Do the advantages of taxing low-cost flights outweigh the disadvantages?

Write my answer and get scored

Taxing cheap flights is one of the few environmental policies that reaches ordinary consumers directly, which is why it provokes such strong reactions. Weighing both sides, I believe the advantages outweigh the disadvantages, provided the revenue is spent honestly. The case against should not be dismissed. Low fares democratised travel: students, migrant workers and families divided by borders fly on prices that a heavy tax could put out of reach. Aviation also accounts for a relatively small share of global emissions, so a measure that trims flying at the margins may deliver modest environmental gains while imposing real social costs on the people least able to absorb them. The case in favour is nonetheless stronger, for two reasons. Price is the one lever that reliably changes flying behaviour, because demand for leisure air travel is unusually sensitive to fare, and where short-haul prices have risen, passengers have moved to rail in significant numbers. Aviation emissions are also growing faster than almost any other source, in a sector with the fewest technical alternatives, so a tax buys time for those alternatives to mature. The decisive question is what happens to the money. A tax that disappears into general revenue is simply a charge on mobility. A tax that funds rail electrification, night services and rebates for residents of islands and remote regions turns a penalty into a substitution. In conclusion, the advantages outweigh the disadvantages conditionally. Tax the flight, protect the traveller who has no alternative, and spend the proceeds on building that alternative.