Breaking up may be hard to do, but it appears especially tough for the government and the airline industry.
Since deregulating the industry a quarter-century ago, the federal government has struggled to map out a consistent approach for handling it. Should it let market forces dominate, even if that means a decline in the number of flights and an increase in fares as airlines fail or consolidate? Should it take a role in the industry's usually fractious labor negotiations? Should it let foreign investors own controlling interests in domestic airlines?
These questions have taken on added urgency in the last few months as airlines have sought wage and benefit concessions from their employees and made cutbacks in an effort to reduce their costs. Two major airlines, United and US Airways, sought bankruptcy protection and a third, American, is still struggling to avoid it. Arguing that assistance was needed to avoid financial disaster, the industry persuaded the government to come up with a US$3.8 billion aid package.
What has contributed to the crippling of the airlines is the inability of the government and the industry, like heartbroken lovers, to let go of each other, according to economists, executives and lawmakers.
Few agree on what the government's policy should be, but they generally contend that officials should take a more sanguine view toward market forces. Government policy should remain consistent through downturns and boom years, they say, and avoid treating companies differently, whether they are reaping profits or in danger of collapsing.
"It is largely start and stop right now," said Representative James Oberstar, who is the minority ranking member on the House Transportation Committee.
Clifford Winston, an economist at the Brookings Institution who studies the industry, said that "the idea would be these policies would be harmonized along with what deregulation was expected to do; the fundamental criticism is that government has failed to do that."
The government's "residual presence" in the industry, he added, has created "a mindset that you can use the government for your own purposes" and "has diverted the carriers' attentions from working out their problems themselves."
Last month, US President George W. Bush approved, as part of the supplemental spending budget for the war in Iraq, the US$3.8 billion in aid, with US$500 million of that coming in the form of a suspension of security taxes for four months ending in September. The Transportation Security Administration is now working to split that money among 71 airlines by May 16. But the debate over how much aid to hand out -- and whether to give any at all -- has been heated and could intensify as the government tries to figure out what to do about the taxes after September.
The industry already received one aid package, when Congress approved US$15 billion in cash and loan guarantees after the Sept. 11 attacks in 2001. Then, in the last six months, it began to look as if federal officials were slowly coming around to adopting a liberalized attitude toward the airlines. Last December, they denied United Airlines a US$1.8 billion loan guarantee, saying United had to repair its broken business model. On March 31, the Transportation Department approved a marketing partnership between Delta Air Lines, Northwest Airlines and Continental Airlines, after easing stringent conditions it had initially required for the partnership.
But the US$3.8 billion in aid raises questions of whether the government is distorting market forces in an industry that experts say needs a good shaking out. Of the total package, US$2.3 billion is partial reimbursement for security-related taxes and costs incurred by the industry after the Sept. 11 attacks -- most of which came from a new US$2.50-a-leg tax that passengers paid, not the carriers. The airlines argue, though, that that tax imposition made it harder for them to raise ticket prices.
"It is Congress' responsibility post Sept. 11 to assume the security costs as a part of national defense," said Jim May, chief executive of the Air Transport Association, the industry's main trade group.
May said the government should permanently rescind the security taxes even after the suspension period ends.
But many critics of the tax relief say the airlines should contribute something to airport security costs. First, they say, it is spurious to argue that the protection of airlines is a national defense issue because many other industries -- trucking, arms manufacturing and so on -- could just as easily argue their security measures should be financed by taxpayers to keep their products away from terrorists.
Second, critics say terrorism will continue to be a fact of life in commercial aviation, and costs related to it should now be considered part of doing business, just like paying to have planes tuned up.
"They have to address those new risks and those new requirements in order to service their customers," said Kevin Mitchell, president of the Business Travel Coalition, an advocacy group for business travelers. "That seems to be an identifiable new part of the environment. Why are taxpayers funding that?"
Oberstar was among the first lawmakers to propose an aid package for the airlines to alleviate effects from the US-led invasion of Iraq, but he did not support the suspension of security taxes.
"That's puzzling to me how that worked out," he said, adding that he thinks passengers are willing to pay the equivalent of a latte at Starbucks on each leg of a flight to support security.
Winston, the economist at the Brookings Institution, said the government's role in security was another example of it getting "involved in areas where it doesn't have expertise." Instead, he said, airports should oversee security - they have more expertise than either the government or the airlines, and they would have more market-driven incentive than the airlines to keep the premises safe.
There are certain regulations that executives and industry analysts say are hampering the financial health of the airlines. They point to the Railway Labor Act, which they argue leads to prolonged negotiations that give the unions too much leverage. But this is a politically divisive issue, and there is no clear-cut opinion on it among experts. Few of them expect the act to be overhauled anytime soon.
Many people in the industry agree, though, that the government should lift limits on foreign investment in domestic airlines. The law prevents foreign investors from owning more than 25 percent of the voting stock of an airline or 49 percent of total equity. Those restrictions originated in an era when federal officials were more concerned about national security issues related to foreign investment, experts say.
"You can't allow people not to buy into US airlines that operate subject to US labor laws," said Michael Levine, a former airline executive who is now a professor at Yale Law School. "I don't see any reason why we should prevent them."
Taiwan Transport and Storage Corp (TTS, 台灣通運倉儲) yesterday unveiled its first electric tractor unit — manufactured by Volvo Trucks — in a ceremony in Taipei, and said the unit would soon be used to transport cement produced by Taiwan Cement Corp (TCC, 台灣水泥). Both TTS and TCC belong to TCC International Holdings Ltd (台泥國際集團). With the electric tractor unit, the Taipei-based cement firm would become the first in Taiwan to use electric vehicles to transport construction materials. TTS chairman Koo Kung-yi (辜公怡), Volvo Trucks vice president of sales and marketing Johan Selven, TCC president Roman Cheng (程耀輝) and Taikoo Motors Group
Among the rows of vibrators, rubber torsos and leather harnesses at a Chinese sex toys exhibition in Shanghai this weekend, the beginnings of an artificial intelligence (AI)-driven shift in the industry quietly pulsed. China manufactures about 70 percent of the world’s sex toys, most of it the “hardware” on display at the fair — whether that be technicolor tentacled dildos or hyper-realistic personalized silicone dolls. Yet smart toys have been rising in popularity for some time. Many major European and US brands already offer tech-enhanced products that can enable long-distance love, monitor well-being and even bring people one step closer to
RECORD-BREAKING: TSMC’s net profit last quarter beat market expectations by expanding 8.9% and it was the best first-quarter profit in the chipmaker’s history Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC, 台積電), which counts Nvidia Corp as a key customer, yesterday said that artificial intelligence (AI) server chip revenue is set to more than double this year from last year amid rising demand. The chipmaker expects the growth momentum to continue in the next five years with an annual compound growth rate of 50 percent, TSMC chief executive officer C.C. Wei (魏哲家) told investors yesterday. By 2028, AI chips’ contribution to revenue would climb to about 20 percent from a percentage in the low teens, Wei said. “Almost all the AI innovators are working with TSMC to address the
Malaysia’s leader yesterday announced plans to build a massive semiconductor design park, aiming to boost the Southeast Asian nation’s role in the global chip industry. A prominent player in the semiconductor industry for decades, Malaysia accounts for an estimated 13 percent of global back-end manufacturing, according to German tech giant Bosch. Now it wants to go beyond production and emerge as a chip design powerhouse too, Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim said. “I am pleased to announce the largest IC (integrated circuit) Design Park in Southeast Asia, that will house world-class anchor tenants and collaborate with global companies such as Arm [Holdings PLC],”