The nordic countries can quickly introduce carbon tax on aviation

the Four nordic vänsterpartiledare want to reduce the flying through the imposition of a tax on aviation fuel and a major investment in high speed rail. In addition, they suggest that frequent air travellers should not be penalised by a progressive tax, but it is not clear how to do it.

The four seem to have very hazy concept of the actual conditions. They claim, for example, it can take a long time to get to the flight international organisation, ICAO, to agree to the tax exemption for aviation fuels should be removed. But no country need to ask ICAO for a permit for the introduction of a tax on jet fuels. Contrary to what many people believe, apparently, also the four vänsterledarna, contains aviation and the chicago convention, with no prohibition on the taxation of jet fuels. However, most of the bilateral service agreements which were signed between various countries such a ban. The EUROPEAN commission has pushed for the prohibition of taxation shall be phased out in the service agreements between different EU countries.

in Addition, they can agree to tax all fuel used on the inomnordiska routes. In this way we can quickly get a common nordic klodioxidskatt on jet fuels. There is nothing to hinder nor to the cooperation extended to several european countries.

Because the aircraft emissions are below the european ets ceiling reduces the total emissions at a faster pace as a result of the introduction of additional policy instruments. But still, there are reasons to consider a tax. The price of allowances is still quite low and the development of more efficient aircraft and the use of renewable fuels need to get started early. It takes 25-30 years to renew the fleet. Hence the need for an additional policy instruments in the near future and in contrast to the current flygskatten provides incentives for fuel efficient plan, and focus on new fuels.

the Road for a long time received many billions in tax exemptions and support to the transition to renewable fuels. Against this background it may be reasonable that the states in the appropriate form also contributes financially to the first phase of the aviation and the shift to biofuels and electrification. A form for this would be to let the tax revenues accrue to a common nordic industrial fund with the mission to support the airlines and airports work to create a zero carbon flight. The Norwegian NOx-fund, financed by charges on emissions of nitrogen oxides has worked well, and, among other things, contributed to a successful effort to reduce shipping emissions.

The Spanish but has not led to any greater reduction of flying and find it difficult to bear their own costs despite huge subsidies.

Koldioxidfonden has the advantage of not being tied to any particular action. It can be used to support the development of more fuel economical plan, electrification and renewables. In Norway aim aviation authority that flights will be completely electrified by 2040. It requires significant efforts had already the next few years.

Long-distance travel by rail has not grown exponentially. It has, however, travel by regional train made, at least in Sweden. The Spanish express train has not led to any greater reduction of flying and find it difficult to bear their own costs despite huge subsidies.

It is not of the four vänsterledarnas article why they think it is important to subsidize long distance trips with the gigantic amount instead of letting the passengers pay the actual cost, including emissions of greenhouse gases. In contrast to the support for local and regional public transport is the most people with relatively high education and income, which benefits from long-distance destinations are subsidized. The parties of the left should think about the distributional effects of its proposals.