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

International Tax Review is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Garden, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

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

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

airplane.jpg

Seven of Europe's biggest aviation companies have joined forces to protest against the European Union's plans to tax airline carbon emissions. Read why this is a waste of time.

Since airlines were brought into the EU Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) in January, 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 met in Moscow last month to 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 & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

Pillar two compliance is creating unprecedented data demands for multinational tax departments, making closer collaboration with FP&A teams essential for accurate reporting and audit readiness
Among the arrivals is Andrew Howell, who leaves scandal-hit PwC Australia after representing PepsiCo in a high-profile TP dispute
ITR's podcast examines whether the big four have overarching cultural issues and assesses the competitive threat of technology-backed transfer pricing firms
The UK advisory firm has seen its global revenues expand by £27.2m following its listing and acquisition of Baker Tilly South-East Europe
Tax-trained John Sams, previously the firm’s CFO and COO, was appointed after a rigorous process, KPMG said
From Mauritius substance rules to Kenyan SEP tax and South African anti-avoidance measures, businesses must navigate growing scrutiny of cross-border IP structures in Africa
ITR spoke to multinationals, advisers and software providers about a June 30 deadline defined by faulty portals, high compliance costs and hard lessons
After years of onerous pillar two prep, businesses will be galled in seeing tax revenues outweighed by compliance costs
Tax advisers should revisit India secondment arrangements after the EY US ruling strengthened the Centrica precedent and raised fresh withholding concerns
Despite the shortfall, effective tax rates of multinationals have seen a ‘statistically significant rise’
Gift this article