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 2025

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 & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

Despite the decline in profitability, the firm’s tax advisory business delivered a 3.4% revenue growth
Firms are making use of inventories and ample profit margins to avoid or absorb the initial impact of higher tariffs, an OECD report found
While UN proposals to shift airline taxation from a residence-based system to a source-state one are not set in stone, ex-British Airways CEO Willie Walsh warns they would increase costs and complexity
Von Wobeser y Sierra’s head of tax shares best practices for resolving tax controversy and touts his firm’s founding partner as an exemplar of legal practice
ITR concludes its analysis of World Tax’s rankings for 2026 by highlighting the firms that stood out most on a global scale
Experts from law firm Kennedys outline the key tax disputes trends set to define 2026, ranging from increased enforcement to continued tariff drama and AI usage
They also warned against an ‘unnecessary duplication of efforts’ in UN tax convention negotiations; in other news, White & Case has hired Freshfields’ former French tax head
Awards
Submit your nominations to this year's WIBL EMEA Awards by 16 February 2026
Defending loss situations in TP is not about denying the existence of losses but about showing, through proactive measures, that the losses reflect genuine commercial realities
Further empowerment of HMRC enforcement has been praised, but the pre-Budget OBR leak was described as ‘shambolic’
Gift this article