International Tax Review is part of the Delinian Group, Delinian Limited, 8 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX, Registered in England & Wales, Company number 00954730
Copyright © Delinian Limited and its affiliated companies 2023

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

COMMENT: Why protests against EU carbon tax on airlines are a load of hot air

800px-tarom-b737-700-yr-bgg-arpsmall.jpg

Since airlines were brought into the EU Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) last month, long-haul countries have been stepping up the noise of protests which will only hurt the environment and taxpayers.

India, China, Russia, and the US will lead the dissenters meeting in Moscow this month as they decide whether to retaliate against the EU's decision to place a carbon tax on all airlines entering or leaving the EU.

Rumoured options on the table include restricting or charging over-flights by European carriers, but this would only hurt airlines already subjected to the tax, which would seem spitefully anti-competitive – a case of political wrangling that hits no one but the taxpayer.

The EU’s move, by contrast, is not only fair on an environmental level – why should the most polluting mode of transport be exempt from carbon taxes? – but fair on a competition level. All airlines, after all, will be subject to the same scheme.

A lot of the debate has centred on the legality of the EU’s decision, with American and Canadian airlines arguing that aviation cannot be brought into the ETS on the grounds that it contravenes the Chicago Convention on civil aviation, the Kyoto Protocol on climate change, and the Open Skies Agreement liberalising rules on international aviation because it imposes tax on fuel consumption and because it applies to airlines flying outside the EU. The European Court of Justice (ECJ) dismissed these arguments, however, allowing the move to go ahead.

The legal argument lost, more than 30 countries are planning to look at other means of scuppering the EU’s tax, but all this smacks of protectionism over the one taxation issue for which international cooperation is vital.

The EU, as a bloc of 27 countries, is the ideal vehicle to coordinate tax policy to tackle environmental problems like climate change that do not respect national boundaries. If the world is to meet its emissions targets, unilateral action, whether through regulation or tax, will not be enough.

India, China, Russia and the US could learn a valuable lesson from the EU if they stopped letting off hot air over the ETS and started working together on common tax policies to reduce hot air in the atmosphere. Only then will everyone, taxpayers and governments alike, get the fairest deal possible.

Further reading

Chinese airlines strike back against EU tax

India wades into EU airline tax debate

more across site & bottom lb ros

More from across our site

ITR’s latest quarterly PDF is going live today, leading on the EU’s BEFIT initiative and wider tax reforms in the bloc.
COVID-19 and an overworked HMRC may have created the ‘perfect storm’ for reduced prosecutions, according to tax professionals.
Participants in the consultation on the UN secretary-general’s report into international tax cooperation are divided – some believe UN-led structures are the way forward, while others want to improve existing ones. Ralph Cunningham reports.
The German government unveils plans to implement pillar two, while EY is reportedly still divided over ‘Project Everest’.
With the M&A market booming, ITR has partnered with correspondents from firms around the globe to provide a guide to the deal structures being employed and tax authorities' responses.
Xing Hu, partner at Hui Ye Law Firm in Shanghai, looks at the implications of the US Uyghur Forced Labor Protection Act for TP comparability analysis of China.
Karl Berlin talks to Josh White about meeting the Fair Tax standard, the changing burden of country-by-country reporting, and how windfall taxes may hit renewable energy.
Sandy Markwick, head of the Tax Director Network (TDN) at Winmark, looks at the challenges of global mobility for tax management.
Taxpayers should look beyond the headline criteria of the simplification regime to ensure that their arrangements meet the arm’s-length standard, say Alejandro Ces and Mark Seddon of the EY New Zealand transfer pricing team.
In a recent webinar hosted by law firms Greenberg Traurig and Clayton Utz, officials at the IRS and ATO outlined their visions for 2023.