Travel News - UN chief hails new French air tax

United Nations chief Kofi Annan has shown his support for French plans for a new tax on airline tickets to boost aid for the world's poor.
At the start of a conference in Paris, Mr Annan urged other countries to follow France's example.

The tax, due to come into force in France in July, would range from one to 40 euros depending on the distance travelled and class of ticket bought.

It is expected to raise up to 210m euros ($248m; £144m) a year.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4758786.stm

Well that should have a positive effect on bookings to other European cities outside France... ;)

I'm a fan of charity and even the smart application of government aid to less developed countries -- especially aid to ones that have been colonized/occupied previously -- but I'm not a fan of milking the travelling public. If this is such a great priority -- and I don't disagree that it has a use -- then the governments should find the money from within their existing budgets or adjust the general tax revenue base and have ALL nationals/residents contribute to such a noble goal instead of levying yet another tax on travellers.

If this is applicable to award tickets, this rat stinks even more.

Well that should have a positive effect on bookings to other European cities outside France... ;)

Exactement, mon ami.

Well that should have a positive effect on bookings to other European cities outside France... ;)

Well...not just France:

PARIS (Reuters) — Thirteen countries forged an alliance on Wednesday to adopt a levy on plane tickets to help poor countries fight AIDS and other killer diseases, despite resistance from airlines.

A further 25 countries opted not to impose the tax but promised to contribute to a central pot which the core group of 13 will create from the levy to fund the purchase of generic drugs and other medicines to help the poor.

Brazil, Britain, Chile, Congo, Cyprus, France, Ivory Coast, Jordan, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Mauritius, Nicaragua, and Norway have now agreed to raise or started raising a sum from air tickets to help the poor, they said in a closing statement.

The 25 others included countries such as Germany, Belgium, Austria, South Africa, South Korea and Mexico.

http://www.usatoday.com/travel/flights/2006-03-01-airline-tax_x.htm

Brazil, Britain, Chile, Congo, Cyprus, France, Ivory Coast, Jordan, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Mauritius, Nicaragua, and Norway have now agreed to raise or started raising a sum from air tickets to help the poor, they said in a closing statement.

13 countries to avoid transiting when all else is equal -- at least where total price is the differentiator. :eek:

Does anyone know whether this tax is applied to existing, ticketed itineraries with no changes or only to new or changed itineraries?

This is more insanity from Chirac and his socialistic fellow E.U. politicians.

Let the corrupt leaders of African (and other) countries pay these taxes. Why should we always have to pay for the so-called poor countries?

I wonder if those (high-end politicians) flying in private/government jets will pay these same taxes. I seriously doubt it.

Let Chirac pay!

Noel Forgeard could lend him some of his Airbus stock options money. :D

Brazil, Britain, Chile, Congo, Cyprus, France, Ivory Coast, Jordan, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Mauritius, Nicaragua, and Norway have now agreed to raise or started raising a sum from air tickets to help the poor, they said in a closing statement.

This stinks! :mad: :mad: :mad:

Brazil, Britain, Chile, Congo, Cyprus, France, Ivory Coast, Jordan, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Mauritius, Nicaragua, and Norway have now agreed to raise or started raising a sum from air tickets to help the poor, they said in a closing statement.

Let's look at these vis-a-vis France.

For transit passengers, the only ones which could have any impact would be Britain, Luxembourg, and Norway.

Actually, you can take Britain and Norway off the list. Thanks to the ridiculous security, nobody connects through Britain anymore -- at least not if they have any choice. Norway is also a non-starter as SAS prices are too high.

These leaves only Luxembourg and I don't think it has very much in the way of transit traffic anyhow.

As an Israeli, if I am not going to take a direct flight to the US, I would connect through Paris, Milan, Rome, Vienna, Zurich, Prague, Frankfurt, or Amsterdam. All this does is make Paris less attractive for me.

Of course, Air France can offset that by lowering ticket prices an amount equivalent to the new tax but I have to wonder if it can really afford it.

Does anyone know whether this tax is applied to existing, ticketed itineraries with no changes or only to new or changed itineraries?

I've been changing older tickets (some used in part, some not used at all, some as old as nearly 1 or even 2 years) and as long as it's date changes, no additional add/collect has resulted.

Changed routing, I don't know.

The tax on tickets between the US and the UK is already over $100. They want to raise it even more now? It's one thing to raise taxes for things related to what is being purchased. For example, "security" taxes, PFCs, etc. But taxes like this are just junk taxes. It's the same as cities taxing out-of-towners on hotel rooms and rental cars and using the funds for a brand new stadium or convention center. It's just a grab for money. If I want to donate I'll donate on my own, thank you.

Let's look at these vis-a-vis France.

For transit passengers, the only ones which could have any impact would be Britain, Luxembourg, and Norway.

Actually, you can take Britain and Norway off the list. Thanks to the ridiculous security, nobody connects through Britain anymore -- at least not if they have any choice. Norway is also a non-starter as SAS prices are too high.

These leaves only Luxembourg and I don't think it has very much in the way of transit traffic anyhow.

As an Israeli, if I am not going to take a direct flight to the US, I would connect through Paris, Milan, Rome, Vienna, Zurich, Prague, Frankfurt, or Amsterdam. All this does is make Paris less attractive for me.

Of course, Air France can offset that by lowering ticket prices an amount equivalent to the new tax but I have to wonder if it can really afford it.

I used to -- and still do -- connect through Norway. Partly it's because ticket prices from OSL to several places are cheaper, especially at the last minute, including, but not limited to, on SAS. That said, I agree with your point.

I applaud this initiative.

Quikly ducks for cover.

I applaud this initiative.

Quikly ducks for cover.

There are better ways to achieve the goals of this initiative; and this method is not it.

I applaud this initiative.

Quikly ducks for cover.

Donate all you want to.

Please don't try to force me to do the same.

Donate all you want to.

Please don't try to force me to do the same.

Nobody is forcing you.
Unlike my regular tax money which goes to lots of things I dont support.

Nobody is forcing you.
Unlike my regular tax money which goes to lots of things I dont support.

This tax is being forced on me if I fly through Comrade Chirac's airports. It's bad enough that I get socked for some hefty international taxes as it is now. It's much worse that I am forced to support some charity that has zero to do with air travel.

Why don't we slap $10 onto tickets to save the whales? $15 to help those with no fashion sense? $20 to recycle motor oil?

Charity should always be a choice, not a requirement.

Nobody is forcing you.
Unlike my regular tax money which goes to lots of things I dont support.

But we are being forced to contribute -- at least those of us who use or must use French airports.

But we are being forced to contribute -- at least those of us who use or must use French airports.

And I'm already supporting 45,000 people on Workfare in my own country. :(

As an Israeli, if I am not going to take a direct flight to the US, I would connect through Paris, Milan, Rome, Vienna, Zurich, Prague, Frankfurt, or Amsterdam. All this does is make Paris less attractive for me.

Of course, Air France can offset that by lowering ticket prices an amount equivalent to the new tax but I have to wonder if it can really afford it.

Rome would be my first choice, followed by Amsterdam I think. But I like to break my travels up into manageable segments. :)

Regards,
-Bouncer-
ps: As to the topic, I hate targetted taxes. If it's that important an issue a general levy on the population as a whole. Fair is fair, after all. /shrug

I applaud this initiative.

Quikly ducks for cover.

Why do you applaud it?

There are thousands of good causes. AIDS is no more or less worthy than cancer or numerous other possible recipients.

My personal preference would be for each person to donate (or not donate) as he sees fit. My second choice would be for each elected government to determine for its own citizens where their money will go. ("Taxation without representation" meant something in 1776 and still does.)

If France feels that this is important enough, let it raise its VAT to pay for it.

It is always easy to tax those who can't vote against you. Switzerland does the same thing with its autostrada. It costs 40 SF a year to drive on it -- and this is true if you live in Geneva and use it daily or if you are from Michigan and will only be on it for 20 minutes between the Italian border and Lugano.

Well I certainly cant vote for the TSA or clogged up immigration at ATL yet I am paying for it as well.
In the end though you CAN vote for it by choosing not to fly there, a chose I dont have with most of my taxes.

Well I certainly cant vote for the TSA or clogged up immigration at ATL yet I am paying for it as well.
In the end though you CAN vote for it by choosing not to fly there, a chose I dont have with most of my taxes.


If you live in a representational democracy, you can vote for those who support your positions. It doesn't mean that they will always win but that is not the question.

Unless you are French you can't vote for or against the people who instituted this tax on you.

If you live in a representational democracy, you can vote for those who support your positions. It doesn't mean that they will always win but that is not the question.

Unless you are French you can't vote for or against the people who instituted this tax on you.

Nor can a French visitor to the US vote for all the taxes tagged to his airline ticket when he/she enters the US.
Its just another tax yes so if you dont like it, dont fly there simple relly.
You DO have a choice not to fly to and from France just like a French person has a choice not to fly to or from the US.

Why don't we slap $10 onto tickets to save the whales? $15 to help those with no fashion sense? $20 to recycle motor oil?

Charity should always be a choice, not a requirement.

:D ^

Why do you applaud it?

("Taxation without representation" meant something in 1776 and still does.)




I am a Non-resident Alien US Taxpayer with no vote, so what happened to...No Taxation without Representation Deal?