Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
Dutchy
Topic Author
Posts: 11778
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Tax on kerosine

Tue Nov 13, 2018 5:46 pm

Rough google translation:

THE HAGUE - The House of Representatives on Tuesday adopted a motion calling on the government to make an international effort to introduce a tax on kerosene. The motion was submitted by D66 and SGP.

The Netherlands can not introduce such a tax itself, because the 1944 Chicago Convention stipulates that kerosene is exempt from tax. This treaty can only be changed by holding a special session of UN air transport organization ICAO and by allowing the participating countries to vote.

To organize such a session, the Netherlands must gather the support of at least one-fifth (39) of the 192 countries that are members of the UN. Now that the motion of D66 and SGP has been adopted, the cabinet must make an effort to do this.

D66 Member of Parliament Jan Paternotte previously explained to NRC why the kerosene tax should come according to him. "This aviation treaty is totally outdated by climate change. Let the Netherlands take the initiative as a green leader, as we do now with a European flight tax. "

If there is a charge on kerosene, flying becomes more expensive and therefore less attractive.



Article in Dutch

Interesting development. Objectively it is quite strange that aviation has a status apparate, no tax on kerosene, no VAT on tickets, etc.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 19989
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Tax on kerosine

Tue Nov 13, 2018 6:08 pm

Dutchy wrote:
Rough google translation:

THE HAGUE - The House of Representatives on Tuesday adopted a motion calling on the government to make an international effort to introduce a tax on kerosene. The motion was submitted by D66 and SGP.

The Netherlands can not introduce such a tax itself, because the 1944 Chicago Convention stipulates that kerosene is exempt from tax. This treaty can only be changed by holding a special session of UN air transport organization ICAO and by allowing the participating countries to vote.

To organize such a session, the Netherlands must gather the support of at least one-fifth (39) of the 192 countries that are members of the UN. Now that the motion of D66 and SGP has been adopted, the cabinet must make an effort to do this.

D66 Member of Parliament Jan Paternotte previously explained to NRC why the kerosene tax should come according to him. "This aviation treaty is totally outdated by climate change. Let the Netherlands take the initiative as a green leader, as we do now with a European flight tax. "

If there is a charge on kerosene, flying becomes more expensive and therefore less attractive.



Article in Dutch

Interesting development. Objectively it is quite strange that aviation has a status apparate, no tax on kerosene, no VAT on tickets, etc.

The no tax and VAT is per bilateral.

Fuel is already the #1 expense of airlines. There is already intense economic pressure to use the latest.

If there is a tax on fuel, aircraft depreciation needs to be at most 7 to 10 years as the viability of using old aircraft fades. For if taxing, some relief is needed.

This is like taxing labor more, be aware of unintended consequences.

Lightsaber
Flu+Covid19 is bad. Consider a flu vaccine, if not for yourself, to protect someone you care about.
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Topic Author
Posts: 11778
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Tax on kerosine

Tue Nov 13, 2018 6:17 pm

lightsaber wrote:
This is like taxing labor more, be aware of unintended consequences.


What unintended consequences? Fewer flights, thus people choose more contentiously? How much I love aviation, I think it grows too much and it is unsustainable. So some things much change. And pricing tickets more in line with the rest of society makes a real choice possible. Quite ridiculously that it is cheaper to fly from Manchester to the Costa Brava, have a cocktail on the beach and then fly to London, then to take a train from Manchester to London. Things need to be more in balance and one thing is not to treat aviation like it is a separate thing, but to integrate it and treat it like any other means of transport.

Personal opinion of course and an opinion which seems to grow in popularity.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
jetblueguy22
Posts: 3478
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 12:26 am

Re: Tax on kerosine

Tue Nov 13, 2018 6:19 pm

I’m sure the other airports in Europe will gladly take the traffic the Netherlands is trying to scare away.
Look at sweatpants guy. This is a 90 million dollar aircraft, not a Tallahassee strip club
 
Dieuwer
Posts: 2487
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2017 6:27 pm

Re: Tax on kerosine

Tue Nov 13, 2018 6:21 pm

If you are concerned with Climate Change re: taxes, then you really should accept that pig farmers in Holland will need to be taxed per pig as well, as pig farming is one of the most warming-gas producing industries on earth.

Methane emissions from pig manure represent nearly half of total global farm animal manure emissions.


https://www.humanesociety.org/sites/def ... change.pdf

According to the IPCC, aviation is responsible for around 3.5 percent of anthropogenic climate change. Since pig farming contributes 50% of agricultural emissions (9% of total emissions, see pie chart below), pig farming is more damaging than flying.

https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/source ... -emissions
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 8342
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

Re: Tax on kerosine

Tue Nov 13, 2018 6:52 pm

Just to be clear, ICAO doesn't stop The Netherlands from taxing ATF on domestic flights (or) international flights operated by Dutch carriers.

They cannot tax foreign carriers, because of reciprocity in the bilateral agreement. No country imposes a tax on a foreign carrier.
All posts are just opinions.
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Topic Author
Posts: 11778
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Tax on kerosine

Tue Nov 13, 2018 7:09 pm

jetblueguy22 wrote:
I’m sure the other airports in Europe will gladly take the traffic the Netherlands is trying to scare away.


That's why it needs to be an international effort................. Did you read the article?
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
User avatar
Channex757
Posts: 2398
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:07 am

Re: Tax on kerosine

Tue Nov 13, 2018 7:13 pm

Unintended consequences: Try this as an example.

Airlines get hit with kerosene tax. They therefore start more widespread tankering. Filling the tanks to the brim where possible at the lowest rates. Hauling dead weight of this fuel about increases fuel burn, therefore exacerbating the production of climate change gases.

And there's plenty more where that came from. Aviation is such an international business that having a zero tax scheme is the simplest, cheapest and most efficient way to manage fuel costs for the airlines.
 
smartplane
Posts: 1507
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2018 9:23 pm

Re: Tax on kerosine

Tue Nov 13, 2018 7:14 pm

That may change. Carbon tax, and increased landing / takeoff charges for inefficient aircraft and/or small loads, is the back door, but rather less transparent way of achieving the same outcome.

Tax on fuel would be easier, and more understandable to airline customers, but is less palatable due to timing for the airlines (and too easy to increase).
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Topic Author
Posts: 11778
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Tax on kerosine

Tue Nov 13, 2018 7:16 pm

Dieuwer wrote:
If you are concerned with Climate Change re: taxes, then you really should accept that pig farmers in Holland will need to be taxed per pig as well, as pig farming is one of the most warming-gas producing industries on earth.

Methane emissions from pig manure represent nearly half of total global farm animal manure emissions.


https://www.humanesociety.org/sites/def ... change.pdf

According to the IPCC, aviation is responsible for around 3.5 percent of anthropogenic climate change. Since pig farming contributes 50% of agricultural emissions (9% of total emissions, see pie chart below), pig farming is more damaging than flying.

https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/source ... -emissions


I accept.....

Flying harms because it brings emissions high into the atmosphere where it does more harm. For instance, one trip from AMS to JFK, does as much harm as 3 years of eating meat. And flying does more harm than "just" climate change, it does harm to peoples health. I am not against flying, but too much flying and making it too easy (read: cheap), does more harm than good.

I am in favor of fair pricing. All external cost incorporated in the ticket price.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Topic Author
Posts: 11778
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Tax on kerosine

Tue Nov 13, 2018 7:20 pm

Channex757 wrote:
Unintended consequences: Try this as an example.

Airlines get hit with kerosene tax. They therefore start more widespread tankering. Filling the tanks to the brim where possible at the lowest rates. Hauling dead weight of this fuel about increases fuel burn, therefore exacerbating the production of climate change gases.

And there's plenty more where that came from. Aviation is such an international business that having a zero tax scheme is the simplest, cheapest and most efficient way to manage fuel costs for the airlines.


Again, it needs an international effort, in that way, there is no need to do this. Being an international business is the standard excuse used by the airline industry and I would say to that, it doesn't hold up to scrutiny and the industry needs to take it responsibility.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
User avatar
PatrickZ80
Posts: 4259
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 5:33 am

Re: Tax on kerosine

Tue Nov 13, 2018 7:31 pm

You can agree or disagree with the idea of taxing fuel, reality is that it will never happen.

For starters, they need at least one-fifth of all ICAO member countries to support a session to even get the subject on the table. That alone is a very tough job since by far most countries oppose such a tax. But let's say they make it, they get the support of one-fifth of the member states. Then what? Then it gets discussed, and we all know the outcome of that discussion. There'll always be countries that don't want to participate and keep offering fuel tax-free. That'll lead to market disturbance. End of the line, no tax is introduced.

All the Dutch politicians are reaching with this is that they're giving a signal "we support this". However as long as they're the only ones supporting it, they're a minority and they just have to accept their loss.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 19989
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Tax on kerosine

Tue Nov 13, 2018 7:48 pm

Dutchy wrote:
lightsaber wrote:
This is like taxing labor more, be aware of unintended consequences.


What unintended consequences? Fewer flights, thus people choose more contentiously? How much I love aviation, I think it grows too much and it is unsustainable. So some things much change. And pricing tickets more in line with the rest of society makes a real choice possible. Quite ridiculously that it is cheaper to fly from Manchester to the Costa Brava, have a cocktail on the beach and then fly to London, then to take a train from Manchester to London. Things need to be more in balance and one thing is not to treat aviation like it is a separate thing, but to integrate it and treat it like any other means of transport.

Personal opinion of course and an opinion which seems to grow in popularity.

Fewer flights yes. Small cities lose service driving more people to large cities. Large city pairs see less service concentrated in larger gauge flights.

Rail is often a work project. All those people driving heavy trucks to work the railroad.

Aviation should be integrated. Build major rail lines to both bypass major airports and reduce the fuel getting to the flight. But stop having rail over priced jobs projects, there must be efficiency. US freight is efficient. Now to get passenger rail efficient.

I live near a major cruise port, so if air travel is too pricey, I know my alternate.

What matters is small aircraft bear the brunt as they burn the most fuel per passenger kilometer. As long as there are no subsidies for short haul, a fuel tax could work. As soon as their are subsidies, why tax?

Lightsaber
Flu+Covid19 is bad. Consider a flu vaccine, if not for yourself, to protect someone you care about.
 
MartijnNL
Posts: 984
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2017 11:44 am

Re: Tax on kerosine

Tue Nov 13, 2018 7:57 pm

dtw2hyd wrote:
Just to be clear, ICAO doesn't stop The Netherlands from taxing ATF on domestic flights (or) international flights operated by Dutch carriers.

They cannot tax foreign carriers, because of reciprocity in the bilateral agreement. No country imposes a tax on a foreign carrier.

The Netherlands had an aviation tax in 2009. It was imposed on all airlines. Icelandair charged me 45 euro's extra for a return ticket to Canada. The tax was later abolished as many passengers choose to depart from airports just across the border.
 
User avatar
PatrickZ80
Posts: 4259
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 5:33 am

Re: Tax on kerosine

Tue Nov 13, 2018 8:44 pm

MartijnNL wrote:
The Netherlands had an aviation tax in 2009. It was imposed on all airlines. Icelandair charged me 45 euro's extra for a return ticket to Canada. The tax was later abolished as many passengers choose to depart from airports just across the border.


True, but there's a difference between a tax on tickets and a tax on fuel. There are multiple countries that have a ticket tax, like Germany and the UK. Statistics show that these taxes harm their economy more than they earn. However airlines in those countries can still buy their fuel tax-free.

Another trick to avoid such ticket taxes is to start off with a short-haul flight to a country that doesn't have a ticket tax. There you make a self-transfer to your final country of destination. The short-haul flight is subject to tax, but given that it's a short flight it's not much. Your connecting long haul flight is on a seperate ticket and because you depart (self-transfer) from a tax-free country you don't pay tax on that part of the journey.
 
KLDC10
Posts: 1409
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2016 8:15 pm

Re: Tax on kerosine

Tue Nov 13, 2018 8:55 pm

Pointless virtue-signalling, presumably to satisfy domestic green pressure groups. The reason they are seeking an "international effort" is so that they can satisfy said groups and simultaneously avoid placing themselves at a disadvantage by acting unilaterally to tax the aviation industry. Kerosene may be exempt from taxation, but if they were really bothered they could tax aviation in some other way, like Air Passenger Duty in the UK. Still, if this stunt relieves some domestic pressure on the Dutch Government then so be it.
DC9/MD90/MD11/F70/BAE146
737/738/739/744/748/752/763/772/789
A319/A320/A321/A332/A333/A346/A359
Q400/E170/E175/E190/CS300
 
UA735WL
Posts: 286
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2012 7:08 pm

Re: Tax on kerosine

Tue Nov 13, 2018 9:53 pm

Dutchy wrote:
Quite ridiculously that it is cheaper to fly from Manchester to the Costa Brava, have a cocktail on the beach and then fly to London, then to take a train from Manchester to London.


Trains are not more efficient or environmentally-friendly by default- I see where you're coming from, but rail maintenance and diesel locomotives don't come free of charge, at least from an environmental standpoint.

Aviation sits in a unique position as being quite possibly the only major mode of transportation that absolutely requires fossil fuels, at least for the time being- batteries don't have anywhere near the energy density as jet fuel, and it all goes downhill from there when discussing alternative aircraft propulsion. A European aircraft manufacturer (Magnus) with aims to produce electric airplanes is setting up a production line in my hometown, and I was fortunate to be able to discuss the challenges of electric aircraft with one of their representatives. They are myriad, and quite difficult to overcome.

Aviation is also quite vital to the world economy because of its ability to quite rapidly move people and goods across oceans -something other modes of transportation simply cannot compete with. It would seem to me that any tax trying to encourage sustainable energy would be better directed at industries that *have* demonstrated viable alternatives to gasoline- witness electric cars, trains, and the associated non-fossil fuel ways of generating electricity. These can be taxed without crippling vital services, because the tax will make alternative forms that already exist immediately more viable.

If jet fuel is taxed, it will stifle aviation and achieve little else, mainly because viable commercial airliners powered by anything but jet fuel are several decades away at best, and a tax won't change that. There's absolutely nothing wrong with using taxes to encourage clean energy, but it would seem that it would be just as environmentally friendly to tax things that aren't aviation.

Put it this way- if we can pare our energy use in such a manner that the only thing requiring fossil fuels is aviation, we will have done quite well to reduce pollution and CO2 emissions.
"One test is worth a thousand expert opinions" -Tex Johnston
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Topic Author
Posts: 11778
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Tax on kerosine

Tue Nov 13, 2018 10:22 pm

UA735WL wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
Quite ridiculously that it is cheaper to fly from Manchester to the Costa Brava, have a cocktail on the beach and then fly to London, then to take a train from Manchester to London.


Trains are not more efficient or environmentally-friendly by default- I see where you're coming from, but rail maintenance and diesel locomotives (or even electric ones using power derived from fossil fuels; and let's be real, most countries(this is a call for international effort, right?) are a long way from generating a majority of their energy, let alone all of it, without using fossil fuels) don't come free of charge, at least from an environmental standpoint.

Aviation sits in a unique position as being quite possibly the only major mode of transportation that absolutely requires liquid fuels, at least for the time being- batteries don't have anywhere near the energy density as jet fuel, and it all goes downhill from there when discussing alternative aircraft propulsion. A European aircraft manufacturer (Magnus) with aims to produce electric airplanes is setting up a production line in my hometown, and I was fortunate to be able to discuss the challenges of electric aircraft with one of their representatives. They are myriad, and quite difficult to overcome.

Aviation is also quite vital to the world economy because of its ability to quite rapidly move people and goods across oceans -something other modes of transportation simply cannot compete with. It would seem to me that any tax trying to encourage sustainable energy would be better directed at industries that *have* demonstrated viable alternatives to gasoline- witness electric cars, trains, and the associated non-fossil fuel ways of generating electricity. These can be taxed without crippling vital services, because the tax will make alternative forms that already exist immediately more viable.

If jet fuel is taxed, it will stifle aviation and achieve little else, mainly because viable commercial airliners powered by anything but jet fuel are several decades away at best, and a tax won't change that. There's absolutely nothing wrong with using taxes to encourage clean energy, but it would seem that it would be just as environmentally friendly to tax things that aren't aviation.

Put it this way- if we can pare our energy use in such a manner that the only thing requiring fossil fuels is aviation, we will have done quite well to reduce pollution and CO2 emissions.


I see your line of reasoning. And it could be quite valid. I would like to see a world where people make decisions based on a true choice. Air travel is too cheap, at least in Europe. That means a weekend in Barcelona is duable for almost everyone. Mass tourism year round. So to reduce fossil fuel emitions you could look at it in two ways:
- innovation
- fly less

Yes, aviation is one area which is going to be hard to make the transition, but it needs to make it anyway if we are going to meet Paris (and yes I know aviation was exempt). Hydrogen powered flight could be a solution. All electric powered flight might not be feasible, I agree. Battaries have a too low density of power in them.

Flying less is a real possibility for me. Make it more expensive to fly and choices will be made different, perhaps not taking an airplane to Barcelona, but take a train to Brussels or Berlin or London instead. Don't do it every month, but do it once every two month or once every three month. Actions have consequences and we need to face them as society. And more important, we need to solve them asap.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 8342
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

Re: Tax on kerosine

Tue Nov 13, 2018 10:44 pm

I doubt it can ever work.

If The Netherlands imposes 5% tax and JFK(US, NY) imposes 15% and ATL(US, GA) imposes 7.5%, it will be a mess. Unless both countries deploy same capacity and aircraft types, someone will be at a disadvantage.

Already airlines based out of tax-free regimes have a leg-up. On a hypothetical DXB-FRA route with LH, and EK both operating. LH pays taxes ex-FRA, doesn't pay taxes ex-DXB, but EK doesn't pay taxes ex-DXB and ex-FRA. Not a level playing field.
All posts are just opinions.
 
FrancisBegbie
Posts: 151
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 7:22 am

Re: Tax on kerosine

Tue Nov 13, 2018 11:05 pm

Instead of adding another lazy tax, they could also enforce existing rules and squeeze rule bending airlines into being compliant with labor laws etc. Stop giving subsidies for flying into regional airports which serve no real transportation need.

Also, the ‘cheap’ airline ticket compared to train tickets is not only caused by absence of taxes on fuel. Your airline is a private company in a cutthroat competitive environment and your EU rail company is a bloated government monopolist filled with civil servants.

Finally, this plan is brought to you by the party that always used “Education” as bait to lure in voters. Now it is getting pretty obvious they have nothing to show for them in that area, they happily switch to the new buzzword “Environment”. Value their sincerity in this department as much as you want...
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 13135
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

Re: Tax on kerosine

Tue Nov 13, 2018 11:55 pm

This is also in the air here in France. Taxes on diesel and gasoline are being hiked, and there is a "popular revolt" going on. Someone mentioned that kerosene used by "the rich" to get around isn't taxed while the poor bastards driving their car to work are taxed to death. It should be relatively easy to get 27 countries to agree to open the discussions on this, aka the EU members. 12 more countries, simple, talk to all the island nations about to go under because of climate change.
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
 
deltal1011man
Posts: 5359
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2005 9:17 am

Re: Tax on kerosine

Wed Nov 14, 2018 12:12 am

Dutchy wrote:
jetblueguy22 wrote:
I’m sure the other airports in Europe will gladly take the traffic the Netherlands is trying to scare away.


That's why it needs to be an international effort................. Did you read the article?

I absolutely agree but you pay my share because I don't want to

deal?



Also good luck getting countries like India and China in on anything like this. :lol: :lol: :lol:
 
YIMBY
Posts: 723
Joined: Tue Sep 20, 2016 4:32 pm

Re: Tax on kerosine

Wed Nov 14, 2018 5:41 am

PatrickZ80 wrote:
You can agree or disagree with the idea of taxing fuel, reality is that it will never happen.

For starters, they need at least one-fifth of all ICAO member countries to support a session to even get the subject on the table. That alone is a very tough job since by far most countries oppose such a tax. But let's say they make it, they get the support of one-fifth of the member states. Then what? Then it gets discussed, and we all know the outcome of that discussion. There'll always be countries that don't want to participate and keep offering fuel tax-free. That'll lead to market disturbance. End of the line, no tax is introduced.

All the Dutch politicians are reaching with this is that they're giving a signal "we support this". However as long as they're the only ones supporting it, they're a minority and they just have to accept their loss.


I do not see it impossible. Most of the member countries are not run by airline owners or aviation enthusiasts, and no intelligent person denies the climate change. Today there are all kinds of taxes for aviation on most countries, and most other countries are discussing some kind of taxes. The reason why those are not imposed in larger intent is international competition.

The fuel tax - or emission fine - would be much more effective than landing tax to reduce the emissions. Other than reducing the growth of the aviation, the fuel or emission tax would guide to select the most economical and ecological route instead of the most convenient.

Honestly, aviation has been a free-rider for the environment and economy. If it is as vital for the business, the businessmen would pay the increased prices- this is how the market economy in theory works, without subsidies.
 
MKIAZ
Posts: 278
Joined: Thu May 01, 2014 5:24 am

Re: Tax on kerosine

Wed Nov 14, 2018 5:54 am

UA735WL wrote:
Aviation is also quite vital to the world economy because of its ability to quite rapidly move people and goods across oceans -something other modes of transportation simply cannot compete with. It would seem to me that any tax trying to encourage sustainable energy would be better directed at industries that *have* demonstrated viable alternatives to gasoline- witness electric cars, trains, and the associated non-fossil fuel ways of generating electricity. These can be taxed without crippling vital services, because the tax will make alternative forms that already exist immediately more viable.

If jet fuel is taxed, it will stifle aviation and achieve little else, mainly because viable commercial airliners powered by anything but jet fuel are several decades away at best, and a tax won't change that. There's absolutely nothing wrong with using taxes to encourage clean energy, but it would seem that it would be just as environmentally friendly to tax things that aren't aviation.

Put it this way- if we can pare our energy use in such a manner that the only thing requiring fossil fuels is aviation, we will have done quite well to reduce pollution and CO2 emissions.


I agree, the low hanging fruit is clearly motor vehicle electrification. But ultimately as this happens we are going to have a cost imbalance between the (very cheap once vehicle electrification takes off) fossil fuel products and their environmental damage. Ultimately we will have to impose some sort of a carbon tax.

I also think ultimately a hyperloop solution may provide some serious competition to air travel - with significantly lower costs and emissions. Sure there are some issues to overcome, but if it was given even half the R&D budget of commercial aircraft these would quickly be worked out.
 
LupineChemist
Posts: 821
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2015 9:03 am

Re: Tax on kerosine

Wed Nov 14, 2018 9:07 am

UA735WL wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
Quite ridiculously that it is cheaper to fly from Manchester to the Costa Brava, have a cocktail on the beach and then fly to London, then to take a train from Manchester to London.


Trains are not more efficient or environmentally-friendly by default- I see where you're coming from, but rail maintenance and diesel locomotives don't come free of charge, at least from an environmental standpoint.

Aviation sits in a unique position as being quite possibly the only major mode of transportation that absolutely requires fossil fuels, at least for the time being- batteries don't have anywhere near the energy density as jet fuel, and it all goes downhill from there when discussing alternative aircraft propulsion. A European aircraft manufacturer (Magnus) with aims to produce electric airplanes is setting up a production line in my hometown, and I was fortunate to be able to discuss the challenges of electric aircraft with one of their representatives. They are myriad, and quite difficult to overcome.

Aviation is also quite vital to the world economy because of its ability to quite rapidly move people and goods across oceans -something other modes of transportation simply cannot compete with. It would seem to me that any tax trying to encourage sustainable energy would be better directed at industries that *have* demonstrated viable alternatives to gasoline- witness electric cars, trains, and the associated non-fossil fuel ways of generating electricity. These can be taxed without crippling vital services, because the tax will make alternative forms that already exist immediately more viable.

If jet fuel is taxed, it will stifle aviation and achieve little else, mainly because viable commercial airliners powered by anything but jet fuel are several decades away at best, and a tax won't change that. There's absolutely nothing wrong with using taxes to encourage clean energy, but it would seem that it would be just as environmentally friendly to tax things that aren't aviation.

Put it this way- if we can pare our energy use in such a manner that the only thing requiring fossil fuels is aviation, we will have done quite well to reduce pollution and CO2 emissions.


Just like to point out that aviation requires hydrocarbon fuels. It doesn't require they be from a fossil source and there is already plant based aviation fuel certified on the market, it's just more expensive and not economically viable yet. If/when oil gets high enough, it will start to flood the market.
 
smartplane
Posts: 1507
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2018 9:23 pm

Re: Tax on kerosine

Wed Nov 14, 2018 9:56 am

Dutchy wrote:
I would like to see a world where people make decisions based on a true choice. Air travel is too cheap, at least in Europe. That means a weekend in Barcelona is duable for almost everyone. Mass tourism year round. So to reduce fossil fuel emitions you could look at it in two ways:
- innovation
- fly less

Yes, aviation is one area which is going to be hard to make the transition, but it needs to make it anyway if we are going to meet Paris (and yes I know aviation was exempt). Hydrogen powered flight could be a solution. All electric powered flight might not be feasible, I agree. Battaries have a too low density of power in them.

Flying less is a real possibility for me. Make it more expensive to fly and choices will be made different, perhaps not taking an airplane to Barcelona, but take a train to Brussels or Berlin or London instead. Don't do it every month, but do it once every two month or once every three month. Actions have consequences and we need to face them as society. And more important, we need to solve them asap.

The same feedback is coming from the various CORSIA planning sessions.

Airlines are saying wait for innovation, otherwise we can only meet targets by reducing activity. UN and other advisers, are saying work smarter. Achieve higher load factors by reducing frequencies, operate multi-branded aircraft, operate fewer larger aircraft, smarter on ground engine management..................

CORSIA milestone this month. Some governments and airport authorities will use as the basis for revising / introducing new efficiency / pollution based charges, including penalising airlines not CORSIA compliant.
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Topic Author
Posts: 11778
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Tax on kerosine

Wed Nov 14, 2018 10:23 am

deltal1011man wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
jetblueguy22 wrote:
I’m sure the other airports in Europe will gladly take the traffic the Netherlands is trying to scare away.


That's why it needs to be an international effort................. Did you read the article?

I absolutely agree but you pay my share because I don't want to

deal?


haha, you want me to pay for your pollution? Quite attractive, but I think I pass....

deltal1011man wrote:
Also good luck getting countries like India and China in on anything like this. :lol: :lol: :lol:


China is becoming a leading nation in sustainability. India much less so. It is unsustainable, so something needs to be done.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
Wingtips56
Posts: 1291
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2010 1:26 am

Re: Tax on kerosine

Wed Nov 14, 2018 10:23 am

One little note: if the cost of transportation goes up, the cost of everything being transported goes up. You might stay home or take a train, but the price of your pineapple is going up.
Worked for WestAir, Apollo Airways, Desert Pacific, Western, AirCal and American Airlines (Retired). Flight Memory: 181 airports, 92 airlines, 78 a/c types, 403 routes, 58 countries (by air), 6 continents. 1,119,414 passenger miles.

Home airport : CEC
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 13135
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

Re: Tax on kerosine

Wed Nov 14, 2018 10:29 am

Goods that could be made locally are instead made around the world because it's cheap to transport them. Then local people are out of jobs and angry. A carbon tax solves two problems simultaneously.
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
 
Waterbomber
Posts: 849
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 11:51 am

Re: Tax on kerosine

Wed Nov 14, 2018 10:47 am

The Netherlands want to be pioneers in everything liberal.
Legalizing drugs, gay marriage, and now fuel on kerosene.

Ok, let's see them tax kerosene at 20% and see how long KLM will stay afloat as an experiment.
The Netherlands are strangling their own country with taxes and Dutch are fleeing in masses to neighboring countries.
Ask the Belgians and the Germans. Their boarder regions are being invaded by the Dutch.
The legalised drugs are wrecking havoc all over the place.

Want to be environment friendly?
Collect a tax on business class passengers. They can afford it and they're the true polluters.
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Topic Author
Posts: 11778
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Tax on kerosine

Wed Nov 14, 2018 10:52 am

Waterbomber wrote:
The Netherlands want to be pioneers in everything liberal.
Legalizing drugs, gay marriage, and now fuel on kerosene.

Ok, let's see them tax kerosene at 20% and see how long KLM will stay afloat as an experiment.
The Netherlands are strangling their own country with taxes and Dutch are fleeing in masses to neighboring countries.
Ask the Belgians and the Germans. Their boarder regions are being invaded by the Dutch.
The legalised drugs are wrecking havoc all over the place.

Want to be environment friendly?
Collect a tax on business class passengers. They can afford it and they're the true polluters.


Did you read the article? They want an international effort, not a Dutch one :roll:

Alaska has left the Dutch behind in legalizing soft drugs. But that is another matter :lol: Perhaps read u about the Netherlands before you say anything about it, because now you just sound like an uninformed biased contributor, wanting to make a point.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 8342
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

Re: Tax on kerosine

Wed Nov 14, 2018 11:03 am

Dutchy wrote:
...
China is becoming a leading nation in sustainability. India much less so. It is unsustainable, so something needs to be done.


Both countries are doing lot more than west with less publicity. The number of electric buses produced by BYD in China is amazing. That will change public transportation throughout the world. Still, we want to classify Tesla Model 3 as a luxury car. India has someone of the world's largest solar farms, plastic carry bags are widely banned and Diesel based public transportation is banned in major cities. Not easy for developing countries with 1.2 Billion to feed to join the eco-friendly bandwagon, still they are doing lot more.
All posts are just opinions.
 
PanHAM
Posts: 9719
Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 6:44 pm

Re: Tax on kerosine

Wed Nov 14, 2018 11:16 am

Raising taxes is the sovereign right of an assembly of an elected government. . The right to raise taxes Ends at the borders of a Country, Airports are borders, hence there is no right to raise a kerosene tax. The same applies on VAT. Interestingly enough, if a Train ticket is bought for a journey from FRA to PAR, the VAT is raised on an assumed border criossing. There is no VAT for the rest of the journey.

Not raising kerosene taxes is adapted from ocean shipping. Bunker fuel is not taxed either, for the same reasons shown above. The Chcago convention was nothing less than the acknowledgement of a new mode of Transport and the Need to construct a legal Frame for air Transport btween countries. Imstead of raising fuel taxes, the member countries were shown different methods of Taxation, like the rouze charges for overflying third Country territory., landing fees, etc.

The parlamentarians advocating a fuel tax for aviation should be educated on the Chicago, Montrea and Warsaw convetions. .

Aviation is like shipping a contributor to national wealth, in Germany alone the annual contribution to the GNP is around 60 Billion €. A kerosene tax would put a big hole into that.
Was Erlauben Erdogan!!!
 
parapente
Posts: 3061
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 10:42 pm

Re: Tax on kerosine

Wed Nov 14, 2018 11:25 am

Perhaps a tax on all commercial aircaft over (say) 20 years old? That might be a better way.In London here there is to be an ULEZ ( ultra low emissions zone) in 2020 ish. All older cars failing this have to pay £12.50 a day to use their cars.
It might be argued that it is plain wrong for BA to be using now and in the near future old 747's.This is also true with some US airlines who use 20+ years old aircaft. Clearly using old rust buckets outweighs the fuel Penalty.So simply tax them to sharpen their thought process'!
Side benefit -build more new aircaft!
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Topic Author
Posts: 11778
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Tax on kerosine

Wed Nov 14, 2018 11:27 am

dtw2hyd wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
...
China is becoming a leading nation in sustainability. India much less so. It is unsustainable, so something needs to be done.


Both countries are doing lot more than west with less publicity. The number of electric buses produced by BYD in China is amazing. That will change public transportation throughout the world. Still, we want to classify Tesla Model 3 as a luxury car. India has someone of the world's largest solar farms, plastic carry bags are widely banned and Diesel based public transportation is banned in major cities. Not easy for developing countries with 1.2 Billion to feed to join the eco-friendly bandwagon, still they are doing lot more.


True. Some amazing things are happening in China. China can do experiments in a lot of cities, if something works, they will make it mandatory for 1,2bn people instantly. Something you can do in an enlighted dictatorship, not something you can achieve in a liberal democracy.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
PanHAM
Posts: 9719
Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 6:44 pm

Re: Tax on kerosine

Wed Nov 14, 2018 12:16 pm

parapente wrote:
Perhaps a tax on all commercial aircaft over (say) 20 years old? That might be a better way.In London here there is to be an ULEZ ( ultra low emissions zone) in 2020 ish. All older cars failing this have to pay £12.50 a day to use their cars.
It might be argued that it is plain wrong for BA to be using now and in the near future old 747's.This is also true with some US airlines who use 20+ years old aircaft. Clearly using old rust buckets outweighs the fuel Penalty.So simply tax them to sharpen their thought process'!
Side benefit -build more new aircaft!


That is all Happening now. Landing fees are based on noise. That automatically means that older aircraft pay more.

More on Taxation, the bi-lateral Agreements make sure that ticked receits are not taxed, on a reciprocal Agreement. International air Transport is a well workig and fine tuned machine. Messing around with Taxation phantasies can only make it worse
Was Erlauben Erdogan!!!
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 13135
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

Re: Tax on kerosine

Wed Nov 14, 2018 12:29 pm

Yes bunker fuel must also be taxed. Also ships' emissions should be lowered, a single container ship can pollute as much as 1 million cars.

The beauty of taxing fuel is that you don't have to care about the age of the aircraft, because that doesn't mean much anyway. The goal is to reduce emissions. If an airline would rather fly older aircraft, but bigger, and eliminate brand new RJs, that can still work out positive for the environment.
New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
 
parapente
Posts: 3061
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 10:42 pm

Re: Tax on kerosine

Wed Nov 14, 2018 12:42 pm

Landing fees based on noise.Yup but it's not working is it - they are still flying the rust buckets and paying their fine.Whether it be noise or straight age it's got to hurt and hurt bad so they sharpen their pencils and realise they got to buy dome new aircaft.It doesn't matter how you do it imho as long as it works,which it is not for many airlines at present.Time for the gas hogs to go.Its actually bad for the industry as a whole which is trying its best to show it cares for the environment.
 
nikeherc
Posts: 670
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2012 8:40 pm

Re: Tax on kerosine

Wed Nov 14, 2018 1:07 pm

Unilateral taxes are very easily manipulated to the advantage of the levying country. Tax both international and domestic fuel and then give breaks to the home town player.

Also, remember that electrified trains run on coal, natural gas and nuclear power. Renewables are not dependable enough to replace those sources.

As for demographics, it’s not just the rich that fly. Raising taxes would make it more expensive for lower and middle income expats would be most impacted.
DC6 to 777 and most things in between
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 8342
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

Re: Tax on kerosine

Wed Nov 14, 2018 1:41 pm

Dutchy wrote:
True. Some amazing things are happening in China. China can do experiments in a lot of cities, if something works, they will make it mandatory for 1,2bn people instantly. Something you can do in an enlighted dictatorship, not something you can achieve in a liberal democracy.


China follows a top-down approach and in India, it is a bottom-up approach. I still remember it took 15 years of legal battles for New Delhi to ban Diesel buses and trucks.

I think EU should work on closing down Double Irish Dutch Sandwich and Isle-of-Mann loopholes. Kudos they fixed Isle of Mann Bizjet loophole. The world will be a better place than taxing on ATF.
All posts are just opinions.
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Topic Author
Posts: 11778
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Tax on kerosine

Wed Nov 14, 2018 1:53 pm

dtw2hyd wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
True. Some amazing things are happening in China. China can do experiments in a lot of cities, if something works, they will make it mandatory for 1,2bn people instantly. Something you can do in an enlighted dictatorship, not something you can achieve in a liberal democracy.


China follows a top-down approach and in India, it is a bottom-up approach. I still remember it took 15 years of legal battles for New Delhi to ban Diesel buses and trucks.

I think EU should work on closing down Double Irish Dutch Sandwich and Isle-of-Mann loopholes. Kudos they fixed Isle of Mann Bizjet loophole. The world will be a better place than taxing on ATF.


Oh, I agree on that. In the Netherlands tax evasion and the role of the Netherlands is indeed in the picture of the government and the EU is working on it as well.

Isle-of-Mann are outside of the EU, so no influence there.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
wildwobby
Posts: 26
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2006 7:27 am

Re: Tax on kerosine

Wed Nov 14, 2018 2:36 pm

dtw2hyd wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
...
China is becoming a leading nation in sustainability. India much less so. It is unsustainable, so something needs to be done.


Both countries are doing lot more than west with less publicity. The number of electric buses produced by BYD in China is amazing. That will change public transportation throughout the world. Still, we want to classify Tesla Model 3 as a luxury car. India has someone of the world's largest solar farms, plastic carry bags are widely banned and Diesel based public transportation is banned in major cities. Not easy for developing countries with 1.2 Billion to feed to join the eco-friendly bandwagon, still they are doing lot more.


Uhhhhhh, what? Facts really do matter.

Image

This thread is insane and really opened my eyes to the fact that “climate change” is exploited for political reasons so easily and without question. Maybe that was obvious, but I really question the good intentions now.
A319 A320 A321 A346 A380 B712 B733 B735 B736 B737 B738 B748 B739 B752 B753 B763 B772 B77W B788 CONC CRJ2 CRJ7 CRJ9 DC10 E120 E145 F100 MD80 MD83 MD88 MD90
 
PanHAM
Posts: 9719
Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 6:44 pm

Re: Tax on kerosine

Wed Nov 14, 2018 2:56 pm

and for all you guys here who advocate Taxation on anything, take a deep breath on yet untaxed air and think about who pays the texes, It's us, the consumers. Taxes are costs and costs are handed down to the buyers of goods and services
Was Erlauben Erdogan!!!
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Topic Author
Posts: 11778
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Tax on kerosine

Wed Nov 14, 2018 2:59 pm

That is onesided view. This is in absolute terms, not relative, not per capita. BP might give you a clue what the intent was....

This is another statistic

Per capita (ton):
Qatar - 35.73 tonnes
Curacao - 30.43
Latvia - 22.94
Bahrain - 21.8
United Arab Emirates - 19.31
Trinidad and Tobago - 17.15
Malaysia - 16.57
Saudi Arabia - 16.4
Guatemala - 16.25
United States - 16.22

Best performing, per capita (ton):

Denmark - 0.06
Finland - 0.09
Nigeria - 0.1
Estonia - 0.11
South Sudan - 0.13
Myanmar - 0.14
Tanzania - 0.2
Zambia - 0.2
Netherlands - 0.21
Togo - 0.24
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
wildwobby
Posts: 26
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2006 7:27 am

Re: Tax on kerosine

Wed Nov 14, 2018 3:03 pm

Dutchy wrote:
That is onesided view. This is in absolute terms, not relative, not per capita. BP might give you a clue what the intent was....

This is another statistic

Per capita (ton):
Qatar - 35.73 tonnes
Curacao - 30.43
Latvia - 22.94
Bahrain - 21.8
United Arab Emirates - 19.31
Trinidad and Tobago - 17.15
Malaysia - 16.57
Saudi Arabia - 16.4
Guatemala - 16.25
United States - 16.22

Best performing, per capita (ton):

Denmark - 0.06
Finland - 0.09
Nigeria - 0.1
Estonia - 0.11
South Sudan - 0.13
Myanmar - 0.14
Tanzania - 0.2
Zambia - 0.2
Netherlands - 0.21
Togo - 0.24


Now do China and India - which is who the poster I was responding to was claiming is doing so much more than “the West”.
A319 A320 A321 A346 A380 B712 B733 B735 B736 B737 B738 B748 B739 B752 B753 B763 B772 B77W B788 CONC CRJ2 CRJ7 CRJ9 DC10 E120 E145 F100 MD80 MD83 MD88 MD90
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Topic Author
Posts: 11778
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: Tax on kerosine

Wed Nov 14, 2018 3:04 pm

PanHAM wrote:
and for all you guys here who advocate Taxation on anything, take a deep breath on yet untaxed air and think about who pays the texes, It's us, the consumers. Taxes are costs and costs are handed down to the buyers of goods and services


That is correct. But think about this. The consequences of climate change and population health has been paid by society at large, guess who pays that....
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 8342
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

Re: Tax on kerosine

Wed Nov 14, 2018 3:39 pm

wildwobby wrote:
Uhhhhhh, what? Facts really do matter.

Image

This thread is insane and really opened my eyes to the fact that “climate change” is exploited for political reasons so easily and without question. Maybe that was obvious, but I really question the good intentions now.


That slide is an anecdotal data sample. Post industrialization west polluted the environment for decades when east were agrarian economies. Now preaching them with one-year data!!

https://qz.com/1169690/shenzhen-in-chin ... bus-fleet/
https://www.greenbiz.com/article/worlds ... ever-heard
http://www.latimes.com/world/asia/la-fg ... story.html
All posts are just opinions.
 
PanHAM
Posts: 9719
Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 6:44 pm

Re: Tax on kerosine

Wed Nov 14, 2018 3:42 pm

That is all nice and Dandy but unilateral Taxation would make a working System go broke within months.And again, parliaments have no right to tax outside national boundaries, So why do you want to kill a working System? IATA and ICAO provide valuable Services for the industry, aviation Needs just 2 certification organisations worldwide, FAA and EASA.

Instead each Country has ist own certification Body for rail Equipment and instead of type licensing a TGV or ICE each and every Train set . Then, back to the hazards of Pollution, it is a new Religion. EU has set Limits for NOx Emission, not more than 40 milligrams outside on the road. In the Office you can hjave 0 mg and in an industry shop 940 mg are allowed. Tongue in cheek, someone wants to hurt the German car industry.

Back to airliners, Taxation is not only paid by the consumers, taxes are withdrawn from Airlines who have much better use for the Money, investing into new Equipment. There simply are no rust buckets flying around,. and the reason for that is agai zhe System works, Whike politicians are still unable to procure Military aircraft
Was Erlauben Erdogan!!!
 
wildwobby
Posts: 26
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2006 7:27 am

Re: Tax on kerosine

Wed Nov 14, 2018 4:09 pm

dtw2hyd wrote:
wildwobby wrote:
Uhhhhhh, what? Facts really do matter.

Image

This thread is insane and really opened my eyes to the fact that “climate change” is exploited for political reasons so easily and without question. Maybe that was obvious, but I really question the good intentions now.


That slide is an anecdotal data sample. Post industrialization west polluted the environment for decades when east were agrarian economies. Now preaching them with one-year data!!

https://qz.com/1169690/shenzhen-in-chin ... bus-fleet/
https://www.greenbiz.com/article/worlds ... ever-heard
http://www.latimes.com/world/asia/la-fg ... story.html


You are the one linking to anecdotes, not me. Do you know what “anecdotal” means?

The chart I posted simply refutes the fact that “China and India are doing more than the west”. The fact is, their emissions continue to grow.. and faster than anywhere else. Meanwhile, in the US, they are falling faster than anywhere else. Your argument is nonsensical!
A319 A320 A321 A346 A380 B712 B733 B735 B736 B737 B738 B748 B739 B752 B753 B763 B772 B77W B788 CONC CRJ2 CRJ7 CRJ9 DC10 E120 E145 F100 MD80 MD83 MD88 MD90
 
dtw2hyd
Posts: 8342
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:11 pm

Re: Tax on kerosine

Wed Nov 14, 2018 4:19 pm

wildwobby wrote:
You are the one linking to anecdotes, not me. Do you know what “anecdotal” means?

The chart I posted simply refutes the fact that “China and India are doing more than the west”. The fact is, their emissions continue to grow.. and faster than anywhere else. Meanwhile, in the US, they are falling faster than anywhere else. Your argument is nonsensical!


Open a non-av thread if you want to be enlightened further on this topic.
All posts are just opinions.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: ADent and 19 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos