After both Ryanair and Eurowings announced large service cuts in Germany in 2025, Lufthansa CEO Carsten Spohr says he is concerned that high taxes and fees at German airports will continue to drive carriers away. He’s right.
Lufthansa CEO Worried About Competition Cutting Routes Due To Burdensome German Aviation Taxes And Regulations
Speaking to the Bild am Sonntag, Spohr expressed concern for the German aviation industry that appeared to go beyond simply his own portfolio of carriers in the Lufthansa Group:
“I am very concerned about the connectivity of our business locations. The extreme increase in state costs for air traffic is leading to a further decline in services. More and more airlines are avoiding German airports or canceling important connections.”
He pointed to both Eurowings, a low-cost Lufthansa subsidiary, and Irish budget carrier Ryanair as having canceled German routes over the “excessively” high airport fees.
Indeed, Ryanair announced last week that it would end service to Dresden, Dortmund, and Leipzig starting next summer and specifically blamed high taxes and fees. Ryanair is also reducing flights to Hamburg by 60% and Berlin by 20%. It blamed the routs cuts on the “German government’s continued failure to reduce air traffic tax, security and air traffic control charges, which are hindering recovery and growth.” It also took a swipe at Lufthansa:
“German citizens now face the highest airfares in Europe following Lufthansa’s €6 billion bailout. This performance by Germany stands in stark contrast to other EU countries such as Sweden, Italy, Hungary and Poland, which are reducing access costs to promote post-COVID recovery and growth in air traffic.”
Side note: Lufthansa repaid its bailout, unlike US carriers.
But Eurowings followed by announcing it too would suspend service to Hamburg on several routes.
“In addition to these domestic German cancellations, Eurowings will probably remove six other destinations in Europe and North Africa from its program from Hamburg.
“Flying to and from Germany is becoming increasingly expensive and unprofitable on many routes. This development could have been avoided, but the airport’s plans for a completely disproportionate increase in fees leave us no choice.”
Spohr also specifically condemned a national synthetic fuel mandate, which he labeled an impossible mandate when “a blending quota for e-fuels…are not yet available in sufficient quantities.”
The result is “the connectivity quality of many important economic regions is declining by international standards.”
Does Lufthasna CEO Have A Point?
I think Spohr is mostly correct and while the reduction of service by Ryanair ostensibly helps Lufthasana, the high airport fees and fuel mandates do squeeze margins for everyone, making flying from Germany on Lufthansa mainline and Eurowongs relatively less attractive.
While there’s something to be said for “nice things aren’t free” and that it takes committed infrastructure investment to create systems that function, German taxes are far higher than in neighbor countries. There’s a reasonable argument to be made that the fees are indeed excessive and discourage growth while also not advancing carbon neutrality and other reasonable goals.
The cutbacks from Ryanair and Eurowings also suggest that consumers do have a ceiling of tolerance for airfare and the idea that they will just take the train instead is not clear: instead, they will more likely just stay home.
CONCLUSION
I don’t think Ryanair and Eurowings are bluffing because I see the higher taxes myself when I fly via Germany…it’s one reason I fly out of France or Switzerland instead. Frankly, I think they are too much as well…like the bloated UK departure taxes. And that is the dilemma governments across Europe (and the Americas) face: finding that balance such that the aviation industry and the economic multiplier effect it brings are not crippled in the name of environmental progress or even infrastructure.
image: Kevin Hackert
Taxes = bad . Higher and more taxes = more bad . Always so .
No. There is a happy medium; a proper balance.
In Germany, the pendulum has swung too far in the direction of excessive.
The worst tax is “inflation” , which is government-approved because it reduces the cost of the interest on Debt.
The Debt paid for the FEMA emergency money , and the FEMA money was spent on a different government program to support the illegals , and now there is less FEMA money f0r the legal hurricane victims ; unless the government takes on more and more Debt . This is absurd .
Schools are awash in money , and the results in New York and Chicago public school are atrocious .
During the 1920s , ( Cooledge ) there was less taxation , but plenty of money for roads , parks , and infrastructure.
Obama said : ” You didn’t build that road ” , to shame people into paying more taxes . Obama think = Fallacy Think.
Causal reasoning is that more taxes equals more impoverishment of the intellect and living standards .
The government cannot spend money designated to another agency. Stop spreading this lie alert.
+1 @Maryland
@Maryland … Illegal immigrants are a net fiscal drain , because they receive far more tax-funded benefits , than they will ever pay in taxes , no ?
@ alert . you lie and now are making assumptions to justify your lies. Again, how much is the maga troll farm paying you?
@Maryland … Well , the government cannot pay benefits to the illegals from Camel-a’s Wine budget ; her Wine budget has already been spent . I wouldn’t want my Wine budget spent on them either .
YET the money had to come from Somewhere , no ? Pray tell us , from where came the money ?
@Maryland
I mean, he needs to throw out his racist views somehow…
They didn’t. It was still FEMA that was setting up housing and giving grants to NGOs. No money was “transferred”. They just chose to spend it on illegal aliens….just like when CBP money is spent on diapers and sandwiches for the criminals and their offspring.
@ CHRIS . the money was transferred by DHS to set up emergency shelter. Nothing more. Nothing was removed from the FEMA budget.
@ CHRIS. This was funding through the last administration also. My bad in not explaining that.
@Maryland … I humbly surrender . You are correct . I am mistaken .
So, you’re rejecting a raise this year to reduce inflation?
Because getting more money for the same work is the very definition of inflation. Just saying.
@Juraj … Pay raises can push income earners into higher tax brackets , no ?
Y0u don’t hear the phrase so much anymore that we should be more like Europe.
Surprise!
If taxes and fees are lowered,who’s going to pay for airport bonds,operations and environmental sequela?
We want safety, convenience , competitive prices and environmental protections. Apparently we don’t want to pay for them. So separate infrastructure and the environmental concerns. Safety and infrastructure should be the focus. We must invest now and accept a tax. As far as the environment maybe it’s time to rethink where the money is going and notice the return isn’t that great. We just aren’t there. The costs are too high.
Travel is a privilege not a right. There may be some that cannot afford it frequently and while I’m sorry, privileges are expensive.
@Maryland … The Golden Gate Bridge and Hoover Dam were built when taxes were lower , average intelligence was higher , and students were educated in arithmetic and reading , no ?
@ troll alert. Not that your ignorant comment has anything relevant, Hoover dam built with FDR depression recovery money, bridge built with bonds and investors. Certainly since you arrived IQ points have plummeted. Never answered my earlier question so I hope feeding you can at least buy your lunch. Also the big funding lie you repeated earlier caused a FEMA center to briefly close when a gunman threatened the workers. Keep spreading these lies and you will own the consequences.
@Maryland … I humbly surrender . You are correct . I am mistaken .
If Spohr was less of a weasel I’d be more inclined to listen to him.
Yeah, I hear you there.
Spohr in 2019: low-cost flights are “economically, ecologically and politically irresponsible.” Looks like he got what he wanted. Now, he doesn’t want it?
Meh. First/last miles on train isn’t bad even with DB delays.
I know where you’re coming from, but it’s still a very American take on the situation.
I understand that if a medium-size city in the US doesn’t have air connections, it’s basically cut off. Not so much in Germany, where alternatives exist.
It’s not like Ryanair routes to a bunch of weekend destinations are the engine of the local economy, much less when Ryanair strongarms smaller airports into very reasonable terms, or even subsidies.
We may discuss what level of fees is acceptable, but Ryanair will whine no matter what and Lufthansa has a strong feeder market that simply won’t go away.
@Huraj … Yep , Flights from Frankfurt to Hannover are ridiculous . Overall , the train is faster from Frankfurt Airport .
When will Germany be banning ALL private jets….regardless of who is flying in them?