Consultation outcome

Reform of Air Passenger Duty for private jets: consultation response

Updated 26 November 2025

1. Executive Summary

The government would like to thank all of those who took the time to respond to this consultation. The evidence, analysis and insight provided by respondents from across the aviation sector, environmental organisations, industry bodies, and individuals have been invaluable in shaping the government’s understanding of the private aviation market and the potential impacts of reforming Air Passenger Duty (APD) for private jets.

Air connectivity plays a vital role in enabling economic growth across the UK. Aviation boosts innovation and the exchange of ideas, supporting the UK’s services sector, including financial services, insurance, creative industries, education, and health. The international connectivity provided by the aviation industry drives investment in the UK, granting global companies access to British markets, and adds billions to the UK economy through tourism. In 2023, overseas residents spent over £31 billion on their visits to the UK.

Delivering economic growth remains the government’s central mission. Achieving this ambition requires a stable and fair tax system that supports innovation and investment, while also ensuring that those with the greatest ability to contribute do so. APD is a long-standing tax that ensures the aviation sector makes a fair contribution to the public finances, given that tickets are VAT free and aviation fuel incurs no duty.

The government is also mindful of the environmental impact of aviation and is committed to ensuring that growth in the sector happens in a responsible and sustainable way. Although APD is not an environmental tax, it is aligned with the government’s environmental objectives because it incorporates a ‘polluter pays’ principle, meaning that those who fly the furthest – and so produce more emissions – incur the largest APD liability. Private aircraft generally carry far fewer passengers and so emit significantly more carbon per person than commercial flights. It is right that the tax system reflects this.

Following careful consideration of the evidence and feedback received, the government will proceed with extending the scope of the higher rate of APD to cover all private jet passengers on aircraft with a maximum take-off weight exceeding 5.7 tonnes. This will help ensure that private jets are taxed equally, and make a fairer contribution to the public finances, relative to commercial operators.

The government looks forward to drawing on the expertise of stakeholders to develop and confirm this policy and will publish draft legislation in due course.

2. Introduction

2.1 Air Passenger Duty and the higher rate

APD raised £4.2 billion in 2024-25 and its primary objective is to ensure that the aviation sector makes a fair contribution to the public finances.^{[footnote 1]} Revenue raised by APD funds vital public services for people and families across the UK.

APD is paid by airlines and operators and is levied on a per-passenger basis on all flights departing UK airports on fixed-wing aircraft with a maximum take-off weight (MTOW) of 5.7 tonnes and over. The rates differ according to a passenger’s class of travel and the distance of their journey. APD is simple to collect and complies with the UK’s international obligations. The UK is one of several countries, including France and Italy, to levy a per-passenger tax on aviation.

APD was introduced in 1994 because air travel was under-taxed compared to other sectors of the economy. It initially applied to operators of aeroplanes with a MTOW of 10 tonnes and above authorised to seat 20 or more people.

In 2013, following a consultation, this de minimis weight threshold changed to 5.7 tonnes and APD was extended to private jets. The then government’s response to this consultation noted that 5.7 tonne weight threshold offered a sensible compromise in view of the increased administration and compliance costs^{[footnote 2]} Simultaneously, a higher rate was established for those operating aircraft with a MTOW of 20 tonnes and above that were equipped to carry fewer than 19 passengers. This higher rate covers the larger, more luxurious, private jets, reflecting the higher class of service they provided.

Other private jets (with a MTOW between 5.7 tonnes and 20 tonnes) currently pay the reduced or standard rates. The reduced rate applies to passengers in economy class, travelling in a seat with a pitch of less than 1.016 metres (40 inches). The standard rate applies to any other class of travel or where the seat pitch is more than 1.016 metres^{[footnote 3]}

The current rates are tabulated below:

Table 1.A APD rates, 2025-2026^{[footnote 4]}

Band	Reduced rate	Standard rate	Higher rate
Domestic	£7	£14	£84
Band A (0 to 2,000 miles)	£13	£28	£84
Band B (2,001 to 5,500 miles)	£90	£216	£647
Band C (over 5,500 miles)	£94	£224	£673

2.2 The consultation aims and proposal

The consultation set out that the government had the following objectives for the taxation of private aviation:

a. ensuring that private jet operators make a fair contribution to the public finances, including ensuring fairness between operators of lighter and heavier private jets.

b. supporting UK and international connectivity.

c. aligning the taxation of private jets with the government’s environmental objectives, particularly the government’s legally binding commitment to net zero emissions by 2050.

The consultation sought views on how these objectives could be reflected through reform of the APD regime as it applies to private aviation. The government wished to ensure fairness between operators of lighter and heaviest jets, given under the current structure, many lighter private jets fall outside the scope of the higher rate, and pay the same rates as commercial travel, despite providing a bespoke and high-convenient form of travel. The government believes that those who choose to fly privately should make a fair contribution alongside commercial air passengers, and the tax treatment of private jets should be standardised to ensure consistency across the sector.

The government recognises the importance of aviation in maintaining connectivity within the UK and with international markets. The consultation aimed to understand how any changes to the taxation of private aviation can be implemented in a way that continues to support economic activity, investment, and regional accessibility, while maintaining a fair and proportionate approach to taxation.

The government recognises that private jet travel is generally more carbon intensive per-passenger than commercial aviation, due to smaller aircraft size and lower occupancy rates. The consultation aimed to understand how the tax system could reflect this. Although APD is not an environmental tax, it is aligned with the government’s environmental objectives because it incorporates a ‘polluter pays’ principle, meaning that those who fly the furthest – and so produce more emissions – incur the largest APD liability.

The government will proceed with the proposed extension of the scope of the higher rate to cover all private jets above the 5.7 tonne threshold for APD so that all private jets currently liable for APD incur the higher rate on all passengers carried.

3. The Private Jet Industry (Qs 1-12)

This section of the consultation sought a broader understanding of the private jet industry, in order to assess as effectively as possible, the impact of the higher rate scope extension. It also sought views on how to ensure that the reform of the higher rate aligns with the government’s environmental objectives.

3.1 Structure of the private jet industry (Qs 1-7)

Summary of responses received:

Question 1- What evidence can you provide about the profitability of different parts of the private jet sector, at the upper and lower ends of the market?

Responses regarding the profitability of the private jet sector varied. Some respondents, including the majority of those from the aviation industry, highlighted the complexity and diversity of the private jet industry, which includes operators, owners, manufacturers, service providers, airports, and more. These respondents noted that this diversity makes profitability difficult to assess across the whole sector. Survey evidence provided by respondents from charter operators and brokers suggests that profit margins are generally tight: 42% reported average margins of less than 5%, and 73% reported margins of 9% or lower. Respondents noted that this was consistent across both upper and lower ends of the market, particularly for non-scheduled commercial operations. It was noted that these figures suggest that many commercial operators work within tight profit margins, due to considerable operational and maintenance costs.

Other responses, including those from environmental stakeholders, noted that the private jet sector has grown significantly faster than the wider aviation industry in recent years, and suggested that the sector continues to be broadly successful and profitable.

Question 2 - How would different segments of the market respond to the government’s proposals to extend the scope of the higher rate?

The majority of industry stakeholders, including private aviation operators and representative bodies, raised concerns about the response from the market to the proposal. Many noted that the private jet aviation sector includes a wide range of aircraft and operator types, with some segments being highly price-sensitive and already operating on thin margins. Respondents suggested that higher taxation could disproportionately affect these operators and may lead to reduced service provision, including the withdrawal from private aviation by some mixed-mode operation organisations.

Other responses, particularly those from environmental groups, noted that private jet passengers tend to be wealthy and that the demand for such travel is likely to be price inelastic. These respondents argued that the proposed increases were modest relative to the overall cost of a private jet flight and that further increases could be justified on equity and environmental grounds.

Question 3 - What impact would the extension of the scope of the higher rate to cover all private jets over 5.7 tonnes and increases to APD have on customer demand for private jets?

Respondents expressed a wide range of views on the likely impact of extending the higher rate of APD to all private jets over 5.7 tonnes. Industry respondents generally considered that the measure could have a negative effect on private aviation activity in the UK, citing potential reductions in flight volumes and the risk of operators relocating to countries with lower taxation regimes. Several noted that private aviation plays an important role in supporting UK GDP, inward investment, and connectivity to regions not well served by scheduled commercial flights. Others argued that higher APD could reduce the viability of smaller operators and impact regional airports reliant on private aviation activity.

Some respondents noted that approximately 1,500 annual flights would be captured by the proposed changes to the higher rate and that the proposal would result in only a minimal increase in tax revenue. Concerns were raised that the potential gains would be outweighed by wider economic impacts if private aviation activity and associated markets were to relocate outside the UK in response to increased costs. Respondents warned that such outcomes could negatively affect perceptions of the UK’s competitiveness among international businesses and investors. Respondents also suggested that the UK was a popular European base for large dedicated private jets and therefore noted concerns about potential displacement of aviation activity.

Conversely, some respondents, the majority of those from environmental groups, supported the proposal, suggesting that private jet passengers could absorb higher APD costs without materially affecting demand, given the overall cost of private jet travel. These respondents viewed the policy as a means of addressing fairness and contributing to emissions reduction goals. A small number also suggested differentiating rates according to aircraft size or emissions to better reflect environmental impact.

Question 4 - Can you provide any evidence about the size of the private jet aircraft population and its distribution between lighter and heavier jets?

Several respondents provided evidence on the composition of the UK’s private jet fleet. Data provided through responses to this consultation indicated that the UK has a significant private jet population, ranking sixth globally, with 522 registered aircraft, although this data was from 2019, so this may not reflect the current private jet population. Of these, 145 were classified as heavy jets, 72 as midsize, and 93 as light jets, with the remainder comprising turboprops and ‘bizliners’.

Question 5 - What evidence can you share about the average number of passengers per private jet?

Several responses provided evidence on the average occupancy of private jet flights with figures generally indicating low passenger numbers per flight compared to commercial aviation. Responses, primarily those from the private jet industry, noted that private aviation prioritises matching aircraft size to client needs, allowing for operational efficiency and cost optimisation. Charter operators in particular aim to maintain high load factors by selecting aircraft based on the specific range and seating requirements of each flight.

Other respondents noted that despite the operational flexibility, average load factors remained low. Analysis provided by responded pointed to an average of 2.5 passengers per flight. Respondents therefore noted that the effective load factor for private jet flights is significantly lower than for commercial aviation. Consequently, respondents, primarily those from environmental groups, cited the low average passenger numbers and high proportion of empty flights as indicators of inefficiency within the sector, and per-passenger-emissions are significantly higher than regular commercial flights.

In contrast, some respondents, primarily those from the aviation/private jet industry, note that the direct comparisons here with commercial aviation may be of limited relevance, given the bespoke nature of private jet usage, and the need to access destinations not served by scheduled airlines.

Question 6 - In contrast to flying on commercial airliners, what are the primary reasons for using private jets and range of journey lengths?

The majority of respondents noted that the main rationale for the use of private jets is the economisation of time. Private jets allow passengers to move through terminals quicker than those flying on commercial airlines, and private flights can connect airports that are unconnected by commercial scheduled services. It was also noted that private flights allow the movement of cargo between airports that may be unconnected by scheduled services. Some respondents also noted the importance of private jets in transporting patients.

Question 7 - As set out, data suggest that those using private jets are more likely to be male. We do not consider that there will be a significant impact on those with other protected characteristics from the government’s proposal on private jet taxation. Do you agree?

A number of responses agreed with the government’s initial position that there would be no significant impact on protected characteristics. However, some respondents stressed that while private jet use is currently male dominated, this is a reflection of existing socio-economic and business structures rather than a direct equality issue arising from the sector itself.

Additionally, several respondents raised concerns that there could be indirect impacts on certain protected characteristics if overall charter capacity was reduced. For example, responses suggested that aero medical flights and repatriation flights could face higher costs or reduced availability. These respondents therefore suggested these categories of flights should remain exempt from APD.

3.2 Changes to the private jet industry (Qs 8-9)

Summary of responses received:

Question 8 - What impact did the Covid-19 pandemic have on the private jet industry?

Responses regarding the impact of Covid-19 pandemic on the industry varied. Respondents, including the majority of those from the private jet industry, noted that initially the industry was significantly impacted by the pandemic, as during the heavier restrictions staff were furloughed or made redundant and flights were very limited. They also pointed to a lack of government funding compared to the commercial aviation sector and highlighted that private aviation faced high fixed and regulatory costs despite limited operations. Nevertheless, many respondents also noted that, as restrictions eased, demand for private aviation recovered rapidly as passengers sought flexibility and routes not served by scheduled airlines. Respondents highlighted that private aviation played an important role in the national and international response to the pandemic, facilitating evacuation flights, medical repatriations, and the transport of personal protective equipment (PPE), vaccines, and time-critical cargo when scheduled services were unavailable.

However, other respondents, from both the private jet industry and environmental groups, noted that the industry recovered quicker during the pandemic, as it allowed those who could afford them to continue flying during Covid restrictions. Therefore, some respondents pointed to the necessity of private jets for flexibility and safety during the pandemic and noted that the private aviation sector was vital in supporting the national and international response to the pandemic, in providing critical services and supplies to tackle the pandemic. Other respondents noted that the pandemic had little adverse impact on the private jet industry, and the sector continued to operate as normal.

Question 9 - What are the current drivers of change in the UK private jet industry?

On the question of the drivers of change in the UK private jet industry, responses were aligned. Respondents, broadly those from the aviation industry, pointed to changes to the UK fiscal environment, with stakeholders highlighting the cumulative impact of various taxes and charges, such as APD, Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) and Air Traffic Control (ATC) fees, the UK Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) costs, and recent uplifts in business rates, as a potential deterrent to inward investment. Respondents also noted the geopolitical developments, including the growing influence of Asian and Gulf states, global conflicts, shifting UK foreign policy, and new sources of energy and minerals, as significant external factors shaping the sector. Sustainability was also highlighted as a growing area of focus, with increasing pressure to decarbonise, adopt new technologies and meet broader environmental obligations.

3.3 Private jet decarbonisation (Qs 10-12)

Summary of responses received:

Question 10 – What evidence can you share about how the private jet sector has decarbonised to date?

On the question of decarbonisation in the industry, the responses were mixed. Respondents, broadly those from the aviation industry, noted that the private jet industry has been pioneering new technologies to support decarbonisation, using more fuel-efficient aircraft and promoting the uptake of Sustainable Aviation Fuels (SAF). Respondents also noted that the private aviation sector is uniquely positioned to support the financial investment in new technologies to decarbonise and will lead the way in efforts to reduce emissions from aviation.

Other respondents, broadly those from environmental groups, noted that the private jet industry has been slower to decarbonise, despite being well-suited to early adoption of electrification due to the short distances and low passenger numbers typical of such flights. It was asserted that users of private aviation often have significant financial resources and access to capital, making them well-placed to invest in emerging technologies such as electric aircraft, should they choose to do so.

Question 11 - What role could tax changes play in supporting decarbonisation of the private jet sector?

On the question of taxation to support decarbonisation, responses varied. Some respondents highlighted that tax incentives could play a positive role in supporting decarbonisation within the private jet sector. They noted that targeted tax relief could encourage greater production and use of SAF as well as stimulate investment in emerging technologies aimed at reducing aviation emissions.

Several respondents, broadly those from the aviation industry, expressed concerns about the potential negative impacts of increased taxation on the industry’s ability to decarbonise. It was suggested that higher taxes could reduce overall profitability and, in turn, limit the capital available for sustainability-focused investments. Specific issues were highlighted with the structure of APD, with some respondents noting that a per-passenger model may discourage fuller aircraft occupancy on private flights. This could lead to higher per capita emissions and undermine progress on environmental targets. Additionally, respondents noted that unintended consequences could harm the sector’s reputation and reduce overall tax revenues.

On the other hand, respondents, broadly those from environmental groups and private individuals, noted that taxation needs to go further to support decarbonisation in this sector. Some respondents strongly supported higher taxation on private jet flights, viewing it as a positive step for both climate and economic policy. Some pointed out that taxing private jet fuel and increasing APD, particularly on larger aircraft with higher emissions, would help reduce emissions and ensure those with the greatest ability to pay contribute more.

Concerns were raised about perceived inequities in the current tax system, with comparisons drawn between the lack of fuel tax on private jets and the taxes faced by ordinary motorists. Respondents also noted the high emissions per-passenger from private jets and suggested that tax levels should reflect this environmental impact. Some also questioned whether the proposed APD rates were sufficient considering the overall cost of private jet travel and the high emissions associated with private jet travel.

Question 12 - What could be the drivers of future decarbonisation of the private jet sector?

Respondents highlighted a range of factors expected to drive future decarbonisation within the private jet sector. Industry stakeholders generally pointed to technological innovation as the primary driver, citing ongoing work to develop hybrid, electric, and hydrogen propulsion systems, as well as improvements in airframe and materials technology to enhance efficiency and reduce emissions. Many also referred to the role of SAF as the most immediate pathway to lower emissions, but wider availability and cost, as well as customer demand would need to be prioritised as key factors to help influence uptake.

Several respondents underlined the importance of airspace modernisation initiatives (such as LAMP) and contrail research to help address both CO₂ and non-CO₂ impacts. There was also recognition that government policy and fiscal measures will be essential to support decarbonisation, through targeted R&D funding, SAF production incentives, and potentially differentiated tax schemes to encourage investment in lower-emission technologies.

Environmental stakeholders tended to place greater emphasis on external policy levers, such as taxation or regulation, to manage demand growth, and reduce low-occupancy and empty-leg flights.

4. Extending the higher rate of APD on Private Jets (Qs 13-19)

This section of the consultation sought views on the government’s proposed definition of the higher rate, as well as the impact of extending the higher rate to all private jets.

4.1 Defining the scope of the higher rate (Qs 13-17)

Summary of responses received:

Question 13 – Do you agree with the proposal that APD higher rate should be reformed to apply to all private jet passengers above the current 5.7 tonne MTOW threshold?

On the government’s proposal to extend the scope of the higher rate to all private jet passengers above the current 5.7 tonne MTOW threshold, responses were varied. Generally, responses from those in the aviation industry opposed the government’s proposal to extend the scope of the higher rate. This is on the basis that the lighter aircraft in the private aviation industry operate on tighter margins than larger aircraft, and customers are very price sensitive. Respondents noted that higher taxes on private jets could reinforce a perception that the UK is a more expensive place to conduct business and invest.

Some respondents, including those from environmental stakeholders and a significant majority of private individuals, welcomed the government’s proposal to extend the scope of the higher rate, suggesting that the current level of taxation levied on private jets is too low. These responses noted that the emissions produced by passengers on private jets are much higher than those produced by passengers on commercial scheduled flights, and therefore respondents would like to see the tax system reflect this.

This group of respondents also suggested that the government should go further than the current proposals and levy a much higher rate of tax on private jets given the high emissions associated with private jet travel.

Question 14 – Do you have any views on whether the current 5.7 MTOW threshold remains appropriate for private jets, and if not, what alternative threshold would you suggest and why?

Some respondents noted that, if the scope of the higher rate must change, 10 tonnes would be a more appropriate threshold than 5.7 tonnes. Conversely, several respondents supported removing the 5.7-tonne MTOW threshold so that the higher APD rate would apply to all private jet passengers, arguing this would improve fairness across operators of different aircraft sizes.

Question 15 - What are the benefits and risks of the proposal to define private jets as having no formal agreement of carriage and no schedule?

Question 16 - Do you have an alternative proposal as to how the government could achieve its stated aims on private jet taxation? Can you conceive of alternative ways of defining private jets in law in a way which aligns with the government’s stated aims?

Regarding the definition of private jets in terms of the absence of a formal agreement of carriage and the absence of a published schedule, some respondents expressed concerns on the government’s proposed definition as they noted that commercial charter flights already operate under an agreement of carriage, and that this could be readily extended to include tickets if required. It was suggested that if scheduled services were taxed differently, some private jet operators, particularly those flying to popular destinations, might respond by publishing schedules to benefit from a more favourable tax treatment. This could create unintended distortions in the market and undermine the purpose of the proposed definition. Other respondents expressed less concern about the government’s proposal.

Respondents also proposed a range of complementary measures to better align taxation with the government’s stated aims. These included ending the VAT zero-rating for private jet flights or introducing a luxury VAT rate. Suggestions also included implementing a tax mechanism based on overall flight costs or offering reductions for flights using sustainable fuels or low-carbon technologies.

Question 17 - Which APD exemptions should continue to apply to private jets under a reformed higher rate and why?

On the question of APD exemptions that should continue to apply to the higher rate, most respondents agreed that the existing APD exemptions should continue to apply to the higher rate. Some respondents suggested that the government add exemptions for flights using SAF blends to encourage sustainable aviation fuel adoption. Respondents also suggested exemptions for transit passengers who need to switch aircraft due to regulatory restrictions, such as the limited ability of foreign carriers to operate certain domestic UK routes.

Other respondents suggested that the APD exemptions should be removed for private jets, in order to ensure all private jets, incur higher taxes. Some respondents suggested that the APD exemption for ‘passengers on short pleasure flights, that last 60 minutes or less and begin and end at the same place’ should be removed, as respondents felt the rationale behind this exemption was unclear and should be reconsidered to ensure consistency.

4.2 The impact of extending the higher rate to all private jets (Qs 18-19)

Summary of responses received:

Question 18 - If, as proposed, the APD higher rate were applied to passengers in all private jets, what would the impact be on:

• The private jet industry in the UK
• The administrative burden facing private jet operators
• Private jet occupancy rates
• Emissions
• UK and international connectivity
• Any other impacts

Several respondents, broadly those from the aviation industry, noted concerns about the broader impacts of proposed changes to APD and related regulation on the UK private jet sector. It was suggested that increased costs could reduce the competitiveness of UK-based operators compared to European counterparts, potentially accelerating the decline in UK-registered aircraft, and reducing associated CAA revenues. It was also suggested that smaller operators could be seen as particularly vulnerable to the cumulative administrative burden of multiple regulatory changes, including new requirements under the General Aviation Report (GAR), European Travel Information and Authorisation System (ETIAS), UK Electronic Travel Authorisation (ETA), SAF mandates, and potential APD reforms. Concerns were also raised about the per-passenger structure of APD, which may discourage full aircraft occupancy and result in lower passenger loads per flight. This could lead to increased per capita emissions and a shift of passengers to scheduled services, increasing pressure on commercial aviation infrastructure. Responses from the aviation industry generally noted the competitive international environment for private aviation, suggesting that APD increases could make the UK less competitive in terms of price, reducing the likelihood that jets would travel to the UK. Responses noted that the industry is generally unrestricted, and people may choose to bypass the UK, flying to cities such as Dublin instead.

Other respondents, however, suggested that the proposed changes would not have a significant impact on the industry, or emissions and UK international connectivity.

Question 19 - What data on private departures (e.g. numbers of passengers, aircraft size/weight, destination, proportion of departures for which the jet is hired vis-à-vis owner-operated) are kept and by whom (e.g. operators, brokers)?

Respondents highlighted that data on private jet movements and operations is collected and held by a range of public and private sector organisations. Publicly, aircraft movement data is recorded by the CAA, UK Border Force, EUROCONTROL and the Ministry of Defence. Airfields are required to maintain accurate records for CAA reporting purposes, including information on aircraft movements, weights and destinations. Some respondents suggested that data sharing between the CAA and HMRC could be enhanced, for example through the provision of movement data or random audits to support compliance monitoring.

In addition to official sources, several respondents noted that commercial data providers such as WingX, Avinode, Leon, and FlightAware hold or analyse further information on the private jet sector, including estimates of passenger numbers, aircraft type and size, destinations, and the balance between chartered and owner-operated flights. Other data sources mentioned included CE Delft’s database (drawing on CIRIUM data) and the OpenSky network. A small number of respondents noted that large operators retain detailed internal data on flights within their own IT systems.

4.3 Government response:

The government recognises that the private jet industry is diverse, covering a wide range of aircraft type, operators and ownership models. The government also acknowledges that private aviation provides important connectivity benefits, including for routes that are sometimes not served by scheduled airlines, which supports wider economic activity, and facilitates business connections.

At the same time, the government recognises that private jet operations are fundamentally bespoke in nature in that they provide a level of flexibility, privacy and convenience that is not available to those flying commercially. These services are also typically more expensive than scheduled commercial flights and therefore tend to be used by wealthier individuals.

The government recognises that private jets may also be used for a range of purposes, including humanitarian and authorised emergency medical service flights. These specific operations are exempt from APD^{[footnote 5]}

While the sector was initially affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, activity in private aviation recovered quicker than in the commercial aviation sector. Industry data has indicated that private aviation flourished in 2021-22, and suggests the sector was able to adapt quickly to the pandemic and recover much faster than commercial aviation^{[footnote 6]}

The government has carefully considered the views on its proposal to extend the scope of the APD higher rate to all private jet passengers above the current 5.7 tonne MTOW threshold. Having reviewed the evidence and responses provided to this consultation, the government intends to proceed with the proposal to bring all private jet passengers on aircraft above 5.7 tonnes MTOW into scope of the higher rate of APD. This will help ensure that private jets are taxed equally and make a fairer contribution to the public finances, relative to commercial operators.

APD is primarily a revenue-raising tax, designed to ensure the aviation sector makes a fair contribution to public finances, particularly given that tickets are VAT free and aviation fuel incurs no duty. Nevertheless, the structure of APD aligns with the government’s environmental objectives because it incorporates a ‘polluter pays’ principle, meaning that those who fly the furthest – and so produce more emissions – incur the largest APD liability. Given the small size and low occupancy rates of many private jets relative to commercial airliners, the government understands that their per-passenger carbon emissions tend to be significantly greater.^{[footnote 7]} Therefore, the government considers it fair that the APD system reflects this environmental impact.

The government acknowledges the concerns raised by some respondents that lighter aircraft within the private aviation sector may be particularly sensitive to higher rates of APD. Nevertheless, the government understands that these aircraft are typically used for shorter routes and are therefore more likely to fall within the short-haul distance bands of APD, where rates are lower. By contrast, larger aircraft are generally capable of flying longer distances and are therefore more likely to be subject to the higher long-haul or ultra long-haul bands. This approach ensures proportionality and fairness within the APD framework.

The government has also noted concerns that this level of taxation is too low. However, the government would like to reiterate that APD is primarily a revenue raising tax which aims to ensure that airlines make a fair contribution to the public finances, particularly given that tickets are VAT free and aviation fuel incurs no duty. Nevertheless, the structure of APD is consistent with the polluter pays principle; those who travel further incur higher tax rates, reflecting the greater emissions associated with longer journeys. Building on the 50% rate increase at Autumn Budget 2024, this change will extend the higher rate to all private jets over 5.7 tonnes. These changes ensure that those who travel furthest, and have a greater impact on the environment, incur a greater tax liability.

The 5.7 tonne threshold took effect in 2013, following a consultation process with industry in 2011. Prior to that, the weight threshold for APD was set at 10 tonnes. At the time, the government felt that 5.7 tonnes offered a sensible compromise in view of increased administration and compliance costs, while bringing much of private aviation into APD. The government also understands that a small proportion of private jets fall below the existing 5.7 tonne MTOW threshold. Given the potential for increased compliance costs and instances where some smaller jets may already incur fuel duty (such as for private pleasure flying) the government still believes this threshold is an appropriate and proportionate threshold,^{[footnote 8]} and that it maintains fairness between operators of lighter and heavier aircraft.

In light of consultation responses highlighting risks of avoidance with the proposed definition, namely that private charter contracts could be classed as tickets or operators could publish nominal schedules to appear as ‘scheduled’ flights, the government will amend the definition to ensure clarity and capture all private jets over 5.7 tonnes within the scope of the proposed definition, as per the government’s policy intent. Under the proposed revised definition, the higher rate will apply to flights meeting any of the following conditions:

i. the agreement for carriage is not comprised of a ticket,

ii. there is no published schedule for the flight/the flight is not a scheduled flight, and/or

iii. the departure date and time, departure location and arrival location are specifically negotiated with the customer or the customer’s representative.

The government also considers that the current set of exemptions remains appropriate and proportionate. The government will not be introducing any additional exemptions or removing existing ones at this stage.

The government recognises the important role that the UK’s aviation sector, including the private jet industry, plays in supporting economic growth, investment, and connectivity. Private aviation connects communities and businesses across the UK and internationally, providing flexibility and access to destinations not served by scheduled airlines. The government remains committed to maintaining a competitive and dynamic aviation sector that supports jobs, skills, and innovation across the UK.

The government continues to work closely with industry, local authorities and devolved administrations to support regional aviation and maintain connectivity. One example is the Public Service Obligation (PSO) framework, which provides a way to safeguard essential domestic air services when they are at risk, helping preserve regional links in partnership with local and devolved partners.

However, the UK aviation market operates predominantly in the private market: airlines, airports and their investors make their own commercial decisions and are best placed to understand and service the demand of their customers across the UK.

The government has carefully considered the concerns raised about the potential impact of extending the APD higher rate to all private jet passengers above the current 5.7 tonne MTOW threshold. As set out elsewhere in this response, the government believes that the extension of the higher rate strikes an appropriate balance between ensuring those who choose to travel by private jet make a fair and proportionate contribution to the public finances, while continuing to support the sector’s long-term competitiveness and growth.

The government also recognises the points raised by respondents regarding the role of the private jet sector in supporting technological innovation and early adoption of cleaner fuels. Respondents noted that the sector may be well placed to demonstrate emerging technologies, including the use of SAF, hybrid-electric and electric aircraft, and more efficient operational practices. The government welcomes ongoing industry-led efforts in this area and will continue to monitor progress through its wider work on aviation decarbonisation.

The government is committed to delivering greener transport in support of its mission to kickstart economic growth and to make Britain a clean energy superpower. The government has already made significant progress, with considerable support for sustainable aviation fuel (SAF), the airspace modernisation programme getting underway and major funding for new technologies, through the Aerospace Technology Institute (ATI).

In January, the SAF Mandate commenced, which drives aviation fuel suppliers to use fuel from sustainable sources, rising from 2% in 2025 to 10% in 2030 and 22% in 2040. To support the development of a UK SAF industry, DfT has laid legislation before Parliament to introduce a SAF Bill to implement the revenue certainty mechanism and has committed a further £63m to the Advanced Fuels Fund for this financial year with continued support for SAF production through to 2029/30.

On the question of passenger occupancy and emissions efficiency, the government notes respondents’ concerns that the per-passenger structure of APD could discourage fuller flights. Nonetheless, the government considers that APD represents a relatively small proportion of the overall cost of private jet travel. As such, APD is unlikely to have a material impact on passenger occupancy rates. Given the bespoke and demand-responsive nature of private jet operations, load factors are primarily determined by passenger requirements and operational needs rather than taxation policy.

We welcome the information provided by responses on where data on private departures are kept and by whom. This data has helped the development of this policy and will help inform future work on APD.

5. Next Steps

At Autumn Budget 2024, the APD rates for 2026-27 were announced. The 2026-27 rates will increase by forecast Retail Price Index (RPI) and will be further increased to account for previous high inflation that has not been reflected in previous years’ increases. The higher rates that apply to the larger private jets will increase by an additional 50%. The 2026-27 APD rates have been legislated for in Finance Act 2025.

At Budget 2025, the government announced that it intends to proceed with the scope expansion of the higher rate to cover all private jets over 5.7 tonnes. This will help ensure that private jets are taxed equally, and make a fairer contribution to the public finances, relative to commercial operators.

The government intends to legislate in the Finance Bill 2026 to implement the reforms outlined above, with effect from 1 April 2027. Ahead of this, the government intends to publish draft legislation for technical consultation to allow stakeholders the opportunity to comment on the detailed design and operation of the new rules.

The government also announced the 2027/28 APD rates at this Budget. The rates are:

Band	Reduced rate	Standard rate	Higher rate
Domestic	£8.26	£16.52	£146.63
Band A (0 to 2,000 miles)	£15.49	£33.04	£146.63
Band B (2,001 to 5,500 miles)	£105.33	£251.95	£1132.76
Band C (over 5,500 miles)	£109.46	£261.25	£1178.20

For the tax year 2027 to 2028 and in subsequent years, APD rates will be rounded to the nearest penny. This will be legislated for in the next Finance Bill.

The government is grateful for the constructive engagement from stakeholders throughout this consultation. It will continue to work closely with industry representatives, environmental organisations, and other interested parties as it finalises the policy.

1. https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/air-passenger-duty-bulletin/air-passenger-duty-statistics-commentary-march-2021 ↩

2. H.M. Treasury, ‘Reform of Air Passenger Duty: Response to Consultation’ (2011), p. 6. ↩

3. Rates for direct long-haul and ultra-long-haul flights from Northern Ireland are devolved to the Northern Ireland Assembly and currently set at £0. Direct long-haul journeys are those where the first leg of the journey is to a destination in Band B. For direct ultra-long haul, this is where the first leg of the journey is to a destination in Band C ↩

4. Rates for direct long-haul and ultra-long-haul flights from Northern Ireland are devolved to the Northern Ireland Assembly and currently set at £0. Direct long-haul journeys are those where the first leg of the journey is to a destination in Band B. For direct ultra-long haul, this is where the first leg of the journey is to a destination in Band C. ↩

5. Exemptions from Air Passenger Duty - GOV.UK ↩

6. https://wingx-advance.com/wp-content/uploads/WINGX_TRB_2023_FINAL_sent.pdf ↩

7. On emissions from private jets, see Frazer-Nash, ‘Decarbonising general aviation: understanding the carbon footprint of general aviation’, (Department for Transport, 2022) ↩

8. Fuel duty also applies to aviation gasoline (Avgas), which is used mainly in small piston-engine aircraft ↩