Airline industry attacks Air Passenger Duty
Many families going on holiday will be forced to pay an extra £100 in air taxes from next week, making some trips abroad \”unaffordable\”, the travel industry has warned.
This is the point of the tax. That, peeps not having paid the full price of their travel before, now do so. That those pesky externalities of carbon emissions are paid for.
And yes, this is exactly what the point of the tax is, at least in theory. That people who don\’t think a flight is worth paying the full cost of a flight don\’t take a flight. In this manner we deter emissions which are not worth, in the value perceived by those emitting, the costs imposed by the emissions.
Now, it\’s certainly possible to argue that the tax is too high, I\’ve not run the numbers against Stern\’s $80 per tonne CO2. But the basic concept, the theory, is that it should indeed act exactly this way. We could also argue that it should be per plane, not per passenger.
Manny Fontenla-Novoa, Thomas Cook Group\’s chief executive, said the company was disappointed that the Government had continued with its plans to increase the duty.
\”There is no evidence of this tax having any environmental benefit,\” he said. \”We will continue to lobby on behalf of our holidaymakers.\”
Manny, you\’re arguing that some people will be dissuaded from flying as a result of the tax. That is the environmental benefit.
It\’s certainly possibl to make this tax better: but the existence of the tax and the dissuading of people from flying, well, that\’s the point.