boscomantico wrote:
At many airports in Europe, flyers of DA40s etc. also get hit with „small quantity surcharges“
You may also need access to CAT terminal from GA terminal, in some places this means you need to call security to fetch your pockets and aircraft, declare you safe before you are allowed to call JetA truck to your aircraft, then who will add 100e ‘hoo*er-fee’ for your 50L uplift, if you get bored after 1h wait, don’t leave DA40NG without yellow jacket in ZSAR Zone before security comes, the whole airport get shutdown !
Jujupilote wrote:
In 2017, JetA was indeed exempted from several taxes for all users. So that’s what you paid as a private owner or a club. This world is over. CAT is still exempted I think.
On JetA, there is Duty tax, VAT tax and Export refund
Which ones owners & clubs were benefiting from?
In 2017, JetA was indeed exempted from several taxes for all users. So that’s what you paid as a private owner or a club. This world is over.
CAT is still exempted I think.
compared to 91cts in 2017 !
Fully taxed? I don‘t believe so.
At many airports in Europe, flyers of DA40s etc. also get hit with „small quantity surcharges“, often raising the price to over 3€ per litre. It‘a really hard making a diesel piston aircraft make sense, ops-cost-wise.
I don’t know for EU, but France has raised taxes on private JetA1.
JetA1 for GA is now around 2€/L in France, compared to 91cts in 2017 !
FYI, 100LL is around 2,50€/L
In fact, I don’t see much diesel GA aircraft, apart from DA42s in ATOs. But more and more Rotax.
Mooney_Driver wrote:
socialist scum
Can we please refrain from that kind of language? Endorsing a particular political ideology is not reason to call adherents of opposing ideologies “scum”.
Rwy20 wrote:
And as always, the irrational focus on aviation by environmentalists will lead to double and triple taxation due to a combination of airlines’ participation in emissions trading, voluntary compensations, per-passenger taxes and fuel taxes.
I really wonder how much exploitation by tax lords will the average guy accept before we see the same protests which came up in France, only much more.
If we really get to a situation where the average worker can not afford a car anymore, can not afford to travel anymore and will have his quality of life ruined by the very socialist scum which pretend to be the workers representatives, are they all going to take it sitting down and just accept it? Maybe some will be scared sufficiently by the doomsday scientists to just give in or they will follow their political leaders as they have done in the past in some countries. But others won’t sit there and accept that their sour earnt privileges and achievements will simply go away.
To me, it is perfectly clear: The changes these people want will lead to public revolt, possibly homegrown terrorism and ultimately war.
Maybe that is what some of them are after… war’s tend to depopulize countries by 50-60% which is what some of those extremists want to achieve anyhow, themselfs excluded obviously.
If you have to decide between a per-passenger tax and a per-hectoliter tax, the latter has the better steering effect. If you take an airline that has a high passenger loading factor, it produces less emissions per passenger on the same route than an airline with a half-empty plane, but would be paying more taxes under the current schemes.
Also, any effort to reduce fuel consumption (by e.g. flying with another cost index or more efficient flight profiles because you choose smaller, less congested airports) is not rewarded by a per-passenger tax.
And as always, the irrational focus on aviation by environmentalists will lead to double and triple taxation due to a combination of airlines’ participation in emissions trading, voluntary compensations, per-passenger taxes and fuel taxes. This will steer traffic towards other, already heavily subsidised means of transportation which may not be much better environmentally in the long run, but are socially more acceptable it seems.
I think €117 would be a massive hit and would finish the short haul “casual holiday” business pretty well, except for business travel.
I think the breakeven ticket cost of a typical short haul trip in Europe is about €150, each way.
Luckily Ryanair are in [what will remain) the EU 
If we do the math – a 737 NG takes 20800kg of fuel which equates to 26000 litres of fuel – for a full fuel range of 5500 km – for 180 passengers – but considering that nobody except for Norwegian air is flying like that lets be more accurate lets say AMS to Bordeaux would use 32000 litres of fuel(I looked up sector planners for a 737 900 online), so a return flight is 64000 litres of fuel.
64klitres is 21120 euros of tax (330 euros per hecta litre) which would equate to 117 euros in tax per passenger for a return flight from AMS to Bordeaux.
Hardly excessive but it would suit Air France, Lufthansa etc very well as they would not be paying tax on their long haul flights and it would be a serious crimp in the plans of Ryanair, Easyjet etc
Edited the previous post as I cross checked the fuel calculator against 3 other models and the original one was off by a significant factor
kwlf wrote:
Surely the customer ultimately pays whether the tax is on fuel or seats
Of course. However, on the news today. Cruise ships traveling along the coasts of Europe pollute 10x more than all the cars in Europe. This is SOx pollution.
