Air Passenger Duty scrapped for children …. but with small print

This article is closed to new comments. Feel free to ask your question in the HfP forums.

• Oliver Bennett says:

  4 Dec4 December 07:06

  Rewrite website?

  If age > 12
  APD = yes
  Else
  APD = no

  • ADS says:

    4 Dec4 December 10:16

    And since most airlines have different prices for Under 12s – this really shouldn’t be too hard to code !

    • Trevor says:

      4 Dec4 December 10:32

      Even more so because all countries charge different APD anyway.

• callum says:

  4 Dec4 December 07:24

  Does this put WT+ under threat? I find it incredibly hard to believe it does.

  • Stuart says:

    4 Dec4 December 08:19

    During school holidays I certainly think it will have an effect on WT+ as the difference in tax for this ‘premium’ cabin isn’t insignificant.

    I know I doubt I will go to WT+ with my daughter.

• Paul says:

  4 Dec4 December 07:33

  Will have very limited impact on me as either I book premium redemptions or fly ex EU.
  The change was also accompanied by a call for airlines to clearly display fuel surcharges and to pass on the benefits of a drop in fuel prices.
  As this charge is now more than double any APD charge that is where passengers will get real benefits if it were actioned. In reality fares will be adjusted or the charges converted to some other spurious charge and beyond the refunds due on iany tickets purchased, passengers, I fear , will see no real benefit to this change

• Frenske says:

  4 Dec4 December 07:51

  Excellent more money for diapers for to use on my 3 week old daughter.

  • gnarlyoldgoatdude says:

    4 Dec4 December 10:36

    Congratulations.
    Enjoy the reduced or waived fares for under 2s.

• DV says:

  4 Dec4 December 08:01

  Is the reference to the Air Sevicing Pricing Regulations an attempt to stop airlines lumping APD and fuel surcharges together as “taxes” to disguise the amount of surcharge.

  • ADS says:

    4 Dec4 December 10:19

    I suspect that it’s both an attempt to stop airlines bundling “taxes and charges” which result in passengers blaming the government for the price of their tickets … And an attempt to crack down on airlines not refunding “charges / levies”.

• Mark2 says:

  4 Dec4 December 08:27

  If this causes a drop in paid flights in WT+ will there be an increase in redemption opportunities?

• Kevin says:

  4 Dec4 December 08:33

  Minor point – Scottish Executive no longer exists – us patriotic Scots officially renamed it the “Scottish Government” when the nationalists stormed to power many years ago:)

  • Richard says:

    4 Dec4 December 10:38

    Since we’re into minor points – us patriotic Scots couldn’t officially rename it, because the name of the entity wasn’t a devolved matter! The original minority SNP administration just started calling it the “Scottish Government” anyway, leading to much hilarity at FMQs when Labour MSPs pointedly asked what the Executive was doing and Alex Salmond equally pointedly replied on behalf of the Government.

    But that was then. The name *was* officially changed by Westminster at some point after that – I don’t remember when, but comparatively recently.

• PZE says:

  4 Dec4 December 08:48

  Can we expect to see a reduction in RFS redemption fees for children on BA, then? While I appreciate the cash component doesn’t cover BA’s standard fees and charges per se, there’s clearly now a differential between the cost to BA of flying an adult and a child (if I understand correctly).

  • Trevor says:

    4 Dec4 December 09:45

    Exactly my thoughts. Since we already pay more for children on a redemption than we should (considering child cash fares are cheaper than adult ones), this is more amo that their charges should drop. and if/when adult APD drops, think RFS fees will also drop? Mmm, as mentioned above, the benefits will most likely only be for those that receive a refund on flights already booked and in reality passengers will see little difference in future fare quotes and savings.

    • PZE says:

      4 Dec4 December 09:58

      True. Raises the question of whether you could claim a refund on your child’s RFS booking on the basis that BA are now having to pay over less APD to HM Treasury than they had expected when selling the ticket.

      • oyster says:

        4 Dec4 December 12:12

        For a one way LGW to Europe on BA the child ‘extras’ are £34.50 – £13 APD, £9.50 BA YQ and £12 for Gatwick coffers. Following the APD cut the ‘extras’ will still be £4 MORE than the RFS fee. So I suspect BA will pocket the extra.

        Even more so at LHR where the pax fee is an outrageous £34 for children and even infants.

        Britain is one of very few places where infants pay adult rates of airport fees.

This article is closed to new comments. Feel free to ask your question in the HfP forums.