why ARE the taxes so high?

can someone explain to me why the taxes + 'fuel surcharges' are so high on UK>US flights, compared to most other flights in the world?

even when booking an economy reward flight you can be hit with $350+ in taxes. PE or UC can be hundreds more than that.

fwiw: a 3500 mile domestic flight in the US taxes would be about $10...
and I just booked business class reward flight LA>AUK (New Zealand) - an 11 hour flight, and taxes were $48...

Two words, and the second one's 'Brown'...

quote:Originally posted by mdvipond
Two words, and the second one's 'Brown'...
Yep, the nail has been hit on the head there.

[Nottingham Nick]

Whilst not disagreeing with Mr Vipond, I think the answer is even simpler - the taxes and charges are so big 'because they can be'.

While people pay up, there is no real reason to change. In real terms the prices of flying across that Atlantic has consistently fallen over the 25 years I have been doing it. I remember paying 350+ for an economy ticket in the 1980s, so today's prices are an absolute bargain in comparison - a lot of thanks for which has to go to Mssrs. Laker and Branson.

Why UK airlines don't just call the surcharges part of the fare and put the prices up accordingly I have no idea. [?] The only real difference it would make is that Y mileage redemptions may actually be worth doing again.

As for the taxes, UK PLC is now so far up that creek, and in debt up to our eyes, that I can't see any taxes coming down any time soon.

Nick

Am I right in thinking that if you upgrade with miles one way, you'll pay less from say the US-UK rather than the UK-US. If so, would it make sense to purchase the outbound trip and come back with miles? I've only ever upgraded on the UK bound leg and my additional taxes were only about $25.

quote:Originally posted by mdvipond
Two words, and the second one's 'Brown'...




Oh yada yada yada, that's so easy nowadays.

Who introduced APD? Norman Lamont, John Major PM = Conservatives.

Who has said he'll match Labour's 50% tax rate, ah that'll be George Osbourne = Conservative.

So, guess who gets my vote. Neither of them, not that it'll make a difference.

Nick's right, they can be and they will be. Whichever party governs next, I bet they'll be higher. Then the answer will be 'two words, and one of them's Cameron'.

[Scrooge]

quote:Originally posted by mdvipond
Two words, and the second one's 'Brown'...




Yes and no, just to give you an example.

If you can book a J reward ticket on NZ through VS you will pay $250 in taxes, if you book a J reward on VS through VS your looking at $560, the difference being the fuel surcharge.

At this point in time VS and BA do not include the fuel surcharge in the price of the ticket, so you have to pay it on a reward ticket, with just about every other airline it is included in the price so you don't have to pay it on reward flights.

If your paying for your ticket you will notice no difference in the fares of course, all airlines will come in with roughly the same fare.

so the 'fuel surcharge' bit at least is somewhat of a scam?
and I thought american airlines (generally) were the sharks in all this.

should there really be a fuel surcharge anymore, now that oil is back to reasonable levels?

Everyone does the fuel surcharge thingy, it's just as Scrooge says in how you roll it up and bundle it. Thx Nick, Slinky and Scrooge for providing some thoughtful answers here. As a point of comparison for the statement 'because they can be', trying to sort out a trip in January to burn through a few UA SWUs, am looking at flying into ZRH, FRA or MUC in alternative to LHR since my connections would be so much easier to *A if I go through those airports. But even though taxes are less than half on ticket prices into those other airports than they are for the UK, overall cost ends up being 150 dollars less if I fly to LHR (due to overall competition being so much tougher into LHR one presumes). So, not only can taxes be high, they actually DO have room to go up a little bit more, while keeping LHR competitive still with other european destinations. Not seeing a flight of carriers away from LHR yet.

In the end, look at it as the UK renting out some of its more valuable assets (in this case air slots) for whatever they can get. I'm not sure that if the govt lowered taxes, you'd see significantly lower fares - what you pay overall is set by what you are willing to pay, what the competitive conditions require with other euro destinations etc etc etc. All the tax stuff may really only be a transfer of profits from airlines to govt.

[Scrooge]

quote:Originally posted by narikin
so the 'fuel surcharge' bit at least is somewhat of a scam?



Again, yes and no.

Fuel prices have risen, though not to the levels seen last year, but if you look at the cost of fuel from say 5 years ago to what it is now, you will see the huge increase, in that same time frame airlines have not been able to raise prices, however by adding the fuel surcharges they were able to raise the total fares.

The issue I have is, after how many years is it still a surcharge and not just a fee ?

[Nottingham Nick]

quote:Originally posted by Scrooge
The issue I have is, after how many years is it still a surcharge and not just a fee ?

I agree. I suppose there must be a reason for it - either a tax issue, or the fact that VS don't have to pay travel agent / third party commission on that (large) percentage of the of the overall fee to fly.

Nick

[Scrooge]

quote:Originally posted by Nottingham Nick
quote:Originally posted by Scrooge
The issue I have is, after how many years is it still a surcharge and not just a fee ?

I agree. I suppose there must be a reason for it - either a tax issue, or the fact that VS don't have to pay travel agent / third party commission on that (large) percentage of the of the overall fee to fly.

Nick


None of the above as far as I can see.

To me it is simply a way of making money off reward flights, the large cost (fuel) is covered by the surcharge, now being that there are only two real (not counting charters or BMI) airlines and they are both playing the same game the British public is kind of screwed.

Now to take an example, if an airline in the US tried this (yes they add fee's to redemption's, but nothing to the level of VS or BA) they would find themselves losing passengers to rival airlines quickly.

The problem for both VS and BA is when not enough people redeem miles, firstly they don't collect that nice fuel surcharge, which ok, that can be covered by a fare paying pax, however they also have all those nice miles sitting out there unused, which turns into a liability. Hence the reason that companies like the flying club or executive club are actually separate companies, though owned b the airlines. They generate a large amount of money which can be funneled back into the company, however if there is a drop in redemption's they generate a huge liability. It was this reason (they were not being nice) that BA ran the 1/2 price sale earlier this year, they needed to lower the liability of all those outstanding miles.

A byproduct of that sale was, they also generated a nice chunk of change through the fuel surcharge.

quote:Originally posted by slinky09
quote:Originally posted by mdvipond
Two words, and the second one's 'Brown'...




Oh yada yada yada, that's so easy nowadays.

Who introduced APD? Norman Lamont, John Major PM = Conservatives.

Who has said he'll match Labour's 50% tax rate, ah that'll be George Osbourne = Conservative.

So, guess who gets my vote. Neither of them, not that it'll make a difference.

Nick's right, they can be and they will be. Whichever party governs next, I bet they'll be higher. Then the answer will be 'two words, and one of them's Cameron'.


It's easy because it's true, Slink; and whilst the insight into your upcoming voting intentions is interesting, perhaps we should return to the OP's question.

Yes, the Conservatives introduced APD in '94 (although it was dear old Ken Clarke, not Norm). Back then, the most you could pay was 10 quid, which brought 84 million into the exchequer in its first year; this year, you'll be paying as much as 170 per flight, which meant that in 08/09 the flying Joe Public put 1862 million into government coffers. You do the math.

So, as to the question as to why are taxes so high, I still have to refer the honourable gentleman to my previous answer - Brown.

Given that some people advocate charging VAT on air tickets does anyone have any idea of the comparison between charging VAT or APD?

BTW we ahould be thankful that Washington DC is the US capital rather than say San Francisco because if it was fligths to the US would be in band 3 and not band 2 making the APD even higher.

I live within an hour of both LGW and LHR which I guess is lucky, but if I had to connect from maybe DUB, MAN, EDH or GLA it really would be worth connecting to Paris, Amsterdam or anywhere else for a TA flight that didnt have APD.

I am really surprised there has not been a more vocal campaign against the previous rise in APD. Although I agree that UK PLC is up sh*t creek, I feel this punative tax will drive away tourists and trade, and will mean less revenue for the exchequer.

Maybe it's time VS looked into a base at CDG?

[Scrooge]

quote:Originally posted by kingcole1974

Maybe it's time VS looked into a base at CDG?


You may want to ask BA how well that idea is going [:D]

The problem with this is that to get any advantage of the lack of APD from some other european hubs you have to be on 2 seperate tickets. Through tickets on AF or KL still have to pay APD to the final destination for the class which you leave the UK in.
If you are on 2 tickets then you have no connection / baggage check rights and have to leave yourselves loads of time to cope with delays and schedule changes.

The only good think I have seen so far is Air France's New Premium Economy. Because you leave the UK in full Y class you only payy Eco APD and save GBP 50.

Ed