business

Sky high: Why foreign carriers pay more to land in Japan

22 Comments
By Gavin Blair for EURObiZ Japan

On one global ranking chart, Haneda, Narita and Kansai airports occupy the top three spots. Unfortunately for three of Japan’s international airports, this is not for passenger satisfaction or facilities, but for the highest landing and parking fees which airlines pay for their planes. Some reductions have been announced in recent years, but most of these are targeted at the new low cost carriers (LCCs), which the government has been trying to attract to Japanese airports, leaving established operators still forking out significantly more than they do at other major hubs.

Despite the authorities pledging to make Tokyo more accessible in the run-up to the 2020 Olympic and Paralympic Games, European airlines hold out little hope for meaningful reductions in the high fees. Those in the industry believe there is a danger of Japanese airports continuing to lose status in the face of stiff competition from major Asian hubs — Hong Kong, Singapore and Seoul’s Incheon — with lower fees. Many believe they are also subsidising both the new LCCs and unprofitable local airports through the fee system, which is overseen by the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism (MLIT).

The high landing fees at Narita, where a new dedicated LCC third terminal opened in April, are also due to the extensive perimeter security (a legacy of the battles that occurred with local residents when the airport was first constructed), says Swiss Air Japan country manager Noburo Okabe. Albeit the passport checkpoint on vehicles entering the airport — long criticised as meaningless, wasteful and time-consuming — finally ended earlier this year, he adds. Another factor, affecting all domestic airports, is the relatively high wages in Japan compared to countries like South Korea.

“We also assume the government raises money from the landing fees to subsidise loss-making regional airports, though no official will say that openly,” suggests Okabe.

One manager at a European airline, who asked not to be identified, suggested that, while the fees do heavily burden established carriers at the major airports, passengers pay in other ways elsewhere.

“The landing fees are said to be highest in the world. However, many other international airports charge very high airport taxes to customers. In Japan, the majority of the cost is paid by the airline,” said the manager, while acknowledging that much of those costs are passed along to passengers in the end.

The central government manages 27 of Japan’s 100 airports via the MLIT, which has now adopted an official policy of reducing landing fees, according to Geoffrey Tudor, a senior analyst at Japan Aviation Management Research.

“The announcement from Narita in February that it would be reducing landing fees for new services at airlines already using the airport is to compete with Asian hubs, especially Incheon and Hong Kong, but also with Haneda,” says Tudor. “However, the fact that the government effectively owns both of Tokyo’s main airports can only be a barrier to real competition between the two.”

The fee cuts are part of reforms being adopted as a step toward privatisation, according to Tudor, “This will involve the creation of a new business which can call the shots on landing fees. At the moment, those fees are not based on market principles.”

Along with control of the allocation of landing slots, high landing fees were a “form of protection for Japanese airlines, though one they can no longer rely on,” says Tudor.

The issue of landing slots is another long-term gripe among foreign airlines in Japan, though some note the country is hardly unique in that respect.

“ANA [All Nippon Airways] and JAL [Japan Airlines] do historically get the best slots, but that is something that happens with national carriers all over the world,” says Swiss Air’s Okabe.

For the time being, European airlines appear to have little choice but to continue lobbying for more prime slots and pay the high fees, or shift more of their operations out of Japan.

“Narita is the end of the line for us; and we’ve been here for 65 years, so our commitment to Japan is long term,” says Leif Nilsson manager for Asia and Pacific at Scandinavian Airlines (SAS). “A lot of the US airlines do fly on to other destinations in Asia, and Seoul’s Incheon and Hong Kong have lower fees; Japan needs to be careful about this.”

For SAS, “We rotate aircraft as soon as possible, so we don’t get charged the high parking fees,” continues Nilsson. “If you have a flight arriving in the middle of the night, that can lead to six to eight hours of parking fees, which is expensive.”

Despite its lengthy presence in Japan, SAS has not yet been granted any slots at Haneda, nor has its Swiss counterpart or a number of other European operators. Although most international carriers are keen to expand their presence at Haneda, with its much closer proximity to central Tokyo than Chiba’s Narita, it is the latter that is scheduled to have its facilities upgraded before the Olympics, according to Nilsson. In addition, he says the government has not yet announced any plans for a much-needed rapid transport link between Tokyo’s two main airports.

Swiss Air’s Okabe is not expecting any landing fee reductions in the lead-up to the 2020 Olympics, though he is at least hopeful for an expansion of the number of daytime slots at Haneda.

“In order to do that, they have to change flight paths; and with that there is the issue of noise, which the government has to settle with residents,” he says.

© Japan Today

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.


22 Comments
Login to comment

So just how much is the landing fee for one airplane coming into these airports?

6 ( +9 / -3 )

So just how much is the landing fee for one airplane coming into these airports?

That's what I wanted to know as well. What percentage difference are we talking about for a standard 777-200 landing at Narita as opposed to London. I did find some data on another article from 2013.

"The largest decrease will be enjoyed by the newest and quietest aircraft. The Boeing 777-200 will be the recipient of the largest rate cut, dropping by around half from 455,000 yen to 214,000 yen per landing, TBS reported." http://www.japantoday.com/category/business/view/narita-airport-cuts-landing-fees-to-increase-competitiveness

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Some figures would have been useful to learn,otherwise it was an article about nothing new concerning the landing charge.

8 ( +8 / -0 )

In other news, one group of people have to do a lot more than another group of people in order to enjoy the same benefit. -KYODO

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Well at least give us some numbers! I mean seriously...

6 ( +6 / -0 )

This is the full landing fee list:

Narita: 95万 Kansai: 83万 Haneda: 77万 Chubu: 66万 JFK: 44万 Paris: 34万 Hong Kong: 32万 Changi: 22万 London: 7万

8 ( +8 / -0 )

Just charge an equal reciprocal fee for flights departing an airport and landing at yours.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

More "omotenashi" for you. Have to go a long way to Narita just to get a non-stop on certain international routes. Nice clean and modern airports but many underlying negatives.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Ridiculous fees. Thanks for posting the fees that were not included in the article. So what might an airline like United have to pay compared to ANA? Does anyone have that information? Thanks!

1 ( +1 / -0 )

papigiulio, Wow ,for the people who don't really care about Japanese math what is that Narita 95 in English ??

1 ( +1 / -0 )

95 万 (man) 950000 yen. use xe.com to change to your preferred currency.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

It's passengers who ultimately pay these fees, but the landing fee is just one of many taxes, fees and levies applied to passengers. A fair comparison would include all of these charges. For example, although the landing fee at Heathrow is much lower than at Japanese airports, the British government levies an extortionate air passenger duty which more than makes up the difference.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

So what might an airline like United have to pay compared to ANA?

The headline is misleading: foreign carriers pay more to land in Japan only compared with other airports, not compared with domestic airlines. Though still a problem, the distinction is important.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Charge the same fees for Japanese carriers at overseas airports that are charged in Japan. JAL, ANA et.al. can then pass on the cost increase to their customers.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

They should get a Nobel for their mastery in living by subterfuge.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

OMG! It's going to drop to $6 per passenger in a 777. The horror!

Since Narita will lose status as a hub, I'll start flying into Singapore, rent a car and drive to Japan to save that $6.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

"In Japan, the majority of the cost is paid by the airline,” said the manager, while acknowledging that much of those costs are passed along to passengers in the end."

LOVE this part! You hear this kind of thing all the time in Japan when asking why certain things cost so much. I remember a few years back before Kansai built the second runway at the airport and they did a survey of International carriers asking if they thought it was a good idea and if they would be willing to land there with increased costs. All said it was unnecessary and a bad idea, and that they did not think the increase costs for landing justified any benefits, with some saying they would cut flights to KIX, and the operators said, "We don't need foreign input," and built it anyway. Costs were jacked up, and many carriers stopped direct flights or flights altogether, and the airport is now complaining and asking why.

I also recall that there are a number of politicians who have vowed to make Haneda "the hub of Asia", since they are pretty miffed about that status going to South Korea, and the leader of the initiative (Maehara?) was born in the area (same as the Kobe mayor building a massive airport there to show off her home city). Sorry, guys, but you'll never be even in competition if you have costs more than 10 times a major European city!

4 ( +4 / -0 )

"In addition, he says the government has not yet announced any plans for a much-needed rapid transport link between Tokyo’s two main airports." It takes 1.5 hpurs on the Keikyu, Asakusa and Kesei line through train with no transfers currently. Nilsson doesn't know what he is talking about! Furthermore how many people need to move between the both airports on a regular basis. New York, LA, Chicago, London and other cities major airports aren't connected directly without having to transfer on public transit!!!!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Can anyone clarify if this was the reason why Virgin stopped it's London to Narita flight?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

All I know is that when I fly with KLM my flight to Japan is around £100 to £150 more expensive than the return flight.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Clueless: The Virgin London-Narita flight was stopped because Delta (which owns half of Virgin) wanted to use the Heathrow slots to fly to the US.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

So, how can anybody explain why when taking a connecting flight that the cost is less than a direct flight?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites