# Fliers say bill will give airlines license to lie about fares



## CHamilton (Apr 21, 2014)

Fliers say bill will give airlines license to lie about fares


> If the airline industry gets its way, and its cleverly named Transparent Airfares Act of 2014 passes, then the price of your airline ticket could drop significantly. At least, it'll look that way.
> 
> Airlines say about 20% of your airline ticket goes directly to the federal government and airports in the form of taxes and fees — money that, for the most part, pays for essential services such as airport security, air traffic control and passenger facilities.
> 
> ...


----------



## oregon pioneer (Apr 21, 2014)

Another reason not to fly!


----------



## Bob Dylan (Apr 21, 2014)

Hopefully Amtrak's Execs won't ask to have Rail Fares added to this Bait and Switch Scam!


----------



## rickycourtney (Apr 21, 2014)

Personally I like the change. It causes flyers to take into account the full cost of their trip (and possibly consider other options.) As this article mentions, these fees pay for things like airport terminals, runways, TSA checkpoints and air traffic controllers. All important "overhead" costs of air travel.

If this passes, I hope it doesn't allow us to return to the bad-old days of "nickel-and-diming" passengers on fees. IMHO, one of the worst offenders was Allegiant Airlines who used to charge a $10 per passenger, per segment "Electronic Carrier Usage Charge" (translation: online booking fee.) The only way to avoid the fee was to buy your ticket in person at a ticket office (not the ticket counter) that often had very limited hours of operation (we're talking like 4 hours a day, 3 days a week).


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Apr 21, 2014)

Personally I think that all prices advertised everywhere should be inclusive of everything, including all relevant fees and taxes. Sales tax should be imputed not computed, registration fees should be part of a cars price, and the practice in certain industries of base prices reflecting an optional item that is not installed in less than one percent of production should also be abolished.

Sunroofs are optional on most luxury cars for instance. Try to get one without it. My dad once paid extra for that optional item to be deleted.


----------



## Texan Eagle (Apr 21, 2014)

rickycourtney said:


> Personally I like the change. It causes flyers to take into account the full cost of their trip (and possibly consider other options.) As this article mentions, these fees pay for things like airport terminals, runways, TSA checkpoints and air traffic controllers. All important "overhead" costs of air travel.


I don't understand how it will help consumers in any way. When one goes to an airline booking site, it is because he/she wants to buy an airline ticket, not because he/she is in the mood to start an anti-government protest.

"Oh, out of the $300 this flight costs, $150 is going to the airline, $80 is going in fees and $70 is going to the government? Welp, I guess I am going to instead take a bus from California to Washington DC, reach there after three days and stage a protest outside The Capitol"

- Said No Traveler Ever


----------



## fairviewroad (Apr 21, 2014)

"In line with other industries" -- Said the Airline Industry

On this they have a partial point. Sticking to the travel industry, a hotel room rate is initially quoted w/o lodging taxes at most websites. Rental

cars are generally quoted at first without rental taxes (which can be quite high as a % of the overall cost).

OTOH, gas stations always quote prices inclusive of all taxes. It's hard to imagine them doing otherwise. (But, you don't buy gas online, so it's not

an apples-to-apples comparison).

Personally, I'd be fine with their proposal if two things were true:

1. The advertised price was inclusive of ALL mandatory airline-imposed fees (i.e. no "fuel surcharge" added after the fact).

And

2. The customer is ALWAYS given the final price before they enter their credit card number.

That said, the current system is customer-friendly and I see no need, from a customer-service standpoint, to change.


----------



## Trogdor (Apr 22, 2014)

#2 has always been the case, regardless of which way the airlines displayed fares in the US.


----------



## Paulus (Apr 22, 2014)

There's nothing that stops the airlines from displaying what portion of the ticket price is from government fees and several already do so.


----------



## fairviewroad (Apr 22, 2014)

Trogdor said:


> #2 has always been the case, regardless of which way the airlines displayed fares in the US.


For sure, and the reason it's that way is that customers always pre-pay the entire cost of a plane ticket (not

counting optional services such as bags). But in the hotel and car rental industry, travelers generally don't

pay until they use the service. And in those cases, it's not always possible to compute the final cost in advance,

because many of those websites simply refer to "additional taxes" and it's up to the consumer to figure out

what the local jurisdiction levies on rooms/cars. [This is more true with hotels than rental cars, IME.]

One can easily imagine a day when airlines sell you a ticket for $XYZ (base fare) and say that additional taxes

and fees will apply when you check in. If you refuse, they still have your money from the base fare that you

already paid. This really isn't that much of a stretch, IYAM. But it would allow airlines to "sell" tickets at an

artificially lower fare upfront. Since they already have mechanisms in place for revenue collection at check-in,

it wouldn't terribly hard to implement such a system, if the regulators (and the market) allow it.


----------

