims, the fruits of our labour and industry as their rightful resources to be allocated as they seem fit. Why does it not surprise me in the least that the tax levied in the video does not go to support aviation infrastructure or the industry.

I am developing a healthy anti-incumbent view as I draw near the voting booth. Politicians and nappies (diapers) need to be changed often and for the same reason.

I got a good response, See Below


Thank you for contacting me about Air Passenger Duty (APD).

I feel strongly about the damaging effects of high APD. Anything other than low rates of taxation damages wealth creation. I believe in low taxation in general and I believe it is crazy to pay for our public services through taxes on fuel and travel.

High APD particularly affects my constituency because many residents are of Vincentian extraction whose lives are blighted by the high rate making it less affordable to maintain family ties with St Vincent.

The only way taxation can be fair, in my view, is for all taxes to be low. But for that to happen, people need to vote for lower government expenditure. Without that, taxes will need to remain high to reduce the deficit and begin paying off the debt.

However, there is a strong case that our air transport costs must be competitive and reflect market changes, so I shall continue to press for the earliest possible reduction in APD as well as for less government, lower taxes and more freedom in general.

On election I made the decision to join the list of MPs who have decided not to sign EDMs. You can read more about my views on EDMs here.

Thank you again for taking the time to contact me.

Yours sincerely,

Steve Baker MP

Wait, so this tax doesn't even go directly towards improvements in ATC, runways, or security? Disgusting.

How does APD affect wealth creation???

If it is paid by a business it is a cost they deduct so eventually the tax payer is the one who pays - admitedly it increases a company's costs but I doubt it is a cost they notice

APD only really affects holiday makers and private citizens - I guess the Govt would point out that the real cost of flying has come down so far they should be able to afford it.

No-one likes paying taxes but as atmosphere says if you want a certain level of Govt expenditure then someone has to pay :(:(:(:(

APD is cheap to collect and hard to avoid and there are almost no exceptions - this makes it a very attractive tax from an HMRC view point

I received a rapid reply from my MP - the newly enobled Sir Tony Baldry. I always thought he was a good guy but as far as this is concerned his minions (who I assume are doing his work for him during the holiday, or am I just on old cynic?) came back with the usual Conservative lines. Basically we have to find money to cover the Labour cockup and this is as good a way as any.

Where is the petition link to increase the APD. I am all for trebling the tax, keep the riff raff out of the planes, keep the Brits from buying houses close to Loco destinations. All in all that would be great for the UK economy.

What do you reckon, 300 quid for EU trips and 750 for long haul? That should do it.

So little?
How about twenty grand for a passport - that should keep the poor at home.

We should be careful what we wish for - if they find a way to tax aviation fuel it would be a lot more punitive to airlines than APD. OK some governments might never agree to it but it would only take Europe and USA to implement it and that probably covers about half the airline flying in the world.

If it's right to inflict the highest flying tax in the world on flights ex UK, why is there not an equivalent tax on coach, rail and ship transport ? Since the original excuse for implementing this tax was to tackle green issues, though none of the taxes are actually used in that direction or any other aviation related service, I find it convenient that no such tax is applied to these other transport modes especially since they produce many more tons of noxious gases.

I have given a good telling-to to the Chancellor.

My comment:
How can a tax which increases the cost of promoting and selling British exports conceivably help the recovery of the UK economy?

Go cheaper
 

It is like in most Countries: The collector has to use his money wise and for the purpose he claimed reason if you have a company or a similar enterprise.

As soon as you are the Taxcollector you can use the money imposed from Air Tax or Petrol Tax to seal any other overdue expenses as you like. People call that missuse, as a government you call that what ?

Another fair share on the downturn of Transit Passengers at LHR is the close to disgusting way most of our Customers get "handeld" from the BAA Security. Also something to think about. I had several occassions when I talked with C-Class Travelers who under no circumstances want to transit in London anymore. Something to think about, but the people concerned will not do it, I am sure. They use Taxpayers money as it belongs to them.

fortystripes said ... Wait, so this tax doesn't even go directly towards improvements in ATC, runways, or security? Disgusting.

You'll be thinking the road fund license goes to repair the roads next !

and it helps the sand pit airlines. Nicely under the high rate tax.:D

Just to clarify (Mr Pedantic, me!) it is for Parliament to consider a debate - it is not automatic.

The power of Democracy
 

Sunnyjohn Quote "it is for Parliament to consider a debate - it is not automatic."

Quite correct!

A petition of over 100000 signatures was presented for Parliament to consider a referendum on EU membership for the U.K.

It was rejected!

Ahh, the power of democracy!

Just received an "I`m towing the party line" reply from my MP ,very discouraging. On a par with the Government`s attitude to Carbon Credits and "Windmills". "Don`t bother me with facts, it`s a great way to collect more taxes."

Good post.
 

Thanks to beerdrinker for posting this.

Positioning to a number of what used to be busy UK airports last week we commented on the noticeable drop in aircraft movements compared to previous years(ok, some of that is due to the global recession).
If the politicians did what a lot of sensible people of this country want :ugh: the economy would start to grow and there would be more money to pay the deficit.
Fact : Lower taxes = more Government income from tax.

I will be adding to the email to my MP, to counteract the deficit plea...Why is the UK borrowing money to give it away to countries that don't need it and taxing British nationals more money in order to pay the interest on those loans? :{

Oh I love assumptions on these threads. Leftbank did you have a few to drink when you showed up during your research visits at various UK airports?

Air traffic in the last published rolling 12 months shows that traffic grew by 2.3% following a growth of 5% in 2011, while capacity grew by 6%.

The tax has no effect on growth, so I say, increase the lot of them. 13 quid for a EU departure is a joke, most locos charge more for baggage and card fees.

Of course this government, or any for that matter is not going to abolish APD, an easy to collect tax that has no bearing on passenger numbers and one that the business community does not pay anyways so has no bearing on economic growth. So let's tax the luxury of foreign holidays a bit more I reckon as a penalty for spending pounds oversees, there must surely be a level to which APD can be increased that would have little to no effect on traffic but would have an effect on domestic spending.

I have no idea where this lunatic idea of hypothecated taxes comes from - the idea that tax on something must be used only on that industry/group of people

the Govt have to find enough money to run the country - they normally try and do it in the easiest and cheapest way that also minimises the chances of evasion - hence PAYE, Fuel Duty, VAT, APD etc

it's like everything else - when only a few people do something it's not worth the effort to tax them - but when it gets to millions of holiday flights a year............

I'm sure they'd be happy to replace it with a fuel tax on jet fuel........

I have always respected and enjoyed reading your valuable contributions here on PPRuNe, please do not interpret anything I have written as a personal attack on you or anybody employed in public service. For society to function well government must play a significant role. But government's constantly increasing demands on our wages is not supportable indefinitely. It seems BALPA has reached that point now and is seeking to change the status quo.


(1) The company purchased high end quality designer clothing from France and leather goods from Italy and Spain that were in demand but not available in the United States. This activity supported industries and thereby jobs on both sides of the Atlantic, a classic win-win for all parties involved (The original owners of the leather used would disagree).

cldrvr - if you read the post, we (which included two experienced 25 year plus in the job, corporate drivers) were commenting on the fall in traffic compared to previous years.
Without Googling all the UK airport figures since what I would regard as the busy/peak times about 6 years ago I can't dispute your figures in the short term but going on what the handling agents told us, they most definitely do not have any growth in movements.Far from it. Sit looking at the runway at STN for example for 6 hours whilst you're waiting for the pax and you'll see the difference.
Off duty now so yes I have had a drink and a fine Scotch it was too!


We all work in aviation do we not? Increases in APD are bad for our business whatever your current job is. We should stick together in opposing it.

It's a nice easy tax, airlines have to pay it.

I don't see it resting at this level for long, inflation and the term "Green" will come into play.

APD and Stamp Duty are just low hanging fruit tax that drop into uk.Gov buckets, the buckets have so many holes, they will never ever be full enough to allow the fruit to remain on the tree....

Good Luck, but I think it's fruitless !!!!

"government's constantly increasing demands on our wages"

WRONG!!!

UK Income tax Wikipedia

the highest rate of income tax peaked in the Second World War at 99.25%. It was slightly reduced after the war and was around 90% through the 1950s and 60s. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...2875-05%29.jpg http://bits.wikimedia.org/static-1.2...gnify-clip.png
Tax revenues as a percentage of GDP for the U.K. in comparison to the OECD and the EU 15.




In 1971 the top-rate of income tax on earned income was cut to 75%. A surcharge of 15% on investment income kept the top rate on that income at 90%.


In 1974 this cut was partly reversed, and the top rate on earned income raised to 83%.


With the investment income surcharge this raised the top rate on investment income to 98%, the highest permanent rate since the war. This applied to incomes over £20,000 (£155,247 as of 2012). In 1974, as many as 750,000 people were liable to pay the top-rate of income tax.



Margaret Thatcher, who favoured indirect taxation, reduced personal income tax rates during the 1980s. In the first budget after her election victory in 1979, the top rate was reduced from 83% to 60% and the basic rate from 33% to 30%.



The basic rate was also cut for three successive budgets - to 29% in the 1986 budget, 27% in 1987 and to 25% in 1988. The top rate of income tax was cut to 40% in the 1988 budget.The investment income surcharge was abolished in 1985.


Subsequent governments reduced the basic rate further, down to its present level of 20% in 2007. Since 1976 (when it stood at 35%) the basic rate has been reduced by 15%.



In 2010 a new top rate of 50% was introduced on income over £150,000. In the 2012 budget this rate was cut to 45%.

WRONG? WRONG?
 

Heathrow Harry,

You are very selective in your choice of supporting "facts".

Never having earned enough money to pay the top rate of tax, any reduction in the top rate is irrelevant to me.

As I am retired and on a fixed income the Government is indeed making increasing demands on my income.

How much was ADP in the periods which you quote?

How much was fuel duty in those periods?

How much was VAT?

How much was National Insurance?

Rail fares are increasing at twice the inflation rate (with Government approval)

etc.etc.

You have conveniently supported your arguement with figures of direct taxation and omitted the more surreptitious methods of fleecing the population.

As you don't seem to have a problem with taxation, perhaps you could pay mine?

I am reminded of those who think that this Government should continue to provide aid to the "independent " countries in the developing world. This aid coming from our coffers when "the Govt have to find enough money to run the country".(your words)

So, I'm afraid that it is you who is WRONG.

A more encouraging email from my (Conservative) MP. It seems there are some who are prepared to at least consider the matter rather than toe the party line.

BBC - Have Your Say: How can travel by train be improved?
.
.
.

By increasing APD the UK will be balancing cost between UK Train and UK Air charges, it's just a way of keeping ahead of other countries !!!

And a previous poster mentioned Jet Fuel Tax, this will be a nice tool to get even more cash.

Two things in life are certain, been said for a long time, no change anytime soon I think.

Are there any trains running between London and New York then?

Are there any trains running between London and New York then?

Not that I know.

But trains do travel between the UK and Europe.

Looking at UK train travel costs, it can not be a surprise that UK air travel gets extra charges !!!

It's only Tax !!!!

Aha, so use the train to get to Europe and then take the plane - magic formula!

I'm told that quite a few people travelling to long-haul destinations from the UK are choosing to take the train to Paris/Amsterdam, have a good time in town, stay in a nice hotel, take a flight to their destination the next day and save money overall.

How can UK airlines compete with that? (Unless they start doing it themselves...)

FullWings is hearing correct.

Some travellers/visitors to Europe from distant places (capital city !!!) are indeed making travel plans to avoid the very high UK APD, lets say they visit the UK first, then mainland Europe and depart home from there, if they research UK train costs, maybe some will skip the UK.

My previous point about Trains and Planes and costings, the UK has expensive trains, getting more and more so, if the UK public can pay for the expensive trains, they will pay more for air travel, simples ???

I think some Euro countries held air travel tax and even suspended it, poss Holland.

The sooner all Euro APD charges are collected by BRU and handed out as they (BRU) see fit the better it will be !!!

I signed the petition and today received a generic reply in return from my MP, Mr j Arbuthnot.

His argument was simply, 'the country/government needs the money.' He indicated that a favour had been done us in delaying the next rise.

Well though out? cogent? no.

A fob off? yes.

As he complained about automated petitions I have emailed him back personaly to reinforce my views on the damage being done. I would reccommend any one else receiving his email to do the same.

GWH

Your MP is just being honest.

Gov.com's tend to collect Tax, this is just a nice easy one that gets poured into the Tax Bucket with little effort apart from just playing with the rate.

The rate is a bit of a joke, but if it were to be changed from cap city to a suitable formula, the overall rate/income/tax would tend to increase to pay for any changes and time spent on keeping people happy.

Lets just be happy it's so low at the moment, it's only going one way in the future !!!

GREEN ??????????

FERetd

Total tax take is shown below - clearly we are nowhere near the highest take which was, interestingly, under the Tories in the early 80's

obviously if you cut income tax then the tax has to be raised somewhere else

unless we REALLY cut deep - say defence, the NHS, University education (only 5% of the UK went to uni when I graduated ), social security....... but how you'd get elected on such a platform is beyond me

Financial year - Net taxes and NI £bn - % GDP


1964-65 12.3 36.2.
1965-66 11.4 31.2.
1966-67 12.3 31.8.
1967-68 13.8 33.6.
1968-69 15.6 35.
1969-70 17.7 37.
1970-71 19.3 36.3.
1971-72 20.8 35.
1972-73 22 32.6.
1973-74 24 31.9.
1974-75 31.1 34.5.
1975-76 39.5 35.3.
1976-77 46 35.1.
1977-78 52 34.1.
1978-79 57.8 33.1.
1979-80 70.3 33.5.
1980-81 84.9 35.5.
1981-82 100 38.
1982-83 109.7 38.2.
1983-84 117.9 37.7.
1984-85 128.6 38.2.
1985-86 138.2 37.4.
1986-87 146.8 37.
1987-88 162.1 36.8.
1988-89 176.8 36.1.
1989-90 189.8 35.4.
1990-91 201.2 34.9.
1991-92 205.3 33.8.
1992-93 205.4 32.7.
1993-94 211.8 31.8.
1994-95 232.2 33.
1995-96 250 33.6.
1996-97 269.4 34.
1997-98 296 35.1.
1998-99 316.5 35.5.
1999-00 335.3 35.5.
2000-01 359.3 36.3.
2001-02 369.1 35.8.
2002-03 375 34.3.
2003-04 397 34.3.
2004-05 427.1 35.2.
2005-06 456.8 35.9.
2006-07 486 36.1.
2007-08 516 36.2.
2008-09 508 35.5.
2009-10 477.8 34.
2010-11 528.9 35.9.
2011-12 550.6 35.7.
2012-13 569 35.5.
2013-14 599 35.7.
2014-15 633 35.9.
2015-16 664 35.6.
2016-17 704 35.7

The issue is whether aviation is being unfairly targeted - personally I think it is - I couldn't give a damn what % of GDP our taxes are set at - all I object to is having to pay these increased taxes when I want to see my relatives in Australia.

Also our politicians are lying (how unusual?) when they tell us this is a "green" tax when none of it is being set aside for "green" purposes (whatever they are).

At a time when the UK airlines are having enough difficulty making profits, HMG decides to increase taxation on air travel.

When the next election comes round and I get canvassed on the doorstep by the prospective parliamentary candidates I will be asking them what their views are and which way they voted - if they indicate their lack of support for changing this penal level of taxation on aviation I will be making it blatantly clear to them that they will not be attracting my vote and I will be educating others to do likewise.

Selective again
 

Oh Heathrow Harry, once again you are selecting statistics to suit your arguement. The % GDP is irrelevant and your own figures show an increase in actual Tax revenue and NI every year since 1964. That is the reality and we (well, most of us) know where it is coming from - our pockets.

APD, the thrust of this thread, is just another cash grab and fireflybob has made some very valid points on the matter.

Like others I, too, signed the petition and received only a generic response from my MP.

I do not agree with the cutbacks to defence (almost to the point of defenceless) or to the NHS, but do agree with your remarks on University education and social security - could include foreign aid as well.

You ask how one would get elected on the manifesto that you have described and the answer is, of course, you won't. You merely publish a more acceptable manifest and then do what you afterwards (again, see fireflybob's post).

You will remember "How to tell if a politician is lying....?"

did you really think it did ?

Darling admits APD will help pay for banking crisis - www.travelweekly.co.uk

That's Nov 2009..