No tax is popular ” or necessarily fair.
Clearly, taxation exists so that all the things that are a given in Western societies ” everything from infrastructure, police and defence ” to who empties the dustbins ” can be paid for from the common purse.
But without quite having the impact that led to the Magna Carta being grudgingly signed, the imposition by the UK government these past years of the so-called Air Passenger Duty (APD), has been one of the most baffling revenue-raising exercises of all.
It is hugely unpopular with airlines ” who resent having to play tax collector ” and is a complicated extra expense for passengers.
But the aspect that provokes most howls of outrage is the ludicrous notion that APD somehow alleviates the ” relatively modest ” impact airlines have on the environment through C02 emissions. Without going over old ground, global aviation C02 accounts for 1.6% of greenhouse gases, while even the worst forward model predicts only modest increases in that figure.
As the green steamroller started to train its sights on aviation a few years ago, APD was introduced to much fanfare, but to what avail? The ”2.4bn or so that was raised appeared not to be hypothecated, but rather seemed to disappear into an enormous black Treasury hole.
And that has been the infuriating situation ever since. Nobody but nobody likes paying tax, but if it could be seen that the famous APD was going towards some worthy environmental cause or as an incentive to engine manufacturers or whatever clever ruse UK government could come up with, then fine.
But it didn”t and that”s what makes last week”s ” rather more modest ” equivalent of King John coming back to the barons - extremely intriguing.
It appears that HM Revenue and Customs ” not a body noted for its sympathy to tax pleas ” has had a change of heart. A slow one mind, but one that has been welcomed ” albeit with a hefty dose of caution.
The redoubtable easyJet clearly thought it knew the way the APD wind was blowing last month, with the launch of its advertising campaign to persuade the UK Chancellor of the Exchequer to come with a more equitable aviation tax.
And mindful of the fact the industry pays no VAT on fuel, any APD replacement pill was one that had to be swallowed ” given the power of the environmental lobby. There was no way an APD under any new Trojan horse name, was simply going to disappear.
But Chancellor Darling has thrown the industry a bone by agreeing to examine with the airlines, whether any future taxation ” slated for introduction in 2009 ” should be based for example on weight and carbon emission rather than per passenger.
EasyJet has long argued that this would penalise older aircraft - such as MD-80s - and reward cleaner machines, er such as easyJet”s A319s. Or as easyJet chief executive, Andy Harrison put it: ”A structure that taxes a passenger in the newest, cleanest aircraft the same as someone in an old gas-guzzler, cannot be allowed to continue.
”It is right to tax emissions, not passengers. That means reflecting a combination of aircraft type and distance flown, but the reform should not be used as an excuse to further increase the burden of tax on passengers.”
One of the oft-trotted out mantras from the uber-greens is that somehow aircraft are flying around the world half-empty. Where are these half-empty aircraft? Load factors, particularly in Europe, are generally on the high side, while the low-cost sector”s very business model is predicated on filling as many seats as humanly possible.
Alitalia seems to cop a fair amount of flak on this one, but the market will eventually decide if the company ” and no amount of government intervention will help. The market ” in a deregulated, non state-owned environment ” will surely sort the wheat from the chaff with concomitant environmental benefits.
Flybe has added an interesting angle, namely that of the importance of maintaining competitive services to remote UK regions such as northern Scotland and the south west. Traditionally served by smaller aircraft to ensure frequency of service, Flybe maintains that they should be taxed based on carbon footprint emissions and not simply size.
Interestingly, services from the Scottish islands currently attract no APD, but those into these remote communities do. Time for a look at that perhaps? The wheel can”t be uninvented ” flying has become a democratised commodity in an increasingly wealthy society and is no longer the preserve of an elite.
Everyone has a view and clearly, no-one likes paying tax ” certainly not one that is a relatively recent addition to the national coffers.
But what is heartening is that the government has indicated it will listen, perhaps realising it can”t burn its green fingers twice.