Aviation Anthology Vol 1 2026 - Digital Version - Flipbook - Page 18
This adjustment underscores two key points. First,
taxation is not neutral with respect to connectivity,
particularly in geographically peripheral regions.
Secondly, the State continues to recognise that taxation
should not undermine services essential to territorial
cohesion, thereby reintroducing an element of policy
differentiation within the fiscal framework.
The TNSA offers a contrasting example of strong
allocation. Based on the polluter-pays principle, it
finances measures for residents affected by aircraft
noise, notably soundproofing programmes in airport
vicinities. Its legitimacy has traditionally rested on the
close causal link between the taxable activity and the
allocation of proceeds.
A further development introduced by the Finance Act for
2026 extends this logic beyond passenger transport. The
introduction of a €2 tax on low-value parcels imported
from outside the European Union reflects a broader
policy approach aimed at taxing the flows associated
with globalised transport systems. Although formally
distinct from aviation taxation, this measure operates
within the same conceptual framework, targeting the
externalities and infrastructure costs generated by crossborder movements.
III. Economic effects and the question of
competitiveness
The increasing fiscal pressure on the aviation sector
raises issues of economic efficiency and international
competitiveness. While the State may legitimately argue
that aviation should contribute more significantly to
public finances, particularly in light of its environmental
impact and historical tax advantages, the cumulative
effect of successive increases may distort market
conditions.
Empirical developments lend some support to these
concerns. In March 2026, French airports’ 2025 results
were described as a “décrochage” compared with the
broader European trend, with traffic levels still below
their 2019 benchmark.[1] Passenger traffic in France
remains around 4 per cent below pre-pandemic levels,
despite the overall recovery of European aviation. This
relative underperformance raises questions about the
attractiveness of France as an aviation hub.
In this context, the non-neutrality of taxation becomes
particularly noticeable. Increases in fiscal burdens
are reflected in ticket prices, operating costs and
demand elasticity. They may also affect the competitive
positioning of French carriers vis-à-vis foreign operators
subject to less onerous taxation.
The reaction of the whole sector to the TSBA reform
must therefore be understood not merely as a
sectoral response to increased costs, but as a broader
concern regarding regulatory stability and long-term
competitiveness.
IV. Legal coherence and tensions
The 2025 TSBA reform, the 2026 adjustment for
territorial routes, the small-parcel tax and the traffic
situation collectively highlight a central tension within
French aviation taxation: the coexistence of multiple
objectives within a framework that lacks overarching
coherence. Budgetary constraints, environmental
policy and territorial considerations are all reflected in
the current system, yet the articulation between these
objectives remains imperfect.
From a legal point of view, this raises concerns regarding
both clarity and legitimacy. A regime characterised
by frequent adjustments and multiple purposes risks
undermining its own intelligibility. The progressive
dilution of earmarking, particularly in the case of
solidarity taxation, further complicates the identification
of the underlying rationale of each levy.
Two main lines of criticism may be identified. First, the
multiplication of levies may reduce transparency for
users, blurring the distinction between charges linked
to specific services and taxes intended primarily to raise
revenue. Secondly, the weakening of the link between
taxation and its stated objectives may expose the
system to criticism as an opportunistic fiscal mechanism
targeting a mobile and internationally exposed sector.
Nevertheless, the State retains a defensible position.
It may argue that aviation continues to benefit from
structural advantages compared with other modes of
transport, notably in relation to energy taxation, and
that additional levies contribute to correcting these
imbalances while internalising environmental costs.
V. A tax system in transition
French airport taxation can thus be characterised as
a system in transition. While it still includes elements
historically linked to specific public policy objectives,
these are increasingly integrated into a broader fiscal
and environmental strategy.
More fundamentally, this evolution reflects a shift in
public law: mobility is no longer treated solely as a
service to be regulated, but as a flow to be priced,
adjusted and, where appropriate, redirected.
The central challenge for the legislator lies not only in
determining the appropriate level of taxation, but in
ensuring the coherence and intelligibility of its legal
justification. A sustainable framework will require a clear
distinction between charges corresponding to services
rendered, levies intended to internalise externalities and
taxes contributing to general budgetary solidarity.
Without such clarification, French aviation taxation risks
being perceived less as a coherent policy instrument
and more as a cumulative assemblage of fiscal measures
whose underlying rationale has progressively weakened.
[1] rapport d’activité annuel de l’UAF & FA 2025.
18
DAC Beachcroft
Aviation Anthology 2026 - Volume I
