Striking proposal from Bond Beter Leefmilieu: the more often you fly, the more you have to pay

A quarter fewer passenger flights and billions in additional income to invest in the climate transition. The benefits of such a new European tax are listed in a report by Stay Grounded, a network of organizations that want to phase out aviation, in which Bond Beter Leefmilieu collaborated in Belgium. “Right now, it doesn’t matter whether someone takes a plane to visit family for the first time in years, or whether that person flies for the tenth time this year to go to a third luxury home. The taxes remain the same,” Stay Grounded notes.

According to the network, it would be fairer for someone who flies often to pay more for the tickets. They therefore had the feasibility of such a tax calculated by the Dutch expertise agency CE Delft. In concrete terms, one return flight per year would not be subject to additional tax. For a second return flight you pay 50 euros extra, for a third 100 euros, for a fourth 200 euros and from the fifth 400 euros for each additional flight. “With an extra allowance for a long-haul flight and for a flight in business class“, says Naomi Cambien, mobility policy expert at Bond Beter Leefmilieu.

This should lead to 26 percent fewer passenger flights in 2028 and 51 billion more revenues than the current flight taxes. “According to the researchers, the amount will increase significantly enough to have an effect,” says Naomi Cambien. However, the tax mainly targets what they call “the rich frequent flyers”. Because according to the report, 72 percent of Western Europeans take the plane at most once a year. “While we require major climate efforts from households, the aviation sector barely pays for the climate impact that flying causes,” says Cambien. “By taxing the small group of frequent flyers, we can significantly reduce the climate impact of aviation, without impacting the majority of citizens.” The environmental organization also advocates a kerosene tax.

Central database

The question is how feasible such a frequent flyer tax is. “It’s not the easiest proposal,” says Cambien. “The analysts say it is legally possible, with some caveats around data protection. For example, everyone could receive a traveler number, which would be kept in a central database. When you book a trip, you can check how many times you have already flown that year.” The political part is more difficult. “Introducing it at European level currently requires unanimity, and that is very difficult. Another option would be to introduce them in an initial phase at Member State level. Who knows, it could be on the table during federal negotiations.”

Aviation economist Wouter Dewulf (University of Antwerp) thinks the chance of this happening is small. “The proposal is quite high big brotherquality,” he says. “It seems crazy to me that something like this could be possible, just taking into account the GDPR rules. I understand the logic of making major consumers pay. But there are other European measures to reduce CO₂ emissions from aviation that I think are more elegant. And they will also make flights 30 to 40 euros more expensive next year. You cannot get this through politically. I don’t know if it would work either. Who are these frequent fliers? Business travelers whose company pays, and people with a lot of money and a villa in Nice or Malaga. They will continue to fly, even if it becomes more expensive.”