This came across my email, I am posting this because what affect the European airlines, also affect the World carriers when they travel to Europe, when you travel there you already pay "extra Fees and Taxes" that are added to the cost of your ticket. When I and my fellow employees, when we "Fly for Free, we are not charged to fly, except for the fees to get into the European Union, they access a fee for every seat on every plane and the airlines will pass that down to the customer, they ain't gonna eat that. and now the clowns in Brussels in the name of "Climate Change" are adding a slew of new fees and taxes the next few years to the travelers, and they don't care if it stifles travel, remember, we the great unwashed shouldn't be traveling far from home anyway, because we "Forget our place". Flying is for the elitist and the the bureaucrats, not for the "Hoi Pelloi". I am posting this because what is going on in Europe will eventually be tried in the United States, but China, India and Pakistan and other 3rd world countries will get a pass because of "Privilege".
KLM says national taxes threaten the level playing field for airlines.
After a 2022 marked by operational difficulties, KLM is looking ahead to a 2023 that may be equally complicated, but for different reasons: Dutch environmental legislation—both planned and implemented—will be in the spotlight.
While the Dutch carrier, part of the Air France-KLM group, may be the most affected by the measures being proposed or implemented in the Netherlands, other governments around the region also are taking matters into their own hands in a bid to reduce the environmental impact of aviation, even as Fit for 55 climate legislation moves toward definitive adoption in Brussels.
Unsurprisingly, airlines are not 100% convinced of the benefits.
In June 2022, the Netherlands government put forward a proposal under which Amsterdam Airport Schiphol no longer would be allowed to exceed the established noise nuisance limits, effectively limiting flight movements to 440,000 a year. That cap, which compares to an existing limit of 500,000 and previous government plans to allow for growth to 540,000, could take effect in November 2023.
Announcing the move, the Netherlands said it was attempting to balance Schiphol’s role as an economic driver and provider of connectivity with the quality of life of those living nearby.
In addition, a tax on passengers departing the Netherlands by air was set to triple to almost €30 ($32) starting Jan. 1 with the aim of encouraging travelers to opt for greener methods of transport.
The Dutch government is not the only one imposing mandates on commercial aviation. France put in place its own 1% sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) blending mandate in early 2022, ahead of the Europe-wide targets due to come into force under ReFuel EU legislation, following Norway and Sweden, which already have a SAF blending mandate.
Norway also has announced plans to increase the air passenger tax on flights to destinations outside Europe in the 2023 national budget. Long-haul carrier Norse Atlantic Airways said it is “deeply concerned” about the move, which could affect its services to and from the region.
“Norse Atlantic Airways operates direct intercontinental point-to-point routes in a highly competitive and price-sensitive market,” the airline said in its December operational update. “This planned increase means that we may be forced to reassess our investment in direct routes to [and] from Norway, to the detriment of Norwegian businesses and passengers.”
Belgium also is planning to introduce changes to the tax regime at Brussels Airport on April 1, in a bid to tackle noise pollution. A new system of airport taxes on aircraft landings and takeoffs there will be calculated according to a formula that considers factors such as the time of day, levels of emissions and destination, as well as noise levels, which are currently the basis.
Flights shorter than 500 km (310 mi.) and those operated with older, noisier aircraft will incur higher charges.
France also has moved to ban domestic flights for which a rail alternative of under 2.5 hr. exists, a move that was found lawful by the European Commission in December.
That new law came about initially at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, as one of its conditions for providing a state bailout for Air France. France, the home of the high-speed train, later decided to broaden the restriction.
Airlines have sounded the alarm about these individual environmental measures, noting they run the risk of skewing the competitive balance in a global industry.
“Aviation is an international sector, we compete across borders. National taxes damage our level playing field,” a KLM representative told Aviation Week.
On the proposed flight-reduction plan, KLM says it is still in talks with the government.
“They will need to follow the EU’s balanced approach when it comes to noise-hindrance reduction. This EU procedure also obliges the government to first look at full-fledged alternatives before, if necessary, turning the volume knob of flight movements,” the representative said.
For now, KLM says it is too early to tell what effect, if any, the passenger tax increase is having on bookings, but it urges the government to make sure the proceeds are used productively.
“KLM, along with the partners of the sustainable aviation table, believe it is very important that a substantial part of the money raised by the increase in the Dutch flight tax goes to more sustainable aviation. Otherwise, an air passenger tax will not help the environment,” the airline says.
The carrier notes its network is under pressure because of the Dutch government’s capacity plans.
For now, nothing is certain: the airline is still in talks with the government about the measure.
KLM says it shares the ministerial goal of reducing noise and CO2 emissions. However, the airline argues, “Reduced airport capacity will benefit neither travelers, nor the broader network nor the Netherlands in general. Moreover, it restricts the earning capacity of airlines wanting to invest in sustainability.”
Fleet renewal is a better solution than capacity reduction, KLM says.
Ryanair CEO Michael O’Leary has spoken out against short-flight bans, noting that while there are alternatives for traveling from cities such as Paris to Amsterdam, simple geography means citizens of some EU countries, including Ireland, have no viable choice but to fly.
Airlines also say introducing individual measures does not make sense when improving air traffic management with Single European Sky updates, long-stalled for political reasons, would have a huge impact on efficiency, bringing fuel savings of up to 10%.
At a media day in Geneva Dec. 7, Willie Walsh, director general of the International Air Transport Association (IATA) cited a Eurocontrol study that showed in 2019, the 24% of flights under 500 km accounted for only 3.8% of CO2 emissions, meaning short-haul routes represent a relatively small potential saving.
“We need to have this debate firmly anchored in data,” Walsh said. “And the data demonstrate that the greatest contribution politicians could make is to reform air traffic control in Europe.”
