Burnham’s new Energy Secretary backed a frequent flyer tax – here’s what she said

Andy Burnham’s new Energy Secretary has previously backed calls for frequent flyers to be charged a green tax on plane tickets. Miatta Fahnbulleh was chief executive of the New Economics Foundation (NEF) think-tank between 2017 and 2023, which advocated for a levy to help limit carbon emissions from flights. A report published in 2021 backed charges potentially worth hundreds of pounds to target people who fly regularly, replacing the current Air Passenger Duty (APD) system. In the same year, the now Energy Secretary told The Independent that the Conservative government – which had announced a cut to APD on domestic flights – should be “raising, not cutting, taxes with a frequent flyer levy”. The Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ) has insisted that a frequent flyer levy is “not government policy,” and there is no suggestion Fahnbulleh will push for it as a minister – or that the Government is considering introducing one. But Fahnbulleh’s past support offers insight into her views on the environment and into the case made by campaigners and the Government’s own advisers for cutting emissions from frequent flying. Currently, the Government charges Air Passenger Duty (APD) on every passenger aged over 16 who departs from a UK airport. The aircraft operator pays the fee, but the cost is usually passed on to passengers through their ticket price. The exact charge depends on the cabin class, type of aircraft and destination, and ranges from £8 for a domestic economy flight to £1,141 for a long-haul trip on a private jet. In 2021, the NEF and Possible climate charity proposed scrapping APD and replacing it with a new frequent flyer levy. Under the proposal, a passenger’s first leisure flight of the year would be tax-free, with each subsequent flight charged progressively more. Business flights would be taxed from the first trip. The idea, in short, is that a small number of wealthier, frequent flyers are responsible for a disproportionate share of flying-related emissions, so should pay more. In contrast, people who fly only once a year should pay less than they do now. The Government’s own climate advisers, the Climate Change Committee (CCC), also proposed a similar system in 2019. However, their preferred model works differently. Rather than a flat rate that rises purely with the number of flights taken, it would charge per tonne of carbon emitted, meaning the cost also depends on the distance flown and the class of ticket bought. As with NEF’s proposal, the first flight of the year would be exempt under this model too. Fahnbulleh was chief executive of the NEF think-tank between 2017 and 2023 (Photo: Thomas Krych/Getty) What could this tax cost you? Under NEF’s proposed system, a first leisure flight in a year would cost nothing extra, rising to £25 for a second flight, £60 for a third, £105 for a fourth and £160 for a fifth. By a tenth flight taken in a single year, the charge would reach £585, while business flights would be taxed from the first journey, starting at £25 and rising on the same scale. For example, someone taking five short-haul economy flights a year would currently pay £75 in APD, but would be charged £350 under the frequent flyer levy – over four times as much. The report estimated the levy would raise £5bn a year for the Treasury, more than the £4.2bn that APD raised in the 2024-25 financial year. The CCC has not confirmed exact pricing for its own model, or how much it would raise. Could the Government still consider it? Proponents argue the levy targets those doing the most environmental damage from flying, while protecting people who only travel once a year. Alex Chapman, one of the authors of the 2021 NEF report, said at the time: “There is a very limited pot of carbon left which UK society can afford to emit before we must reach net zero. As it stands, a huge chunk of that pot will be used up by a tiny minority of super-wealthy frequent flyers.” He added that raising the average tax paid by those taking four or more flights a year would “make sure the wealthiest people pay their fair share towards preventing climate breakdown,” while cutting the charge on a person’s first flight would help lower-income households afford a holiday. The CCC made a similar argument in 2019, when its chairman at the time, Lord Deben, wrote to the then-transport secretary, Grant Shapps. He said the aviation industry was “highly unlikely” to eliminate emissions by 2050, and that it was on track to become the UK’s single biggest source of emissions over the same period, with demand forecast to grow well beyond the 25 per cent increase the committee says is compatible with the UK’s climate targets. But not everyone agrees such a charge would help. Manchester Airports Group, which owns Manchester, Stansted and East Midlands airports, told a Commons select committee in 2021 that it did not support further taxes or “frequent flyer levies.” It warned in written evidence that further taxes would “suppress investment in new technologies, delaying much-needed low-emission technologies” and risked pushing “airlines to operate outside of the UK, resulting in carbon leakage”. Despite the backing from proponents and the Government’s own climate advisers, the Government has already ruled out introducing a frequent flyer levy for now. A DESNZ spokesperson told The i Paper the idea is “not government policy,” and that Fahnbulleh, as Energy Secretary, is instead focused on “working to bring bills down for good.”