European Airlines Warn of Risk of More Expensive Tickets Due to EU ETS: What This Means for Passengers

Lead. European airlines have brought a dispute over the future of aviation climate regulation to the public level. On June 8, 2026, Airlines for Europe published a letter from 15 airline executives to the European Commission calling for the EU ETS emissions trading system not to be extended to long-haul flights outside the European Economic Area. For passengers, this does not mean an immediate new fee on the ticket, but it does mean a significant price risk for trips from Europe in 2027 and beyond: if Brussels goes for a broader application of the ETS, some of the additional costs may gradually pass into tariffs, especially on international routes.

The topic is important right now because the European Commission must evaluate by July 2026 whether the global CORSIA scheme sufficiently meets the climate goals of the Paris Agreement. According to the European Commission's official explanation, two basic options are possible after this evaluation: either maintain the current focus of the EU ETS primarily on intra-European flights, or propose an extension to flights departing from the European Economic Area to third countries, with an exception for incoming flights. It is the second scenario that has caused a sharp reaction from Europe's largest aviation groups.

What Happened

In the Airlines for Europe letter dated June 8, the heads of 15 European airlines addressed President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen and the relevant European Commissioners. Among the signatories, according to Reuters and the A4E text itself, are the heads of large groups and carriers linked to Air France-KLM, IAG, Lufthansa, Ryanair, easyJet, TUI, AirBaltic and others. Their main position: a partial or full extension of the geographical scope of the EU ETS to non-European flights, in the opinion of the airlines, will increase costs for passengers and cargo shippers and weaken the competitiveness of European carriers against airlines and hubs outside the EU.

Airlines do not deny the goal of achieving net zero by 2050, but insist that regulation should not only reduce emissions but also maintain the accessibility of air travel and Europe's air connectivity. In the A4E letter, they provide their own estimates: association members paid 2.3 billion euros in ETS costs in 2024, and by 2030 this amount could grow to 5 billion euros. Airlines also speak of a premium cost for aviation's transition to net zero at the level of 1.3 trillion euros and ask to direct ETS revenues toward supporting sustainable aviation fuel, new aircraft, engines, and air traffic management technologies.

How EU ETS Works for Aviation

EU ETS is the European emissions trading system, which has covered the aviation sector in Europe since 2012. Its logic is that operators must monitor, report, and verify their emissions, and then cover them with corresponding allowances. The tighter the limit on available allowances and the more expensive they become, the stronger the economic incentive to reduce emissions or finance the transition to cleaner technologies.

Currently, the practical focus of the EU ETS for aviation is primarily limited to flights within the European Economic Area, while for international non-European flights, the logic of CORSIA — a global carbon offsetting and reduction scheme for international aviation under the aegis of ICAO — is applied. The European Commission explains that this limitation of the ETS scope is not permanent: it was extended several times to support the global mechanism, but now in 2026, an evaluation of CORSIA's effectiveness must take place.

Additionally, from 2026, the transition to full auctioning of allowances in aviation is being completed: free quotas for air operators were reduced in 2024 and 2025, and from 2026, the sector moves to full payment for emissions. At the same time, the EU has reserved a portion of ETS allowances to support the use of alternative aviation fuel, specifically to partially offset the difference between the cost of conventional fuel and more expensive sustainable fuels.

Why Airlines Talk About More Expensive Tickets

For a passenger, climate regulation often looks abstract, but for an airline, it is a specific line item in costs. If a carrier has to buy more emission allowances or pay for them for a wider set of flights, they may partially absorb these costs themselves, or they may pass them into tariffs, fuel or environmental surcharges, changes in the availability of cheap tickets, or a revision of the route network. This is why the dispute over the EU ETS is important not only for regulators and airlines but also for people planning vacations, transatlantic trips, flights to Asia, Africa, or the Middle East from European hubs.

Reuters, citing the airlines' letter, notes that the European Commission is considering the possibility of extending the ETS to emissions from flights departing from the EU. Airlines claim that this could shift some demand to non-European hubs: for example, a passenger flying from Europe to Asia or Africa could theoretically choose a layover at an airport outside the EU if the total price there is lower. For the European Commission, the counter-argument is different: extending the ETS could ensure the same rules for some routes and not leave long international flights outside a real price signal regarding emissions.

Important: there is currently no approved decision on a new universal fee for all tourists. This is a political and regulatory discussion ahead of the July evaluation. However, the air ticket market reacts to expectations in advance. If carriers see a probability of higher climate costs, they may be more cautious in opening cheap tariffs for long-haul destinations, revise promotional offers, or shift capacity to routes with better margins.

Which Routes May Feel the Impact First

The most sensitive to the potential extension of the ETS may be long-haul flights from major European hubs: London, Paris, Frankfurt, Amsterdam, Madrid, Barcelona, Rome, Vienna, and other cities from which flights are operated to North America, Asia, Africa, and the Middle East. For travelers departing via London Heathrow, Paris Charles de Gaulle, Frankfurt, or Amsterdam Schiphol, this means that when planning a trip, it is worth comparing not only the base ticket price but also the total cost of the route with baggage, layovers, overnight connections, and ground logistics.

Those who buy long-haul flights with a long planning horizon should be especially careful: for the winter season 2026/2027, major sporting and cultural events, cruises, study trips, or family visits. If the rules change closer to 2027, this will not necessarily affect already purchased tickets, but it may influence future tariffs, the availability of the cheapest booking classes, and the price difference between direct flights and routes via alternative hubs.

What This Means for Tourists Right Now

Practical advice for the passenger is simple: there is no need to panic or urgently change routes because of the airlines' letter. But it is worth reading the price structure and tariff rules more carefully. In the European market, several factors are already simultaneously pressing on the price: high fuel costs, a shortage of new aircraft, SAF costs, climate obligations, as well as airport and navigation fees. EU ETS is just one element of this broader picture, but it could become important for long-haul international flights if its scope is indeed extended.

Those flying via major hubs find it useful to check flight status in advance and allow extra time for layovers. For this, online board pages can be used, specifically for LHR, CDG, FRA, and AMS. If the connection is overnight or very early, it is worth comparing the cost of the flight along with accommodation: sometimes a cheaper ticket via a complex hub loses its advantage after adding a hotel near the airport, transfer, and travel time. For such cases, pages with hotels near CDG, FRA, and LHR can be useful.

Why This Is Not Just a Dispute Between Airlines and Brussels

At the center of the conflict is the question of who and how should pay for the decarbonization of aviation. The EU believes that transport must contribute to climate goals, and aviation cannot remain outside economic incentives to reduce emissions. Airlines respond that excessively expensive or unilateral rules may not reduce the demand for travel, but simply shift passengers and emissions to other hubs and carriers where regulatory pressure is lower. Both positions have practical consequences: for the climate, for the competitiveness of the aviation market, and for the accessibility of travel.

For the tourism industry, this is also a signal that cheap long-haul travel from Europe will increasingly depend not only on airline promotions but also on the regulatory architecture. Tour operators, OTAs, hotels, and destinations that depend on European outbound demand will closely monitor whether costs for flights from the EU increase. If prices for long-haul destinations rise, some demand may shift to shorter trips within Europe or to routes with alternative layovers.

What to Watch for Next

The key date is July 2026, when the European Commission must complete the evaluation of CORSIA and determine whether additional actions regarding flights to and from Europe are needed. After this, a legislative process is possible, meaning changes will not become a reality overnight. But the July evaluation will show the direction: the EU may maintain the current balance between EU ETS and CORSIA or move to a stricter model for flights departing from European airports.

Passengers should watch for three things: whether carriers introduce new environmental or fuel surcharges; whether the price difference between direct European flights and routes via non-European hubs changes; whether airlines begin to reduce or revise long-haul capacity on less profitable destinations. If a trip is tied to a specific date, it is better to buy tickets with transparent change conditions, and for long layovers, check the ground part of the route — from transfer to hotel.

Conclusion

The letter from 15 airline executives is not a new rule for passengers, but it is one of the clearest signals that the price of air travel in Europe will increasingly depend on climate policy. If the EU ETS is extended to long-haul flights from Europe, airlines will almost certainly try to partially pass additional costs to the market. If the rules remain closer to the current model, pressure on tariffs will not disappear, but will be more related to fuel, SAF, and aircraft shortages and general operational costs. For travelers, the main thing is not to react to headlines impulsively, but to plan trips with the full cost of the route, a buffer of time for layovers, and a careful comparison of alternatives.