Air Passenger Duty goes up today

[Katys Grandad]

The allegedly "environmental" Air Passenger Duty goes up today.

The long haul tax is now allocated in bands dependent upon the flight distance. Luckily, although Florida destinations are over 4,000 miles from the UK, flights fall into the under 4,000 band because the amount is assessed on the distance from London to the capital city of the country. As Washington DC is under 4,000 miles away, all US destinations are taken as being that far.

The rise is £5 per passenger in economy and £10 per passenger in all premium cabins. Bigger rises are already set for next November.

In the great scheme of things it's not a lot of money but with all the other charges now being applied to things like checked baggage, it all adds up.[msnsad]

[Jill]

Mr Darling has finally come clean and said this is not an enviornmental tax but effectively just another tax to try and plug the hole in the government's finances.

Addressing journalists in Newcastle, home of the failed bank Northern Rock, Mr Darling said: 'I am quite blunt about it, we need to raise money to pay for some of the things we have done.
'If unemployment goes up there is a cost obviously to the family, there is cost in increased benefits, Northern Rock has cost a lot of money.
What we are doing is putting a pound on to your average ticket, which about three quarters of people travel on.
'And you consider the cost of an air ticket, I don't think a pound is that unreasonable.
'In the North East, we have spent billions on a bank for very good reasons.
'We could have stood back and said "There you are, tough luck". We didn't because that was the wrong approach.'

[Katys Grandad]

No doubt when Mr Darling flies it's down on his expenses bill so he can afford to take that line with our money can't he?

[Robert5988]

Some of us who frequent the USA Frequent Flyer forums are well aware that this tax has received considerable adverse publicity. Many businessmen are actively arranging their trips to Europe to avoid UK, as are many holidaymakers.

If visiting UK is essential, it is pretty easy to travel via Dublin or any major European hub and pay the lower tax. If you want to visit a city other than London it is sometimes easier.

Of course it is not just the airport tax that is lost, but the income GB Ltd loses from people failing to stay in Britain.

I assume that the UK Government have carried out a realistic analysis of the overall effect of this tax; but then I always was naive
[msnwink]

[andy_d]

IF you are a family travelling or a group its defininely worth looking at flying to the US via Paris now and even more so next November when it goes up again. Not sure about Dublin but I know that there is no Air Duty when flying from France,so would only have to pay the smaller duty which at present is only £11 each instead of £45.

[steph_goodrum]

The trouble is as soon as you factor in the cost of flying via other airports you can easily strip yourself of any savings made on APD. If you allow plenty of time between connections and have a couple of hours then ffeding a family at the airport can soon negate any savings (and the Government know people will realise this eventually and pay it regardless.
It's like the taxes on cigarettes and alcohol to discourage their use, with cigarettes (from what I've seen costing around £5 a packet there are probably still just as many smokers as before.

[Katys Grandad]

<blockquote id="quote" class="ffs">quote:Originally posted by steph_goodrum
The trouble is as soon as you factor in the cost of flying via other airports you can easily strip yourself of any savings made on APD. If you allow plenty of time between connections and have a couple of hours then ffeding a family at the airport can soon negate any savings (and the Government know people will realise this eventually and pay it regardless.
It's like the taxes on cigarettes and alcohol to discourage their use, with cigarettes (from what I've seen costing around £5 a packet there are probably still just as many smokers as before.
[/quote]

I agree with that if you're flying economy but the equation changes when you're in a premium cabin where the tax is now £90. Next November, somebody flying to the US in a Premium Economy cabin will pay £120 in APD.

If you fly to Australia or most of the Far East next year in PE, that'll be £170 each![msnmad]

[SteveandJan]

It never was a green tax and knew it was going into the main coffers. Just another way of taxing hard working people who want to get away for a break and I don't see any improvements of what labour have done for the country.

[ShirleyD]

Exploding the myths of air tax hikes



Claims that Air Passenger Duty (APD) will deliver environmental benefits have been debunked by Airlines ahead of the tax increases that come into effect this weekend.

From Sunday (November 1), APD will be applied in four bands based on the distance between London and the capital city of the destination country, with one rate for economy cabins and one for premium.

A second increase in APD that comes into effect in November 2010 will become payable in mid-November 2009 on bookings made for travel beyond November 1 next year.

In total, the increases will push APD up by 50 per cent on flights to the US, 87 per cent to the Caribbean, and 112 per cent to Singapore and Australia compared to today's rates.

With the embattled airline industry fighting the biggest financial storm in its history, airlines across the world need every s[bad language filtered out] of help they can get to survive. But while other governments are taking action to help aviation, the UK government is saddling carriers with this even greater financial burden.

Six myths of APD
The government defends the increases as environmental and fair but the reality is exactly the opposite

APD IS an environmental tax
The proceeds from APD go into the Treasury’s general coffers and are not ring-fenced for any environmental schemes.

The rises are needed to ensure aviation pays its environmental costs
The Department for Transport paper ‘Aviation emissions cost assessment 2008’ showed that aviation more than paid for its environmental costs through APD even before the 2009 increases were taken into account.

The revenue from APD more than doubled between 2006/2007 (£971 million) and 2007/2008 (£1994 million) despite a 1.6 per cent decline in passengers from 2007 to 2008.

Taxation reduces emissions
Taxes on flying provide no incentive for airlines to invest in technology to become more carbon efficient. APD rates are the same for each route, irrespective of the emissions levels of the aircraft flying it. Carbon trading is far more effective than taxation, as it provides a financial incentive for the aviation industry to improve its environmental performance.

Aviation is undertaxed
No other country imposes flight taxes as high as APD, and air travel from the UK is the most heavily taxed in the world. Within the UK, there is no equivalent of APD levied on any other form of transport. Despite this, aviation is the only transport mode that pays for all its own infrastructure without any taxpayer subsidy.

APD rises will only affect airlines
Inbound tourism earns the UK more than £16 billion a year – and is bound to be adversely affected by the APD rise on the return leg of overseas visitors’ flights. It is estimated that thousands of jobs in the UK tourist industry could be put at risk by the APD hikes. The Airport Operators Association, which represents 72 UK airports, says the rises, coming on top of the recession, threaten the survival of some regional airports as airlines and charter companies cut services.