Europe’s war on emissions will put an end to low-cost flights

Net zero reports tend to be predictable affairs, so it’s perhaps no surprise that the latest update from the Climate Change Committee – the Government’s official net zero watchdog and proponent of eco-friendly lifestyles – has called for a frequent flyer tax.

The idea of hiking taxes on so-called frequent flyers has been a staple of environmental politics for more than a decade. To date, Conservative and Labour governments have resisted the temptation to bring in such a scheme, despite repeated suggestions from the Climate Change Committee and others.

Sir Keir Starmer – something of a frequent flyer himself – has been quick to play down some of the report’s more controversial recommendations, including curbs on eating meat. Before we express too much relief, though, it’s worth remembering that his government has already hiked taxes on plane tickets, with a significant jump in Air Passenger Duty (APD) in the autumn budget.

Increasing APD has become a bit of a hobby for recent chancellors. But Reeves was the first in 13 years to increase duty on short-haul economy tickets, a move that will increase the taxes on a flight to Spain to £15 per person from April 2026.

Perhaps Rachel Reeves was just following the example of her continental peers, many of whom have seemingly identified the aviation industry – and its passengers – as their latest cash cow.

Europe’s creeping green levies

Back in January, Denmark became the latest EU country to charge an additional levy on all plane tickets, charging 50 Danish Krone (around £5.50) per short-haul flight. Before the Danes, it was the Portuguese, with Lisbon’s left-wing government adding a €2 levy to all flights back in 2021.

Meanwhile, those EU countries that already have passenger levies have been quietly increasing them: last year, Germany hiked theirs by 20 per cent. The French government just increased its preposterously named “solidarity tax” on short-haul flights from €2.63 to €7.40.

While the charges might sound small in isolation, they can make a significant difference to low-cost carriers, which rely on fine margins to keep their ticket prices down to a minimum. But could they result in the likes of easyJet and Ryanair pulling out of higher-tax countries altogether?

“When you’re running an airline, taxes are the only major variable you can control,” says Eddie Wilson, Ryanair’s chief executive. “We already have our planes; the fuel cost is the same wherever we are flying; as is the cost of the pilots and cabin crew.”

“There is sometimes an assumption among politicians that ‘Oh, Ryanair can just find an extra €13 of savings to pay for APD.’ Believe me, if that were the case, we would have already done it,” he adds.

Adding fuel to the fire

It would be bad enough if it were just passenger levies. But the all-powerful net zero agenda has also resulted in a barrage of new indirect charges and restrictions which could also put pressure on the cost of your next plane ticket.

One such measure is the EU’s plan to force airlines to use a minimum percentage of “sustainable aviation fuel” when they fly. Given the cost of such fuels, the scheme is expected to significantly increase airline overheads – an inconvenience that will almost certainly be passed on to customers.

Then there’s the EU’s plan to include aviation within its carbon trading scheme, meaning that airlines will have to purchase an emissions allowance to compensate for every flight they make. The carbon costs of a return flight from London to Athens could run as high as €32.50 (£27.75) per person.

‘Incomprehensible’ plans

All this is before we get to the various measures taken by European governments themselves. France has banned domestic flights for routes where a train journey would take less than two and a half hours (that means no flights from Paris to Nantes, Bordeaux, or Lyon) and has even mooted banning private jets from landing in the country entirely.

In the Netherlands, KLM has hit back at what it calls an “incomprehensible” plan to limit landings at Amsterdam’s Schiphol Airport – the fourth-busiest airport in Europe – as a way of reducing the noise impact from the aviation sector. A plan that makes even Britain’s Nimby-friendly policies seem tame by comparison.

Some proposals seem intent on pulling the rug out from budget airlines entirely. In 2021, the then-coalition government in Austria even proposed a minimum ticket price of €40 on all flights to or from the country – a proposal that the Austrian Greens said was necessary to stop the scourge of ultra-cheap flights.

The bottom line

How expensive could flying get if the eco-warriors have their way? The Climate Change Committee says its proposed taxes could add the equivalent of £150 (in today’s prices) to the cost of a short-haul return flight by 2050. In other words, say goodbye to £50 return tickets to Alicante.

Could a Mediterranean break end up becoming a rare luxury, as it was in the pre-Ryanair days? The CCC says that its “citizens’ panel” was “broadly accepting” of higher ticket prices. But they must know more than anyone that there’s a big difference between people saying they support environmental measures and actually being prepared to change their behaviour.

Have they also contemplated the possibility that some airlines might just pack up and leave? After Denmark increased its flight taxes in January, Ryanair responded by cancelling all flights from the country’s Aalborg Airport. More than 1 million “seats” (to use airline parlance) have vanished from the map.

While airlines have an obvious incentive to moan about taxes, independent analysts suggest they aren’t bluffing about their thin profit margins. “The majority of air travel is price-sensitive, which is the reason airlines express concern about increased ticket taxes,” says John Strickland, an aviation expert at JLS Consulting.

“Margins on the lowest fares tend to be particularly slim, so higher taxes increase pressure on profitability. We’ve seen Ryanair move aircraft between markets in the past due to tax levels. When you have millions of passengers on one route, a small tax rise can have a significant impact on bottom-line profits.”

If you thought airlines removing routes would dampen enthusiasm for new taxes, think again. Just last year, a major report from the left-wing New Economics Foundation proposed an EU-wide frequent flyer tax, which it claims would raise $64 billion in revenue without increasing costs for the average passenger.

Too good to be true? Peer into the details and you’ll soon have your answer. In fact, each person will be allocated just one short-haul flight per year (long-haul flights will be subject to an immediate €100 surcharge), after which they will pay €50 for their next trip, €100 for the one after that, and €200 for their fourth return journey.

If you had naively entertained the notion that such taxes would only hit the jet-set elite, well now you have your answer. It isn’t just that there’s an eco-war on flying in Europe: it’s that you’re probably a target.