A few frequent flyers 'dominate air travel'
31/03/2021
|
news
|
science
|
780
Those who fly more should be taxed more, and air miles incentives should be banned, campaigners say.
The question is whether it should increase exponentially to deter such frequent flying...Climate change will affect the poorest most
They fly more than they need to because they can afford it.
Damaging the future of others unnecessarily is unacceptable.
Damaging the future of others unnecessarily is unacceptable.
People who fly frequently already pay more tax.
You are missing the point: the proposal is for there to be an exponential rise in that tax amount. Currently it's linear.
People who have more spare cash are able to fly around the world more than those who can't afford to. How insightful.
It's making the point that its curtailment won't affect the majority.
If you have a job that requires you to travel extensively, then the one time you travel for your holiday you get taxed to the heavens? Should the company you work for pay the tax? Lots of difficult questions in this...
Quelle surprise. We have had to close our business since Boxing day with absolutely no income (and the grants are pitiful) while Rita Ora gets to fly to Australia to make money working on a music show, even after breaking Covid regs several times. Definitely them and us. I'm sick of it.
While I've spent a year working 6 or 7 days a week alone in a tiny one-room flat, told not to go anywhere in the same country lest it kill people, and no chance of a summer respite from the grinding gloom unless I want to pay a massive fine. But if you're a rich celebrity, lockdown either doesn't exist or can be bought off with fines which to them are less than a round of drinks. What's the point?
Nothing has changed over the last year
The rich and privelged continue to do as they please while the rest of us proles suffer the consequences
In it all together my Ar**
The rich and privelged continue to do as they please while the rest of us proles suffer the consequences
In it all together my Ar**
Best keep voting for parties like Conservatives, UKIP, and whatever the man-of-the-people Farage is at these days, they have your best interests at heart and they don't perpetuate this rich/poor divide. Things are so much better after years and years of Conservative rule aren't they? Everyone's quite right to be absolutely terrified of the extreme-left opposition, as they now have in the USA.
You are lucky, 3 million people have been excluded from any COVID support whatsover. Totally abandoned by this government and country. That means not even 1p help and cannot earn 1p since March 2020! Shame on this government and people in this country.
Do something about it then.
But if celebs can't fly to exotic locations, how can they influence us via Instagram ?
All flights should be taxed. Why make a difference between FF'ers and others? The poor don't fly.
And stop FF schemes.
If you stop FF schemes, the empty seats will get filled by people who don't fly frequently.
Only taxing the FF'ers is a typical idea of green Greens.
And stop FF schemes.
If you stop FF schemes, the empty seats will get filled by people who don't fly frequently.
Only taxing the FF'ers is a typical idea of green Greens.
You are part of 'them' if you fly, most don't.
I think you find most of frequent flyers are business people. The makes out as if it is rich people, define rich when you can fly for 100 euros. The article failed to declare the type of person flying. Define frequent.
Shock, horror ........ less than 1% of the population take 100% of flights ............ they are called pilots!
Not if you are counting seats occupied...
But then you couldn't look clever, could you?
But then you couldn't look clever, could you?
serious issue, idiotic comment
Instead of trying to tax the rich in stupid convoluted ways. Just tax them like you tax everyone else, remove the loopholes that allow them to pay themselves £25k and then get the rest in low tax dividends. Tax them on their actual annual wealth. Tax the massive businesses they work for too. It isnt hard, if they dont like it, they are free to go move somewhere else.
You really don't understand how any tax system works, do you...
"Tax them on their actual annual wealth"
Would you like to be taxed every year on the value of your house, or would that only apply to rich people...
And what do you define "rich" as, I wonder?
"Tax them on their actual annual wealth"
Would you like to be taxed every year on the value of your house, or would that only apply to rich people...
And what do you define "rich" as, I wonder?
Dividends are paid out of company profits, those dividends have already had corporation tax deducted. There is some squaring up could be done, but the “tax advantage” is nowhere near as big as some people think.
You display your ignorance of how the tax system works and confirm the politicised debasement of our language. "Fair" now means "as much as possible that doesn't actually effect me" just like "cut" now means "reduced increase". The top 20% of earners already pay about 80+% of the total tax-take - that's considerably more than "fair" in the correct use of the word.
LOL. Ridiculous.
It's so easy to suggest that people and businesses are free to go somewhere else, but if they do, then the UK loses 100% tax income from those people and businesses. Instead of 'bashing the wealthy' (simply because they are wealthy), think about the money they bring in to the country that helps keep taxes down for everyone else.
Dude - you have no clue at all, zero, about dividend taxation (and the associated corporation taxation).
Corp tax at 19% from the first £1 (unlike income tax which has £12.5K tax-free).
Div tax is 7.5% after that, so a combined 26.5%.
The higher rate of div tax is 32.5% (on top of the 19% corp tax already paid - so 51.5%).
Corp tax at 19% from the first £1 (unlike income tax which has £12.5K tax-free).
Div tax is 7.5% after that, so a combined 26.5%.
The higher rate of div tax is 32.5% (on top of the 19% corp tax already paid - so 51.5%).
Tax on dividends is not low
No loopholes
Yes NI is lower
They are classed as income and taxed at the normal tax rates
In addition corporation taxes are paid
Try check out facts before you post nonsense based on jealousy and misinformation
No loopholes
Yes NI is lower
They are classed as income and taxed at the normal tax rates
In addition corporation taxes are paid
Try check out facts before you post nonsense based on jealousy and misinformation
Yeah there's no way they would be able to get round that by just putting their property / vehicles etc. in trust funds, holdings, other peoples names etc. ........
I have just learnt that JCB were given a £600,000 business loan last year with no end date. Also learnt that they are a tax avoider and like Virgin Care receiving billions in contracts, work it that they don’t pay tax. I am getting sick and tired as to what is really going on here. As a pleb, even my taxed income is taxed again.
exactly , remove loopholes, but this has to happen globally .
Pre Brexit I worked a lot between a UK & EU office. As part of our company's commitment to being green, we used to travel by Eurostar. Took a lot longer and was more expensive, but we only have one planet that we know of that we can live on.
??Do you have any idea how much power those behemoths take to run? That journey from London to, say, Paris will burn around 20 kWh of energy per passenger one way, around 40% of which is produced from fossil fuels in the EU. 20 kWh is two days’ worth of electricity consumption for a typical UK household. Yes it’s probably less polluting than flying, but it’s far from “green”.
As a travel writer for AWE365.com I fly quite a lot. However I would be in favour of a frequent flyer tax. Before the pandemic I was already trying to reduce flights by travelling by train and merging press trips together. We are all in it together and those who do the damage should pay the price.
Nice business plug ??
APD? The more you fly the more you’re taxed already
Presumably you'd just claim the cost on expenses? It's easy to be in favour of something that wouldn't cost you anything personally.
As this would target those with power and influence, don't hold your breath.
It is targeting ordinary people under the guise of hitting the rich. The climate nutjobs and the lockdown zealots are on the same page. They want to exert complete control and subdue humanity.
Far from air miles and other rewards, price of tickets should double with green tax, each time a passenger needs to fly again in a year.
Shock, horror ........ less than 1% of the population take 100% of flights ............ they are called pilots!
Personally, I find it difficult to criticise people who may need to travel frequently as part of their jobs that may create other jobs and wealth for people and Governments.
Some things cannot be done over Zoom etc.
Some things cannot be done over Zoom etc.
My Uncle is in finance and he said the Pandemic has shown that it's actually at least 90% of the reason they travelled abroad could habe easily been done on Zoom or other platforms. Flyong was just a luxury. It'll actually save the company more money in the long run.
What rubbish.. I have a low paid job, don't have my own place, etc, but I fly frequently.. it's what I like to do. People are already taxed when they earn!
you probably won't be able to afford to do so in the future, the days of lost-cost flights won't last much longer
And of course taxed through Air Passenger Duty so that the more and further they fly the more tax they pay.
The joke is people are not meant to be going on vacation and yet I know a number of frequent overseas flyers ignoring the rules with no consequence. Sort out quarantine and the borders UK government.
If that's true the airline would have found out by now and I'd actually be interested to find out where they're going. I know for a fact that travelling to Germany, Spain and Italy could land you in jail or a massive fine when you land if you're lying about why you left the UK.
Removed
25 years ago there was no such things as Air Passenger Duty. Now, every time we fly, we are taxed. The more that we fly, the more tax that we pay. If we are 'rich' and fly in a more expensive cabin, we are taxed at a higher rate. So what exactly needs to be fixed here?
The amount of flying has to be reduced; it really is very simple.
Where to start with this. I am not a frequent flier, but do use planes on occasions. The more you fly the more you pay on tax etc , and keep people in a job.I wonder who the Uk citizens assembly is, neither they or Green peace speak for me even though these groups seem to make the arrogant assumption that they speak for all. The idea of greater tax is ridiculous, it needs binning
Shock, horror ........ less than 1% of the population take 100% of flights ............ they are called pilots!
I have flown from London City to Zurich twice in the space of 4 months pre-covid.
Same flight and time.
I was amazed to see a number of the same people on the same flights.
They must fly City to Zurich there and back maybe every day.
WHY?
Same flight and time.
I was amazed to see a number of the same people on the same flights.
They must fly City to Zurich there and back maybe every day.
WHY?
So you flew twice and saw the same people and your conclusion is they must fly every day? Maybe they thought the same thing when they saw you?
I flew London to Brussels a few times pre Brexit. Full of MEPs and Eurocrats all flying Business Class of course and all funded by the tax payer. A frequent flyer levy wouldn’t affect them at all
This tax isn’t just about raisinh money. It’s about changing behaviours. CO2 emissions are proving hard to cleanup.
We shouldn’t be letting the few destroy the planet. End of.
We shouldn’t be letting the few destroy the planet. End of.
lol, when it's the rich that have to fork out it is always difficult to implement and when it's the poor that have to fork out it's done almost straight away.
Welcome to Capitalism.
I've always despaired at how easily the 99% are controlled by the 1% through politics.
Not even a moment's hesitation. Well the Tories have to think of their sponsors!
First flight per tax year is free of tax. The next flight is £40 tax, then it doubles each time, making more than ten flights a year very expensive, maybe even another multiplier based on distance and there is no cap, resets end of each tax year (April). Yes you could fly twice in a month and not pay tax, but then you've got a whole year to wait again.
I'd expect better reporting standards by the BBC. What dates did this study cover? If 2020, this was a very atypical year?
What is the criteria to be in the 15% wealthy population?
Number of flights also do not equal total emissions.
I'm sure the wealthy are over represented, but this article needs better information.
What is the criteria to be in the 15% wealthy population?
Number of flights also do not equal total emissions.
I'm sure the wealthy are over represented, but this article needs better information.
I cant wait to get on a plane again and fly, bring it on
Eurostar couldn't opperate over the border because of Covid not Brexit ??
Why?
If Eurostar goes to the wall because it's business model cannot change with the times that's it's problem not ours
Why should it be bailed out so a few Londoners can go for lunch in France and bring back cheese cheap plonk?
Flood the tunnel, it's outlived it's purpose and would cut off one way illegal immigrants try to enter the UK despite having already passed through several safe countries
Why should it be bailed out so a few Londoners can go for lunch in France and bring back cheese cheap plonk?
Flood the tunnel, it's outlived it's purpose and would cut off one way illegal immigrants try to enter the UK despite having already passed through several safe countries
Its covid you retard ...and french owned hows that for 2 facts that upset your day
Removed
Take the money back from all the Billionaires and Tory chums that have made a literal killing out of Brexit and the covid. The rich are hoovering up the world's wealth. Bad days ahead.....
You do realise a lot of Labour MPs also wanted Brexit, just like half the Tories didn't want Brexit. Quite a lot of parties had MPs in favour of it. The PM at the time of the vote campaigned against it.
Presumably such comment is either deliberate 'to get a rise' out of people or is based on a huge chip on your shoulder and how unfair it is that anyone has more money than you. Lots of people earn more money than you and me and those same people pay a lot more tax too. Let's stop being a jealous nation and try to bring everyone 'down' to the lowest level and instead be inspired to be better.
Why the constant witch hunt against the aviation industry?
Is it because it's a very responsible and well regulated industry and therefore an easy target to lobby ?
Far better educate the people of litter Britain to stop trashing their countryside and use road transport and haulage less.
Is it because it's a very responsible and well regulated industry and therefore an easy target to lobby ?
Far better educate the people of litter Britain to stop trashing their countryside and use road transport and haulage less.
It's not a witch hunt against them. If anything, it'll more than likely help them out in the long run. Everything they do to cut emissions seems to help industries that cause them somehow eventually.
Far better to deal with both issues. They are not mutually exclusive.
Instead of trying to tax the rich in stupid convoluted ways. Just tax them like you tax everyone else, remove the loopholes that allow them to pay themselves £25k and then get the rest in low tax dividends. Tax them on their actual annual wealth. Tax the massive businesses they work for too. It isnt hard, if they dont like it, they are free to go move somewhere else.
I#m not advocating it but that's how it's done in many places around the world. Even includes your car!
"Would you like to be taxed every year on the value of your house". I AM; it's called "council tax", ex-rates. The advantage of a tax on buildings is that you can't hide them; some countries with a weak tax system occasionally have an extra one-off building tax when they're short.
So my council tax is about 5% of my YEARLY earnings pre tax. on a Band C property. worth about £300k.
Mr Rich guy in his 5 million pound mansion pays £3700 a year in council tax. That is 0.37% of his earnings at least assuming he earns over a million.
No that isnt fair, They work same hours as me, work just as hard, but earn way more. A more even distribution of wealth is the ideal of society
Mr Rich guy in his 5 million pound mansion pays £3700 a year in council tax. That is 0.37% of his earnings at least assuming he earns over a million.
No that isnt fair, They work same hours as me, work just as hard, but earn way more. A more even distribution of wealth is the ideal of society
I think you must have a million pound house :D
I think there is some confusion around this tax in the comments. Of course the more you fly the more you pay in tax, it is a flat rate tax, but the tax doesn't cover the massive amount of emissions produced by flying. If the tax was levied equally across all flights it would hit regular holiday makers hard.
This step up tax rate acts as incentive for companies and frequent flyers to cut down.
This step up tax rate acts as incentive for companies and frequent flyers to cut down.
Surely if the aim is to reduce carbon emissions then it makes most sense to apply it to all flights?
I haven't been on a plane in 19 months. I usually have at least 10 flights a year. I will protest if the Government keeps a ban on foreign travel.
Do grow up.
I think global health is more important than the myriad of holidays you have a year that you're bragging about. Get real.
I think global health is more important than the myriad of holidays you have a year that you're bragging about. Get real.
This pandemic has shattered the myth that business people need to jet all over the world for meetings etc. They do it because they like it as with technology most business trips are totally unnecessary
Not really. We live in a world where we are supposed to be wary about people's mental well being, and personal human interaction is a big part of that. The pandemic has leant me to consider flying less, but it is not conceivable to stop conducting face to face meetings and customer or supplier visits
No. As someone who has traveled a lot on business I can assure you I don’t do it because I want to; in fact wherever possible I avoid it. As an IT consultant I am also firmly of the opinion that technology does not make most trips “totally unnecessary”
Sometimes it is better to have a face to face meeting, and yes a lot can be done virtually - but its not the same - how about you live in your room for the next ten years - not going out - only contacting people via zoom ?
People need to interact with each other - why do you think the young generate are having so many mental / health issues ?
IT doesnt solve everything.
People need to interact with each other - why do you think the young generate are having so many mental / health issues ?
IT doesnt solve everything.
The UK economy is primarily built on service industries. Being successful in a service business often relies on the strength of customer relationships. Those relationships would weaken if the UK business didn't visit an international customer, whereas a competitor in the customers locality did. The notion that business trips are totally unnecessary is unfounded.
you clearly have no clue what you are talking about. Much of what happens at a meeting is in the body language or the shared cup of coffee at the break time... relationship building leads to better business and that doesn't happen on Zoom
Less travel is possible but meeting new and existing customers in person can bring in so much more business and improve efficiency. Travel can't and shouldn't go away in our global world.
Business travel is not fun, and most of us would stop it if we could. I cannot conduct safety surveys of our warehouse operations by zoom. 10 hours on an overnight flight in economy (we don’t all get business class) followed by 3 12 hour days of surveys and a 10 hour overnight return flight. No time for any sightseeing. No, business travel is not fun, but in my case is essential.
Not Really anywhere near the truth. I do a lot of working from home now. I also travel all over the place as my job is hands on. Various quarantine rules around the world just mean my office looks like a different hotel room almost every month. I would end up having to pay more tax for the luxury of almost never getting home. Foreign travel is not all beached pools and drinks. It's hard!
Its much easier to do business face to face but given the alternatives the internet is a viable alternative in most cases
There's a lot more than meetings. Factory inspections, equipment commissioning, trade fairs. You can't really reduce flying for those without having offices in every region you work in (which is really expensive).
Greenpeace wants Air Miles banned. Always thought they were a bit of a con like Green Shield stamps and Players No 6 ciggie vouchers (my late Mum's) of yesteryear. Spend years saving them, spending a fortune only to lose them or trade them in for a packet of fruit gums.
An extra tax on the wealthy? Can't even get them to pay the amount of tax they are supposed to as it is due to loopholes. Just ask Lorraine Kelly or Piers Morgan for example who have never been employed by ITV but are in fact freelance journalists, nudge nudge wink wink. Good idea, especially regarding the environment, but closing existing loopholes should be the priority.
You do know that freelance journalists pay tax as well don't you.
They are no more employed by itv than the plumber who comes to fix your tap is employed by you. Services paid for
Another Tory scam to keep us chained to Alcatraz. Very soon only those who are super rich or on expenses will be allowed to fly and the rest will be confined to little England.
the UK son the uk..not just engerland
Ignorant comment from someone who has no sense of reality. There's nothing wrong with preferring another political party over the Conservatives, but don't use that as a reason to talk b@!!@*^&.
This article ignores the fact that many of those people who fly frequently do so for work, not because they are rich. I used to take around 100 flights a year but that was part of my job touring the world with various bands. I was flying economy nearly all the time and although I was reasonably well paid, I'm certainly not rich.
I'm not disagreeing that things need to change though.
I'm not disagreeing that things need to change though.
Then you were flying for work, so just as the cost of your flight was presumably not paid out of your pocket (or you claimed it back), nor would the tax be. If you were self employed then you would still be charging your services at a rate where you recouped all your costs.
Very much so. I spent about 20 years flying all over the world for work. Not quite at your level but typically 15 to 20 trips a year (30-40 flights) but since worked changed I've had one foreign in 6 years.
Lots of people fly because they have too, not because they chose to. Who in their right mind would spend any more time in airports if they had a choice.
Lots of people fly because they have too, not because they chose to. Who in their right mind would spend any more time in airports if they had a choice.
Haven't you heard of video conferencing ? This is the 21st Century, grandad.
Fine, then your employer should pay. Business flights have the same environmental impact as holiday flights. If your business wants to save money, it will question whether those trips are worth the financial and environmental cost.
I fly to Ireland regularly but would happily get the train + ferry if it wasn't 5x the cost! Increase taxes on flights, subsidise rail and bus services.
I fly to Ireland regularly but would happily get the train + ferry if it wasn't 5x the cost! Increase taxes on flights, subsidise rail and bus services.
With the massive leap forward in the technology supporting virtual meetings online; the continued justification for business-related air-travel and frequent flying has surely become more tenuous than ever before.
Which would add to the costs of the business, put up their prices to cover the tax and price them out of the market compared to countries that do not have this tax. Well done on destroying British business.
The same here, I worked in the aviation industry and had more than several flights a year for Business and flew mostly economy.
Then companies will game the system - each person will travel up to the non-taxable limit and then another employee will travel in that persons stead. It will create inefficiencies. It in case, the true cost will be paid by the consumer of whom that 57% of non-fliers will share the burden. It's not like companies are spending money on travel without discretion.
Is this even news ? Or have the greenie, lefty Liberals at the BBC got to fill a gap in their "news" reporting ?
Yes, it's news.
It may be news you don't like, but that's not important.
It may be news you don't like, but that's not important.
Well it can't always be tiresome gammon rara Churchill Union Flag triumphalistic tosh...
Or will it as they seem to reproduce the most and their offspring may more likely succeed, evolution is full of surprises.
Do the same for other forms of transport including your car
Increase car fuel costs exponentially
Increase public transport fares exponentially as well
Maybe introduce travel rationing books
Bet you wouldn't like it
Take your blinkers off
Increase car fuel costs exponentially
Increase public transport fares exponentially as well
Maybe introduce travel rationing books
Bet you wouldn't like it
Take your blinkers off
Instead of trying to tax the rich in stupid convoluted ways. Just tax them like you tax everyone else, remove the loopholes that allow them to pay themselves £25k and then get the rest in low tax dividends. Tax them on their actual annual wealth. Tax the massive businesses they work for too. It isnt hard, if they dont like it, they are free to go move somewhere else.
15% are wealthy fliers. 57% don't go abroad at all. So why no mention of the other 38% who board a Ryanair 737 for a cheap booze filled holiday in some grotty Spanish costa?
Check your numbers...
Quelle surprise. We have had to close our business since Boxing day with absolutely no income (and the grants are pitiful) while Rita Ora gets to fly to Australia to make money working on a music show, even after breaking Covid regs several times. Definitely them and us. I'm sick of it.
While I've spent a year working 6 or 7 days a week alone in a tiny one-room flat, told not to go anywhere in the same country lest it kill people, and no chance of a summer respite from the grinding gloom unless I want to pay a massive fine. But if you're a rich celebrity, lockdown either doesn't exist or can be bought off with fines which to them are less than a round of drinks. What's the point?
And here too is a prime reason why our government refused to close our borders through the pandemic - to facilitate the "windswept and interesting" lifestyles these privileged few lead and all that lovely money they spend.
The health risks of doing that were so very much secondary.
The health risks of doing that were so very much secondary.
Stop talking nonsense. These ppl are essential travellers who give a reason for going. If you have a reasonable excuse to travel then who is stopping you.
Why not fine rule-breakers as a percentage of their income, starting with a minimum fine at the bottom of the range? Perhaps if they lost a large chunk of their concert profits, it may be some discouragement?
The point is this is why we vote for left leaning governments. Right wing ones are pro this behaviour and actively encourage is with their contracts to mates.
Removed
Daft idea. As others have mentioned fliers already pay high levels of tax on each leg of a journey. I suspect the very wealthy will be undeterred by such measures. Most importantly, this will disproportionately affect UK businesses and global competitiveness. Not everything can be done via video conferencing - especially in some cultures where meeting in person is essential to winning new work.
I've been vaccinated twice so I can go on holiday. I've already had 5 trips cancelled due to the pandemic. Sixth time lucky.
15% are wealthy fliers. 57% don't go abroad at all. So why no mention of the other 38% who board a Ryanair 737 for a cheap booze filled holiday in some grotty Spanish costa?
He got sacked from his job as a maths teacher. Strange, as he was giving it 110%...
Aviation contributed 2.5% of CO2 emissions. I think it will be a long time before a passenger plane can run on batteries. Persuading China to stop mining coal may be more useful.
Ban crypto currencies first
That alone is more than banning all air travel.
So simple to do too
That alone is more than banning all air travel.
So simple to do too
And yet China still only emits half the CO2 per person as the United States. Everyone needs to do their bit, not just China.
And yet our Government want to open a new coal mine here... that will help persuade them eh?
Shall we wait until it's 5%? Or nip it in the bud before more people become 'dependent' on it? This argument has as much traction as 'Cars whose registration contain the letters E and F only contribute x%'...so bloody what! It's still pollution.
When you break CO2 emissions down by capita China drops way down the list of the top polluting countries. Persuading the US to reduce their emissions would have a much bigger impact on global CO2 emissions and if every country brought back their manufacturing from China this would also reduce the total CO2 emissions from China
Around 2030 for aircraft with over 100 passengers according to BA. But not batteries, hydrogen fuel cells. They’ve just invested in a UK start-up developing the engine and fuel system technology.
China is bad but then we sent them all our manufacturing. So we exported our carbon production to them. Look at it from the basis of individuals causing carbon production (by buying stuff etc) then it's a very different picture and we look very bad then.
reviewing the UK's fuel duty system - effectively frozen for a decade
would also be a more effective way to reduce emissions and improve air quality for city folk
would also be a more effective way to reduce emissions and improve air quality for city folk
A carbon tax please on private jets. If frequent flyers are using scheduled services I don’t that there is any difference in carbon emissions.
Scheduled flights are still supply and demand lead.
There will be a calculable carbon footprint per passenger on a flight, as a full 747 will use more fuel for a given journey than if it were empty, and that difference is attributed to passengers and their luggage.
You do, however, raise a valid point that private jets should also have a carbon tax.
You do, however, raise a valid point that private jets should also have a carbon tax.
If it went towards carbon offsetting directly, that would be good.... but unlikely to happen.
Let's not forget about commercial helicopter flights. High carbon emissions and awful noise pollution.
Why the constant witch hunt against the aviation industry?
Is it because it's a very responsible and well regulated industry and therefore an easy target to lobby ?
Far better educate the people of litter Britain to stop trashing their countryside and use road transport and haulage less.
Is it because it's a very responsible and well regulated industry and therefore an easy target to lobby ?
Far better educate the people of litter Britain to stop trashing their countryside and use road transport and haulage less.
If everyone had a free allowance of say just 500 miles PA issued as a token ,duty assessed on excess miles, the allowance could be traded. Then the rich would pay the poorer for their airmiles that were never taken up , and the people who do not travel would benefit by staying out of aircraft. . What a super idea. (It's very nearly how the stock market works with shares and bonds after all. )
Why the constant witch hunt against the aviation industry?
Is it because it's a very responsible and well regulated industry and therefore an easy target to lobby ?
Far better educate the people of litter Britain to stop trashing their countryside and use road transport and haulage less.
Is it because it's a very responsible and well regulated industry and therefore an easy target to lobby ?
Far better educate the people of litter Britain to stop trashing their countryside and use road transport and haulage less.
this is just soppy. The majority of frequent fliers are export salesmen.
The uber wealthy do not fly commercial airlines.
They fly privatly or have people come to them.
The uber wealthy do not fly commercial airlines.
They fly privatly or have people come to them.
Tax by occupancy space per person
The 'wealthy 15% of the population'
You wouldn't be including the hypocritical luvvies who fly back and forward across the Atlantic to attend Extinction Rebellion demos in the middle of a global pandemic by any chance ?
You wouldn't be including the hypocritical luvvies who fly back and forward across the Atlantic to attend Extinction Rebellion demos in the middle of a global pandemic by any chance ?
Utterly pathetic attempt at deflection.
Add your comment...would not have chosen that point.
This would be a blatant misuse of the powers to tax & should be rejected out of hand like any form of social engineering by taxation.
All tax is social engineering
Not really. We live in a world where we are supposed to be wary about people's mental well being, and personal human interaction is a big part of that. The pandemic has leant me to consider flying less, but it is not conceivable to stop conducting face to face meetings and customer or supplier visits
You don't need to fly across the world for a meeting for mental wellbeing. You may need to do it to meet a customer or supplier, but let's not conflate everything with mental health.
Flying adversely affects many people's 'mental well being'!
Look around at the other passengers at the end of a 12 hour flight, (regardless of what class they are in) and tell me that business travel is fun. It's not fun, it's not glamorous, but sometimes it's necessary.
We can reduce it for sure, and I think business travellers and concerned citizens would all welcome that.
We can reduce it for sure, and I think business travellers and concerned citizens would all welcome that.
Why not? I see everyone over Zoom.
"A frequent flyer levy (mostly affecting the very richest) will be difficult to administer" say the Conservatives, the party of the very richest.
Well fly me to the moon - I'm absolutely amazed they've responded in this manner. Not.
Well fly me to the moon - I'm absolutely amazed they've responded in this manner. Not.
People who fly frequently already pay more tax.
That's not capitalism, that's cronyism.
More elitism than capitalism. You think the top 5% of North Korea, Venezuela, etc give a toss about their proletariat?
Its disgusting that anyone is suggesting more taxes on flying.
Air passenger duty was introduced as an environmental tax and what these brainless lumps at greenpeace (didnt they stop being relevant decades ago?) dont seem to realise is frequent flyers are already paying more because of the taxes already in place. APD is what, £160 per flight now?
Air passenger duty was introduced as an environmental tax and what these brainless lumps at greenpeace (didnt they stop being relevant decades ago?) dont seem to realise is frequent flyers are already paying more because of the taxes already in place. APD is what, £160 per flight now?
Instead of trying to tax the rich in stupid convoluted ways. Just tax them like you tax everyone else, remove the loopholes that allow them to pay themselves £25k and then get the rest in low tax dividends. Tax them on their actual annual wealth. Tax the massive businesses they work for too. It isnt hard, if they dont like it, they are free to go move somewhere else.
You display your ignorance of how the tax system works and confirm the politicised debasement of our language. "Fair" now means "as much as possible that doesn't actually effect me" just like "cut" now means "reduced increase". The top 20% of earners already pay about 80+% of the total tax-take - that's considerably more than "fair" in the correct use of the word.
It is you who is displaying your ignorance, maybe deliberately so?!
It is a fact that based on wealth the wealthy pay around 1% tax in reality; they are in fact massive takers from society.
The rest of us pay 20-60% on ours. Your question seems to be whether we would rather pay wealth taxes than income & non-direct taxes? Hell yes, of course we would.
Intelligent people say yes to wealth taxes!
It is a fact that based on wealth the wealthy pay around 1% tax in reality; they are in fact massive takers from society.
The rest of us pay 20-60% on ours. Your question seems to be whether we would rather pay wealth taxes than income & non-direct taxes? Hell yes, of course we would.
Intelligent people say yes to wealth taxes!
We should have a green tax, that's a tax on the envious.
It's easy to attack and demonise others when you don't do something. But flying is small part of the problem compared with things like cars and having children, and that's when we discover that people don't really want to do anything and prefer to change the subject and deflect attention to other people's carbon footprints.
Aviation is about 13% of UK CO2 emissions - cars about 25%+. So it is true that cars are a bigger problem. However, there is a path to reduction of CO2 from vehicles, more people use cars than fly and many car journeys are kind of 'essential' (or at least basic to reasonable life).
True on children - should be replacement numbers at most. But I wouldn't advocate a law for that.
True on children - should be replacement numbers at most. But I wouldn't advocate a law for that.
Absolute nonsense. Most of the people they allude to will be higher rate tax payers anyway.
Or wealthy tax-dodgers.
An extra tax on the wealthy? Can't even get them to pay the amount of tax they are supposed to as it is due to loopholes. Just ask Lorraine Kelly or Piers Morgan for example who have never been employed by ITV but are in fact freelance journalists, nudge nudge wink wink. Good idea, especially regarding the environment, but closing existing loopholes should be the priority.
Of course but not as much as TV presenter employed by a TV company, which is what they actually are
it's the other insurance contributions you can duck
plus, if you 'own' the business that 'employs' you there are wrinkles in terms of tax obligations upon how you declare profits as opposed to earnings
that and the fact that you can rent your own house from yourself
ah hummm....
plus, if you 'own' the business that 'employs' you there are wrinkles in terms of tax obligations upon how you declare profits as opposed to earnings
that and the fact that you can rent your own house from yourself
ah hummm....
I generally get deleted for posting this stuff but I will post again...
PAYE is now - a big up to Gord and Tone - a mugs game
PAYE is now - a big up to Gord and Tone - a mugs game
Instead of trying to tax the rich in stupid convoluted ways. Just tax them like you tax everyone else, remove the loopholes that allow them to pay themselves £25k and then get the rest in low tax dividends. Tax them on their actual annual wealth. Tax the massive businesses they work for too. It isnt hard, if they dont like it, they are free to go move somewhere else.
Found the rich guy.
You really don't understand how any tax system works, do you...
"Tax them on their actual annual wealth"
Would you like to be taxed every year on the value of your house, or would that only apply to rich people...
And what do you define "rich" as, I wonder?
"Tax them on their actual annual wealth"
Would you like to be taxed every year on the value of your house, or would that only apply to rich people...
And what do you define "rich" as, I wonder?
Just add to current air passenger duty. No additional admin
Seems fair - wealthy pay for the pollution they cause
And just FYI - I have flown over a million miles with work and holidays. So I am arguing for a higher tax on me but I see the long term benefit
Seems fair - wealthy pay for the pollution they cause
And just FYI - I have flown over a million miles with work and holidays. So I am arguing for a higher tax on me but I see the long term benefit
I'd expect better reporting standards by the BBC. What dates did this study cover? If 2020, this was a very atypical year?
What is the criteria to be in the 15% wealthy population?
Number of flights also do not equal total emissions.
I'm sure the wealthy are over represented, but this article needs better information.
What is the criteria to be in the 15% wealthy population?
Number of flights also do not equal total emissions.
I'm sure the wealthy are over represented, but this article needs better information.
Its makes a difference because the article keeps going on about wealthy people and that is very misleading. And I thought the UK was looking forward to a new era of world trade - well that is not going to happen unless we got on planes and fly to our customers!
15% are wealthy fliers. 57% don't go abroad at all. So why no mention of the other 38% who board a Ryanair 737 for a cheap booze filled holiday in some grotty Spanish costa?
Do grow up.
I think global health is more important than the myriad of holidays you have a year that you're bragging about. Get real.
I think global health is more important than the myriad of holidays you have a year that you're bragging about. Get real.
Oh poor you. All about you is it? Protest away so we can have a good laugh.
The duty of care to citizens does include dissuading destructive behaviours, especially those that cost the taxpayer more.
The question is whether it should increase exponentially to deter such frequent flying...Climate change will affect the poorest most
The politics of jealousy is not going to stop the very rich flying, but having had to fly for the last 35 years - and not in private jets or in business class - you now want to stop me even getting a reduction in my holiday fare?
Grow up! You are almost certainly judging a situation you haven't yet encountered yourselves and having had no children my carbon addition is still lower than many.
Grow up! You are almost certainly judging a situation you haven't yet encountered yourselves and having had no children my carbon addition is still lower than many.
The BBC makes its own contribution sending multiple teams to cover exactly the same event eg US presidential elections. Hardly a sustainable policy, but then double standards are par for the course.
It’s a large country, an important event, they have people based there permanently too they are not just flown in. Less than in previous years I thought.
and your uncle knows everything about everything so that's good. silly comment.
The rich just pay the tax the poor still pay the tax even if tax is on a sliding scale it still disproportionally affects the poor/middle class/non-rich. People fly because there is no other option, you want to go by train, Bristol Temple Meads to Edinburgh (Waverley) Single fares from £291.10 - For that I will drive you myself! Fix the trains first!
It's less than half a tank of diesel to drive from Bristol Temple Meads to Edinburgh Waverly, say £30 - 35 and takes just about the same amount of time
You're right Fix the trains outside of London and charge a fair reasonable tarif instead of the ridiculous out of date ticket prices that exist now
You're right Fix the trains outside of London and charge a fair reasonable tarif instead of the ridiculous out of date ticket prices that exist now
Agree completely. How can it be cheaper to lift a plane into the air and have it travel at 400MPH rather than push a train along the ground at 90MPH? Then again do we know the energy requirements of the rail system as a whole is less than the airline industry.
We looked up the train prices for 4 adults from Manchester to Edinburgh. We were flexible +/- 3 days either side of sunday (we were willing to stop a couple of nights). The cost was £191 return and those were the cheapest tickets. For that price we could drive, park, hotel in two rooms for the night.
yes fix the trains and people will use them
The art and challenge is in getting the balance right. I’ve run international IT projects, we’ve had ‘visits’ so people spend time together, but all the weekly progress meetings (since the 1990’s) have been remote via telephone and/or video. I have also worked abroad, flying out monday morning and returning friday for circa 6 months.
Do grow up.
I think global health is more important than the myriad of holidays you have a year that you're bragging about. Get real.
I think global health is more important than the myriad of holidays you have a year that you're bragging about. Get real.
The rich will continue to fly and the emissions will remain whether they're taxed or not. The question is what to do with the tax? What the money could be used for is more carbon capture or tree planting to off-set the emissions. As with any figured on the percentage of emission data, the devil is in the detail https://ourworldindata.org/co2-emissions-from-aviation
Maybe the people calling for this should look a bit closer to home. i.e. Carline Lucas frequently flying to the west coast of the US to visit her son, or the luvvies flying 6000 miles to join a protest about climate change!
They’ll tax farting next
Is that not good for the heart, though?
They do pay more tax the more they fly, that's how tax works.