Osborne Ditches APD Increase
Back to Forum- This topic has 13 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated 22 Mar 2011
at 05:27 by TominScotland.
-
- Author
- Posts
- Skip to last reply Create Topic
-
VintageKrugParticipantSome good news as Osborne asserts himself and starts making some sensible decisions:
Labour had previously announced plans to increase the tax from next month.
Gorgeous George is also planning on stopping a 5p increase in fuel duty, also due in April.
Sense returning to the important issue of taxation on transport; hopefully more positive soundings after Wednesday’s Budget.
21 Mar 2011
at 10:29
VintageKrugParticipantWell, I’m not sure that’s going to happen, but at least the signalling of the refusal to continue Labour’s escalating taxes on both airfares and on petrol/diesel is a welcome start.
The amount of the tax is not currently appropriate, being focussed on the disbenefits generated by travel, rather than the many and various economic and other benefits aviation delivers for the UK.
There’s no doubt in my mind that aviation does have to bear some form of taxation burden, but it doesn’t seem right that it should be borne directly by individual travellers who have little influence on the efficiency of their journey – paying the same to travel on a gas guzzling SAS MD-80 as a brand new BA Embraer.
Once aviation taxes are collected, they should be spent on aviation infrastructure to increase runway capacity, re-organise European Air Traffic Control and encouraging more fuel efficient aircraft to genuinely deliver a more environmentally efficient journey for everyone.
I also think that aviation fuel may well be subjected to a 5% tax in due course; not terrific in my view, but better than this warped APD tax which has got out of hand.
21 Mar 2011
at 16:45
VintageKrugParticipantWhile I concur in the longer term, fleet renewal, especially for the larger “flag carriers” is much less simple.
You can’t simply retire BA’s 100-strong fleet of 747s and 777s instantly for a whole range of reasons.
In the short term it is much less expensive to engage in methods such as reducing luggage allowances, abandoning heavy in flight magazines, reducing the weight of paint on the exterior or introducing more direct routings, reducing stacking and developing direct approaches, as well as increasing runway capacity.
If APD was invested to deliver such benefits, I wouldn’t be so against it.
As it is, it’s an invidious tax which actually reduces airports’ and airlines’ profit margins at a time when they can ill afford it, and therefore stifles investment in greener technologies and infrastructure.
21 Mar 2011
at 17:48
Binman62ParticipantWhen the likes of BA stop having surcharges and credit card fees that are twice the level of APD on ticket then I will support something being done about APD.
Once again however we see this government looking after the bankers and super rich whilst doing nothing for the ordianary man on the street.
It is no surprise really, it is in their gene pool narrow as that is.
They will ruin this country but make themselves rich whilst doing so.
21 Mar 2011
at 18:55
VintageKrugParticipantSplendid. So everyone suffers while Binman proves a point!
Socialism at its worst.
21 Mar 2011
at 19:14
robsmith100ParticipantSorry, but I don’t quite understand how would this not be helping the ordinary man?
21 Mar 2011
at 21:19
TominScotlandParticipantHowever gorgeous George may be (each unto his own personal tates, I guess), worth remembering that he did permit the duty for short haul economy flights to be raised by £1 to £12 last November and by more for longer routes.
The talk of a tax on flights by private planes is certainly not aimed at the “common man” (whoever this person actually is) and would be a fair way of closing a crazy loophole – no tax on aviation fuel or on the actual flights themselves for corporate or leisure travel of this nature is crazy.
22 Mar 2011
at 05:27 -
AuthorPosts