I am ordinarily not anti-tax in virtually any form.  The truth is, I believe that we get one hell of a lot for our taxes in this country compared to virtually any other country in the world.  In general, I believe that we need to raise taxes in many areas to meet our obligations in the next several years.

That said, I’m wholly unamused at the latest proposals for taxes on air travel.   On the one hand, we know that air travel requires an expensive infrastructure and that needs to be paid for.  I don’t think anyone  would argue any differently.  Furthermore, it is an infrastructure that needs reinvestment to modernize many parts of it.  That means it is only going to be more expensive to sustain for a while.

What I object to, however, is placing the bulk of the burden upon air travelers alone.  You see, it isn’t just air travelers who benefit from the air transportation system.  Everyone in this country benefits from it and often a great deal albeit somewhat indirectly and that means everyone should be paying a portion of its costs rather than just those boarding the aircraft.

Taxes that sustain the air transport system should be crafted in such a way that we all share some proportionate burden of the costs.  Air travelers should, perhaps pay a bit more than the guy who never flies but that exists today in the form of current taxes and fees charged.  But don’t tell me that the burden shouldn’t also be shared by some of these people:

1)  Private aircraft, particularly private jets, who consume a disproportionate amount of resources with respect to air traffic control and airports.  Look up how much it costs to handle a Cessna Citation jet at a major airport vs a 737.  Now consider that a Cessna is essentially using the same amount of resources that a 737 uses.  Starts to look a little cheap for the Cessna, trust me.

2)  How about the flower farmer who uses the air transport system to ship his flowers to market every day of the week?

3)  How about the citizens of metropolitan areas who get to host headquarters of Fortune 500 companies because they do have good access to the air transport system?  There is a direct economic benefit to those people that isn’t often shared by them.

Three good examples of parties who don’t share a proportionate burden of the costs to sustain that system. 

It’s easy to continue to levy taxes against the paying passengers of airlines.  Politically, we know they have no choice but to pay in most instances.  We don’t really care about the direct demand impacts to airlines (and any airline can tell you just how quickly a $10 increase in a fare can affect demand) because airlines, for some reason, are horrifically bad at political lobbying in our governments.  In short, we can get away with it and few people with political power can object.

But that doesn’t make it right.

Filed under: Airline News by ajax