Europe-wide frequent flying levy would raise €64bn without any cost to majority of people

A frequent flying levy across Europe would increase aviation tax revenues to €64bn, without any financial cost to the majority of people, according to a report from the New Economics Foundation (NEF), Stay Grounded and others, out today. This represents a six-times increase in European aviation tax revenues — equivalent to around 30% of the entire EU annual budget. The revenue generated through the EU alone (€51bn) could fund 20% of the annual public investment needed for the EU to meet its climate targets.

The report also finds that a frequent flying levy would result in a 21% drop in aviation emissions, mainly as a result of just 5% of people — the most frequent flyers — taking less flights.

The report is the first to analyse how a frequent flying levy could be implemented across Europe, using economic modelling by CE Delft and a legal assessment by Adastone Law. 90 organisations and 47 academics have signed a public statement also released today in support of a frequent flyer levy for the EU.

The report proposes the introduction of a Europe-wide frequent flying levy which would apply increasing levels of tax to every return flight a person takes in a year. The first return flight would not be charged a levy. In addition, the report proposes a surcharge for the most polluting journeys: medium- and long-haul flights, as well as business and first-class seats.

Sebastian Mang, senior researcher at the New Economics Foundation (NEF), said:

“When it comes to stopping climate breakdown, Europe faces a huge gap in the finance available. A frequent flying levy could make a sizeable contribution to the EU’s funds and could be leveraged to generate hundreds of billions in capital for investment in public transport, wind and solar power, and nature restoration. At the same time, a portion of the funds should be ring fenced for the EU’s contribution to lower and middle-income countries dealing with the sharp end of the climate crisis.”

Unlike other modes of transport, aviation is currently highly subsidised. The report recommends that aviation’s current exemption from fuel tax and VAT be scrapped. This, in combination with a frequent flyer levy, would create a socially fair way of targeting excessive pollution by mostly wealthy frequent flyers, while preserving access to affordable occasional flights for lower income groups.

The report uses polling across Western Europe to find that frequent flying skews towards the wealthiest:

• Just over half of people (52%) don’t fly at all in any given year.
• On average, just 11% of people fly more than three times a year.
• 35% of the richest households (earning more than €100,000) take three or more return flights a year, compared to just 5% for the poorest (earning less than €20,000).
• 70% of the poorest households don’t fly in a given year, compared to just 20% for the richest.

Magdalena Heuwieser, aviation campaigner at the Stay Grounded network, said:

“Right now, it doesn’t matter whether you’re flying to visit your family for the first time in years, or taking a tenth annual flight to your luxury house on the coast — you’ll be paying the same tax for that flight. A frequent flying levy would be a fair aviation measure, reducing excessive flights for wealthy passengers, while raising revenues — including to expand and provide affordable railways and public transport.”

Marlene Engelhorn, Austrian millionaire and founder of tax​menow​.eu, said:
​“The mile high club of private planet combustion where wealthy people like me can ferment in our comfort zones needs to close its doors. Unfortunately, the climate crisis with its floods and droughts and wildfires and heat waves seems not to reach this crowd high as a kite on kerosine. But the law also applies when we have our bejewelled feet off the ground. It‘s high time democracy uses this last force of human nature to harness the unnecessary destruction that my class’s jet-setting causes and to effectively demand we contribute to the costs of saving this planet.”

Stefan Grebe, author of the CE Delft economic modelling study, said:

“Immediate reduction of carbon emissions is necessary to align the aviation sector with the goals of the Paris climate agreement. Otherwise aviation is likely to contribute to an overshoot of the remaining carbon budgets and in addition requires disproportionate amounts of clean energy and land or depends on uncertain technological breakthroughs.”

Finlay Asher, aerospace engineer in the aviation industry, said:

“It’s very clear to aviation workers that our industry is on a dangerous flight path of emissions growth. We love flying, and the planet, but our freedom to continue flying in the future is now under threat. It will be impossible to set ourselves on a new trajectory of rapid emissions cuts without focusing on frequent flyers who are responsible for the majority of our pollution. Only by targeting this tiny minority of air travellers can we reduce our climate impact while maintaining access to the most valued services that air travel provides to the rest of society.”

ENDS

Notes

The New Economics Foundation is a charitable think tank. We are independent of political parties and committed to being transparent about how we are funded.

Stay Grounded is a network of more than 200 member organisations around the world, aiming at reducing air traffic in a fair and climate-safe way.

CE Delft is an independent research and consultancy, helping build a sustainable world, leading the field when it comes to energy, transport and resource issues.

Adastone Law is a law firm specialised in transport and provides regulatory expertise, notably for the aviation industry.

The report, A Frequent Flying Levy in Europe, is available at https://neweconomics.org/2024/10/a‑frequent-flying-levy-in-europe
The CE Delft report is be available at http://​cedelft​.eu/​p​u​b​l​i​c​a​t​i​o​n​s​/​e​u​r​o​p​e​a​n​-​f​r​e​q​u​e​n​t​-​f​l​y​i​n​g​-levy.
Find the list of organisations and academics here: https://​stay​-ground​ed​.org/​f​r​e​q​u​e​n​t​-​f​l​y​i​n​g​-​levy/

Table 1: The FFL pricing schedule tested by CE Delft, showing charges applied per single flight rising every two flights, and additional surcharges for longer distances and comfort classes

Table 2: Core impacts of an FFL implemented in 2028 against a baseline, no-FFL-policy scenario

All impact data of a frequent flying levy uses an example year of 2028.

Polling data was drawn from Europe Talks Flying from More In Common https://​www​.mor​ein​com​mon​.org​.uk/​o​u​r​-​w​o​r​k​/​r​e​s​e​a​r​c​h​/​e​u​r​o​p​e​-​t​a​l​k​s​-​f​l​ying/