MSE News: Air fares to rise as Government hikes taxes

malkie76

I think you will find that Stella Lager is Belgian and Becks is a German Brew.

I think you'll find he was making a joke

If I have to travel to say Australia or the Far East to meet a business client - obviously having to get there by air travel, how would the APD be totally optional when I have no choice but to fly?

It's optional because you are making the decision and choosing to fly - hence the charge can't technically be described as a 'rip-off' (a term commonly mis-used on these forums.

I totally agree that the government have you over a barrel, and could be impacting directly on your ability to do international business (as they are for me too). However, if you are fully aware of the cost of something, and you choose to pay it then you can't claim that you've been ripped off.

There are loads of taxes which are totally unfair (high rate income tax in particular), yet we all have the choice to move abroad if we are unhappy with the situation in this country. I lived overseas for many years, and honestly the grass isn't any greener.

tightwadman

Jenny Keefe, MoneySavingExpert.com consumer products analyst, says: "Sadly, there's not a lot you can do about flight tax.

Sorry Jenny but you are so wrong - yes you can absolutely save a lot of money on an average family of four by NOT taking long haul flights out of UK airports anymore. You buy a ticket which takes you to into Europe say Amsterdam and Paris and connect to your flight to say Florida from there. This is the only way I will be travelling long haul from now on and I dont care about the connecting flight. You will only be charged the European "tax" band.

For those unbelievable people who think this tax is a good idea what planet do you come from? This APD is supposed to be a green tax to help the environment - it very clearly is not and our lovely chancellor recently admitted as much. I feel sorry for UK airlines but I am not going to pay this tax if I can find means of avoiding it or reducing it and I have!

Take connecting flights into Europe and save money! Kerching.....

malkie76

Kenny_Powers wrote: »

Millions of people have to travel (myself included) and i have no option but to pay the tax.

Incorrect - absolutely no one has to travel. It's your choice to fly.

PolishBigSpender

dpassmore wrote: »

I think you will find that Stella Lager is Belgian and Becks is a German Brew.

AHEM

Obviously irony isn't your strong point, then

If I have to travel to say Australia or the Far East to meet a business client - obviously having to get there by air travel, how would the APD be totally optional when I have no choice but to fly? - even rerouting by mainland Europe as I have described in a previous post I would still need to pay APD on the departure from the UK.

You use video conferencing. The technology is mature enough now to be reliable - and there is quite frankly no need for anyone to fly round the world for a business meeting - and in this case, the high APD actually does discourage such travel. It is totally optional - if you use greener technologies, you don't pay APD. Simple.

The only 'option' to avoid APD would be not to fly and allow a competitor to get my business.

In today's environment-centred world, especially with the damage done to Australasia - I suspect any potential client would be endeared by your green credentials in not flying halfway round the world for a meeting.

malkie76

Kenny_Powers wrote: »

I could sit and give you a million reasons why some people have to fly, but i know id be wasting my time on you.

A top 10 list would be enough, please. Your subsequent post was subjective waffle - what concrete examples can you give us?

malkie76

You said 'millions', I asked for 10, and you reply with 2, neither of which absolutely need travel.

Paperwork can always been handled via post or better still electronically. Visiting family is entirely a choice and definitely not absolutely required.

You'll have to try a little harder or conceed my point.

malkie76

Thank you for conceeding my point. If you can't support your claims with sensible arguements then please don't post them

You clearly don't have to travel for business and don't have the ability to understand things

Yet another glorious assumption from yourself based on nothing but hot air. If you'd read a few of my posts you'd realise just exactly how much business travel I do. I choose to travel, and accept paying the taxes on it, and don't grumble about paying for something that I do out of choice.

dickydonkin

malkie76 wrote: »

I think you'll find he was making a joke


It's optional because you are making the decision and choosing to fly - hence the charge can't technically be described as a 'rip-off' (a term commonly mis-used on these forums.

I totally agree that the government have you over a barrel, and could be impacting directly on your ability to do international business (as they are for me too). However, if you are fully aware of the cost of something, and you choose to pay it then you can't claim that you've been ripped off.

I never stated or claimed in previous posts that APD was a 'rip off' and you have not convinced me that it is totally 'optional' as many people have no choice but to fly to destinations whether it is for business, work, or indeed sometimes life saving treatment, therefore for many, APD can hardly be described as optional when no other suitable modes of transport are available when one has to travel overseas with time restraints.

So how can these people "choose" to pay APD when there is no other alternative? I would replace the word 'choose' with 'forced'.

I am fully aware that we in the UK have to pay for a TV licence. I know that this is a legal requirement, but I and many others in this country believe it is a 'rip off'. BTW A rip off is in the eye of the beholder.

We are all aware of the TV licence fee (and using your interpretation), does that suggest the TV licence fee is not a 'rip off'? Again, using your rationale, the TV licence is then deemed as 'optional'?

I suspect that argument would be blown out of the water by the magistrate after not paying my TV licence. Like APD for air travel, the TV licence is mandatory if you own one.

Of course, you do not have to own a TV, but for many people, it is their only form of entertainment and pleasure as is flying away on holiday to get away from this hell hole. And there the government have the population 'over a barrel' - which virtually means - no choice!

So get rid of your car, never fly again and chuck the TV in the bin. Ah well, we do have a choice then!

Unfortunately, like many forms of leisure pursuits such as travel and entertainment, the government are finding new ways to extract various forms of stealth taxes. The duty on fuel is a prime example.

Take note that the three examples of stealth taxes given - TV LICENCE - APD -AND FUEL EXCISE DUTY (AND THE VAT ON SAID FUEL DUTY) can also be classed as optional if we do not travel, own a car or television.

We may as well all be dead for God's sake - oh -forgot about inheritance tax - they even have you when you are dead!

We have many stealth taxes in this country - many of which we are aware of - but just because we know we have to pay them - does not mean it is 'optional'. And yes I am going to use the quote again that is "regularly misused on these forums" - many of the stealth taxes ARE rip offs!

I am not even going there about the lager!

dickydonkin

PolishBigSpender wrote: »

Obviously irony isn't your strong point, then

Certainly not - take the pi$$ out of the British if you like (previous post), but I would suggest you keep your own counsel on that one. I know many amusing stereotypical jokes about the Polish, but tend to keep such puerile comments to myself.

You use video conferencing. The technology is mature enough now to be reliable - and there is quite frankly no need for anyone to fly round the world for a business meeting - and in this case, the high APD actually does discourage such travel. It is totally optional - if you use greener technologies, you don't pay APD. Simple.

Arguably, you may find that SOME may be potentially discouraged from flying resulting in a reduced load on an aircraft that will be scheduled to fly that journey anyway. Hardly environmentally friendly is it?

As for VC, that facility is somewhat restrictive and only suitable for limited situations.

In today's environment-centred world, especially with the damage done to Australasia - I suspect any potential client would be endeared by your green credentials in not flying halfway round the world for a meeting.

While at the same time being endeared to ones green credentials, a seemingly admirable gesture indeed, the client then offers the business/contract to a company that can be bothered to make the effort to meet face to face.

I am sure that a client in say India, China or the US for example where the bottom line is all that matters - and who do not give a toss for the environment, would hardly be impressed.

tightwadman

We have many stealth taxes in this country - many of which we are aware of - but just because we know we have to pay them - does not mean it is 'optional'. And yes I am going to use the quote again that is "regularly misused on these forums" - many of the stealth taxes ARE rip offs!

I would go further and say that ALL stealth taxes are rip-offs. Take APD - this is supposed to be a green tax and the money taken off us is ALL supposed to be pumped back into green initiatives. It blatantly is not and is ALL going into Treasury coffers. The Chancellor has admitted as much already and when you see statements like "air travel is relatively untaxed" as an excuse you know its all smoke and mirrors and lets be honest bare faced lies.

So dont forget next year come election time which party has foisted all these dreadful stealth taxes on us ( and want to bring in many more like road charging and id cards). Use your vote to get rid of the crypto-communists currently in power...I predict a landslide for labour....being toppled out of government!