Stressing its opinion that Malta’s airport, or departure, tax is “discriminatory”, the European Commission yesterday decided to bring Malta before the European Court of Justice over the controversial “travel tax”.
In a statement issued yesterday, the Commission said that, “air passengers travelling from Malta to other EU member states will benefit from eliminating the discriminatory effects of the airport tax” as a result of its action in the area.
The Lm20 airport tax has been introduced in August 2005 and the government had announced in the last budget the tax would be halved to Lm10 as from this month.
Yesterday’s announcement is the third and final step in the infringement procedure against Malta with respect to the airport tax. A letter of formal notice was sent to Malta on 4 July 2006, which had been followed by a reasoned opinion delivered on 15 December 2006.
The tax, the EC insists, places an unfair burden on residents of Malta.
As the Commission points out, “The airport tax is discriminatory as it is only levied on air passengers beginning an international journey from Malta airport, but not levied if the passenger had started the journey outside Malta.
“The tax therefore puts an unfair burden on residents in Malta, and makes it more difficult for them to receive and provide services in other member states.”
Moreover, the Commission also points out the fact that domestic destinations, such as the now defunct but soon to resume air link between Malta-Gozo, are exempted from the airport tax. According to the Commission, the airport tax should not differentiate between domestic and other intra-Community flights.
The final step in the infringement procedure on the air tax issue was one of five infringements received by Malta yesterday, but a formal complaint to the European Court of Justice was only made in respect to the controversial airport tax.
Malta also received a reasoned opinion, the second of the three legal steps, over not communicating its implementation of the Capital Requirements Directive, which deals with the taking up and pursuit of the business of credit institutions and the capital adequacy of investment firms and credit institutions. Greece and Spain also received reasoned opinions on the issue yesterday.
Malta also received a first written warning on not having stipulated enough special protection areas for bird habitats, a reasoned opinion for the country’s lacking vessel traffic monitoring and information system, as well as a reasoned opinion for failing to transpose the Markets in Financial Instruments Directive, which creates a new legal framework for the provision of investment services in the EU by establishing authorisation and operating conditions for investment firms and regulated markets.