Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
BFS - EWR Under Threat From Taxes..  
User currently offlineeire123 From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2011, 47 posts, RR: 0
Posted (3 years 6 months 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 2961 times:

Just spotted this on the BBC news website this morning. It appears that UK TAXES are threatening the profitability of international flights. Clearly the UK Government are loosing this battle. With Belfast under treat from DUB, and the rest of the UK's competition from the rest of Europe's hubs because of government duty..
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-13853472

[Edited 2011-06-21 06:18:27]

25 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinejfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8494 posts, RR: 6
Reply 1, posted (3 years 6 months 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 2914 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Would be sad if a bunch of regional airports lost intercontinental flights because of the awful APD. The UK government needs to smell the winds of an overtaxed traceling public. The UK also has a "Passenger Service charge" on top of teh APD. Two departures taxes, its not that the UK is Tax "Light".

User currently offlineJoost From Netherlands, joined Apr 2005, 3185 posts, RR: 4
Reply 2, posted (3 years 6 months 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 2839 times:

It should be BFS - EWR. (Belfast International).

Good luck flying a fully loaded 757 from BHD's 1819m runway. (Belfast City / George Best airport)


User currently offlineLondonCity From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2008, 1523 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (3 years 6 months 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 2813 times:

Quoting eire123 (Thread starter):
With Belfast under treat from DUB,

According to the BBC report, the tax at DUB is just Euros 6. What a difference to the APD rates ex-BFS of £60 for Y and £120 for J class that CO pax must pay when flying transatlantic !


User currently offlineLondonCity From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2008, 1523 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (3 years 6 months 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 2784 times:

Quoting LondonCity (Reply 3):
According to the BBC report, the tax at DUB is just Euros 6.

It's Euros 3, not Euros 6. My mistake.


User currently offlineGiancavia From Vatican City, joined Feb 2010, 1385 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (3 years 6 months 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 2769 times:

Whats shocking is in todays financial climate where jobs and making money are hard to come by the government makes it harder with pointless taxes that helps nobody currently and appeases some clueless hippies.

Ridiculous..


User currently offlinetonymctigue From Ireland, joined Feb 2006, 1961 posts, RR: 9
Reply 6, posted (3 years 6 months 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 2730 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Giancavia (Reply 5):
Whats shocking is in todays financial climate where jobs and making money are hard to come by the government makes it harder with pointless taxes that helps nobody currently and appeases some clueless hippies.

Ridiculous..

This is not the first time this has come up. It would be a pity for a smallish airport like BFS who are responsible for hardly any pollution to be the ones to suffer. If they want to introduce a carbon tax on air travel then at least do it in some way that punishes weights against big airports.



Next Flights: CX178 MEL-HKG; CX257 HKG-LHR; EI387 LHR-SNN; EI384 SNN-LHR; CX250 LHR-HKG; CX135 HKG-MEL
User currently offlineCODC10 From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 2461 posts, RR: 6
Reply 7, posted (3 years 6 months 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 2675 times:

Quoting tonymctigue (Reply 6):
that punishes weights against big airports.

I simply fail to understand the logic of such a punitive taxation regime. Air carriers are drivers of commerce and, at most major airports, largely use among the most fuel-efficient and environmentally-friendly technology that is feasible.

In my mind, the APD is completely indefensible.


User currently offlineGiancavia From Vatican City, joined Feb 2010, 1385 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (3 years 6 months 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 2668 times:

Quoting tonymctigue (Reply 6):
This is not the first time this has come up. It would be a pity for a smallish airport like BFS who are responsible for hardly any pollution to be the ones to suffer. If they want to introduce a carbon tax on air travel then at least do it in some way that punishes weights against big airports.

Or just not do it at all, If you make everyone poor and jobless or restrict their ability to enjoy life due to taxes there isnt going to be a nice place left to save for "future generations".


User currently offlinemainMAN From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2005, 2115 posts, RR: 5
Reply 9, posted (3 years 6 months 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 2613 times:

Pretty obvious now that the UK government can't ignore regional airports, and their campaign to reform taxes.

User currently offlineeire123 From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2011, 47 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (3 years 6 months 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 2509 times:

Quoting tonymctigue (Reply 6):
This is not the first time this has come up. It would be a pity for a smallish airport like BFS who are responsible for hardly any pollution to be the ones to suffer. If they want to introduce a carbon tax on air travel then at least do it in some way that punishes weights against big airports.

100% agree with this, great point.. It should be used to push less transfers at the major hubs, and keep the regionals alive.


User currently offlineOA260 From Ireland, joined Nov 2006, 27305 posts, RR: 60
Reply 11, posted (3 years 6 months 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 2328 times:

This was brought up a while back on the Irish threads. IIRC there are currently meetings between Westminster and Stormont regarding setting their own taxation in return for less subsidies.

User currently offlineTOMMY767 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 6930 posts, RR: 9
Reply 12, posted (3 years 6 months 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 2328 times:

I think I read on here before that BFS-EWR isn't one of the strongest TATL routes in the system.


"KEEP CLIMBING" -- DELTA
User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16907 posts, RR: 51
Reply 13, posted (3 years 6 months 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 2253 times:

Quoting TOMMY767 (Reply 12):
I think I read on here before that BFS-EWR isn't one of the strongest TATL routes in the system.

I think your thinking of BRS, which was cut. BFS is a successful route.



Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlinemainMAN From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2005, 2115 posts, RR: 5
Reply 14, posted (3 years 6 months 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 2253 times:

Quoting eire123 (Reply 10):
100% agree with this, great point.. It should be used to push less transfers at the major hubs, and keep the regionals alive.

How about a tax against constant stacking over London?  


User currently offlineSonomaFlyer From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1888 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (3 years 6 months 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 2207 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

The UK is laboring under a dual theory tax system. One is this so-called "carbon tax" and the other is simply a facility tax to provide revenue for infrastructure. They are already uncompetitive in terms of taxes and facilities (getting to/from LHR can be a nightmare and the amenities at LHR aren't great except for T5 and the renovated portion of T1).

They need to encourage commerce but "incentivize" travel to less impacted airports. This could mean that they would reduce this tax for TATL service to airports other than LHR and LGW. Opening travel options from North America to STN and/or LTN would be fantastic. CO has already demonstrated they can make money flying to BHX, MAN, BFS and Scotland.


User currently offlineCuriousFlyer From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 702 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (3 years 6 months 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 2106 times:

It seems to me that airlines often blame it on taxes when they can't make money. However all businesses pay taxes, most businesses pay more taxes than airlines. They can often get away with paying less taxes by threatening to use the services of a country which charges them less. CO seems to be doing just this, at a moment where the difficult economy makes profitability more difficult.

Another issue is that this tax was primarily aimed at relatively rich London, where most of the international traffic is. It has some side effects on the rest of the country though.


User currently offlineMI5Flyer From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 81 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (3 years 6 months 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 2005 times:

The reason this is an issue at BFS is because Dublin is close by and a boat is not required to get there. The rest of the UK airports are held hostage to these taxes and the public is left to suffer since you'd have to leave the island for a remedy.

If I were near BFS there is no question that I would consider the 1.5 hour to drive to DUB to start my family holiday with CO there at a savings of something like $100-200 a ticket. For a family of 4 or 5 that more than pays for the aggrevation of the drive or bus ride to DUB.

This tax just keeps doubling and at what point do the people of the UK have a voice in stopping this nonsense?


User currently offlinekaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 12593 posts, RR: 34
Reply 18, posted (3 years 6 months 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 1983 times:

It's amazing that the NI govt has no power in this; to lose a very valuable route because of such an absurd level of surcharges would be indefensible.

To be honest, at this stage, it is no longer a "green" tax; it's pure revenue generation, pure and simple, and that makes it even more absurd that it should result in the loss of a route: no route, no tax - and the govt loses out too.


User currently offlinegkirk From UK - Scotland, joined Jun 2000, 24964 posts, RR: 56
Reply 19, posted (3 years 6 months 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 1902 times:

APD should only be charged on those flights departing LHR and LGW.


When you hear the noise of the Tartan Army Boys, we'll be coming down the road!
User currently offlineNibog From Ireland, joined Apr 2009, 329 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (3 years 6 months 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 1837 times:

From my own point of view,over this past few years anytime I have flown stateside it has always been out of DUB,simply down to the main factor of price.I live just 45mins from BFS,I would love to use that airport,but always, it works out cheaper to fly from DUB,which is 1 1/2 hour drive away.I would use the service to EWR with the connections to be had there,yet when I start to price the airfare,DUB works out cheaper by far.

User currently offlinejfk777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 8494 posts, RR: 6
Reply 21, posted (3 years 6 months 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 1837 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting gkirk (Reply 19):
APD should only be charged on those flights departing LHR and LGW.

APD should not be charged at any UK airport, especially LHR. Why should London get teh tax and not Manchester or Glasgow ?


User currently offlineOA260 From Ireland, joined Nov 2006, 27305 posts, RR: 60
Reply 22, posted (3 years 6 months 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 1789 times:

Quoting MI5Flyer (Reply 17):
If I were near BFS there is no question that I would consider the 1.5 hour to drive to DUB to start my family holiday with CO there at a savings of something like $100-200 a ticket. For a family of 4 or 5 that more than pays for the aggrevation of the drive or bus ride to DUB

Very true I live between DUB and BFS along the border area and I can go either way. DUB always works out cheaper unless I get a saver fare from BFS or BHD. Also you have the benefit ex DUB for USA flights of CBP .

The NI politicians should get together for the greater good and have more home rule with the ability to control air taxes. For a province that has seen a 300,000 decline in tourism numbers its a major blow to the local economy.


User currently offlinegkirk From UK - Scotland, joined Jun 2000, 24964 posts, RR: 56
Reply 23, posted (3 years 6 months 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 1686 times:

Quoting jfk777 (Reply 21):
APD should not be charged at any UK airport, especially LHR. Why should London get teh tax and not Manchester or Glasgow ?

Because London can afford it. Regional UK cannot, hence why the CEOs at MAN,BHX,GLA,EDI,BRS,NCL,LPL, ABZ,EMA,BFS etc have signed a petitition against this.



When you hear the noise of the Tartan Army Boys, we'll be coming down the road!
User currently offlineGiancavia From Vatican City, joined Feb 2010, 1385 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (3 years 6 months 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 1603 times:

Quoting gkirk (Reply 19):
APD should only be charged on those flights departing LHR and LGW.

It should be charged nowhere in my opinion, It does nothing overall in world terms for the environment.. If anything its just adding more woes to the British economy while trying to appease a few peoples conscience.

British govt should be trying to stimulate flights, Grow airports.. Create jobs bring in even more tourists.


User currently offlineSonomaFlyer From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1888 posts, RR: 0
Reply 25, posted (3 years 6 months 1 day ago) and read 1543 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

The tax might be more definsible if it addressed overall crowding/impact of a given airport. LHR would be a the top of the list. LGW might also be there as well. STN has a 10.000 ft runway which would support TATL operations (AA once flew there from ORD). By shifting the tax scheme to encourage full utilization of all airports in the UK, it could reduce overcrowding at airports such as LHR and open up new business and tourism options for people in North America.

I hate the idea of taxes in general like many of you but there's no way the UK government will simply scrap the scheme.


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Air India To Start BOM - EWR Non Stop From W10 posted Tue Jul 27 2010 00:48:04 by ojas
Leicester Airfield Under Threat - Petition! posted Fri Feb 22 2008 16:20:18 by Jamesbuk
Bmi LHR-LBA Service Under Threat posted Thu Nov 29 2007 10:28:30 by Humberside
Broughton Under Threat By Power8? posted Wed Jan 31 2007 09:38:37 by Scouseflyer
UAL CEO: Alliances Under Threat posted Sat Oct 21 2006 08:42:35 by Singapore_Air
Malaysia - India Civil Aviation Links Under Threat posted Fri Mar 14 2003 00:32:59 by MASkargo
KUL-LAX/EWR/LHR/AKL From $525 Usd! posted Sat Mar 16 2002 02:58:30 by OdiE
LS To Begin Flights NCL-EWR From Dec '10? posted Sun Jun 13 2010 16:19:00 by nclmedic
When Will TG Start Operating A345 From EWR To BKK posted Sat Mar 6 2010 10:21:47 by dairy
Will AS Move From EWR To JFK posted Tue Sep 22 2009 03:53:07 by Rgreenftm