Air passenger tax introduced on 1 June – NRK

After a consultation round with a lot of criticism, and the postponement of three months, swept Finance Minister Siv Jensen (FRP) all doubts aside Friday. The charge comes as planned.

– The fee was approved by the Parliament before Christmas as part of the budget agreement for 2016 Parliament adopted both rate and exemptions. When the Ministry of Finance today establishes regulations and implement tax with effect from 1 June, we follow loyally up Parliament’s decision to introduce an air passenger tax, says Jensen.

Disagreement with ESA clarified

the so-called aircraft seat charge carries an increased expenditure of NOK 88 per passenger per flight from Norwegian airports – except for passengers who have to take several flights with the same company on the same trip.

EFTA surveillance Authority believed this exemption could involve illegal state aid and asked the government to wait to introduce the system to the issue was resolved. The fee should really have been in place from 1 March.

The government said it is not about illegal state aid, but since ESA promised to deal with the matter quickly, went Ministry of Finance to postpone the introduction to 1 . June .

Ministry of Finance stated that the controversy is cleared away and that the ESA has concluded that the exemption is not to be regarded as state aid.

ESA Director of competition and State aid Gjermund Mathisen says that they neither said yes or no to the introduction of the tax.

– In dialogue with Norwegian authorities has stated that the measure does not appear to involve public support. Then there is also no obligation to notify it to obtain a formal decision from ESA, says Mathisen.

disputed fee

The charge has been controversial at home. In particular, Moss Airport Rygge made it clear that the introduction of the tax would mean hook on the door.

The airport is completely dependent on traffic from budget airline Ryanair, which has threatened to stop using Moss as a base in contribution will be introduced and halve the number of routes.

the traffic would then be greatly reduced. Management at the airport fearing current surplus will be turned into such large deficits that further operation is impossible.

District Criticism

The proposal has met opposition from other quarters. Among other business organization active all powerful retort because they believe the tax would have negative consequences for rural areas, and that it is inefficient as environmental tax.

Political protests have been strongest from the Center Party, which believes the charge is a small accurately environmental measures and that it can affect rural areas and workplaces.

the postponement from March 1 to June 1, has cost the state 250 million crowns in taxes, it went up by revised national budget. The charge was a major factor in the government and supporting parties would be able to land a consensus on the state budget for 2016.