Consumer Groups Say Transparent Airfares Act is Anything But
A 2012 Department of Transportation regulation that simplified flight pricing drew praise from consumer groups. But a House bill, backed by the airline industry, could roll back the rule, leading to pushbackâand questions over what constitutes transparency in airfares.
Heads up: this content is over 5 years old, so some information may be out of date.
A legislative fight over the rules for airfare pricing is raising an interesting question: What exactly does transparency mean?
That depends on who you ask. Supporters of a new House bill, the Transparent Airfares Act of 2014 (opens in a new tab), say it will ârestore transparency to the advertising of U.S. airline ticket prices and ensure that airfare advertisements are not forced to hide the costs of government from consumers.â
But consumer and business travel groups that oppose the bill say it would create pricing thatâs anything but transparent. âThe name of the bill is just the start of the false advertising,â FlyersRights.org President Paul Hudson told USA Today (opens in a new tab).
Three perspectives on the bill below:
Industry cheers: The airline industry applauded the new bill, introduced by Reps. Bill Shuster (R-PA) and Peter DeFazio (D-OR) last month. The measure is a response to a 2012 Department of Transportation rule (opens in a new tab) that required airlines to include taxes and other government fees in the advertised price of a plane ticket. The changes were intended to make price comparisons easier, but Airlines for America (A4A) argues that it âfundamentally changedâ the way airline advertising works, hiding the effects of tax and fee increases on ticket prices. âThis [rule] reduces transparency and treats airfare advertising differently than advertising for virtually all other consumer products, rendering air travel less price competitive when compared with other modes of travel,â the group wrote in a statement upon the billâs approval (opens in a new tab) by the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee earlier this month.
Consumer, travel groups object: According to critics, such as the Business Travel Coalition and FlyersRights.org, the bill would make it harder to compare prices online, because government fees and taxes wouldnât be included in the cost of a ticket. In other words, the quote you see on Priceline wouldnât be the full price of the ticket; taxes and fees wouldnât be added until near the end of the purchase transaction.
Translucent, not transparent: The bill drew âtepidâ support from the U.S. Travel Association, whose CEO, Roger Dow, argued that transparency is needed but that the bill doesnât go far enough. U.S. Travel noted in a statement (opens in a new tab) that the bill would âpermit advertisers and other sellers of air transportation to hide the bottom-line cost of airfare in separate links or in pop-up windows, making it more difficult for consumers to quickly understand and easily compare âall-inâ prices among carriers.â
âThe impetus for the bill is solid, but it could be more accurately called the âTranslucent Airfares Actâ because it doesnât go far enough in providing the transparency in airfare pricing that consumers crave,â Dow said in the statement (opens in a new tab). âIt only gets halfway there by still allowing sites to obfuscate the full price of an airline ticket. If weâre going to do this, letâs do it right the first time, and finish the job.â
He added: âDonât just swap one kind of transparency for another. Letâs take this opportunity to shine a full light on the costs associated with air travel.â
(iStock/Thinkstock)
Comments
Comments are for ASAE members. Learn more about comments on this site.
Log in to your member account or join ASAE!