International Air Transport Association Tariff Coordinating Conference

Order 2008-4-45
OST-2006-26409

Issued April 30, 2008 | Served May 5, 2008

Order Amending Exemption | Word

In its applications, IATA states that the broadening the exemption is justified by substantially the same reasons the Department relied on in Order 2006-12-24 granting the original exemption, and would be in the public interest. First, the subject agreements concern non-U.S. fares, and such fare agreements typically are approved using expedited procedures, because they seldom raise any public interest issues involving U.S. passengers under U.S. aviation policy or U.S. antitrust laws. Second, the Flex Fares system in the additional markets will be subject to the competition laws of the EU. Third, granting the requested exemption is consistent with actions the Department has taken on other IATA agreements that do not present significant issues under U.S. antitrust laws, such as the agreements of the IATA Services and Agency Conferences.

We will grant the expanded exemptions as requested, under the same conditions.  IATA fares for travel between non-U.S. markets typically present no public interest concerns justifying our review of agreements limited to such travel. We find that an expansion of the Flex Fare mechanism to include IATA interline fares for travel in the additional non-U.S. markets to/from Europe is consistent with the public interest for the reasons stated in Order 2006-12-24.

In our earlier orders, we expanded our exemption to cover passenger and cargo agency conference resolutions that apply solely to agents within Europe and the other world areas covered by Flex Fares, because the agency resolutions, like IATA’s tariff coordination activities, are fully subject to the competition laws of the EU and other jurisdictions and are more properly the concern of those authorities.  With the widespread expansion of Flex Fares to additional markets it would be anomalous to exempt the agency resolutions only for the countries covered by IATA’s instant applications, leaving a shrinking number of markets subject to the Department’s filing and approval requirements.  In addition, the present scope of our exemptions of agency resolutions has engendered some confusion.  For example, a number of pending agency agreements include resolutions applicable only in geographic areas we have already exempted, and those resolutions should not have been filed.  For these reasons we will grant an exemption for the resolutions of IATA’s passenger and cargo agency conferences on a worldwide basis.

By: Michael Reynolds

Order 2008-4-45
OST-2006-26409

Issued April 30, 2008 | Served May 5, 2008 | Corrected May 15, 2008

Order Amending Exemption - Corrected Copy

In its applications, IATA states that the broadening the exemption is justified by substantially the same reasons the Department relied on in Order 2006-12-24 granting the original exemption, and would be in the public interest. First, the subject agreements concern non-U.S. fares, and such fare agreements typically are approved using expedited procedures, because they seldom raise any public interest issues involving U.S. passengers under U.S. aviation policy or U.S. antitrust laws. Second, the Flex Fares system in the additional markets will be subject to the competition laws of the EU. Third, granting the requested exemption is consistent with actions the Department has taken on other IATA agreements that do not present significant issues under U.S. antitrust laws, such as the agreements of the IATA Services and Agency Conferences.

We will grant the expanded exemptions as requested, under the same conditions. IATA fares for travel between non-U.S. markets typically present no public interest concerns justifying our review of agreements limited to such travel. We find that an expansion of the Flex Fare mechanism to include IATA interline fares for travel in the additional non-U.S. markets to/from Europe is consistent with the public interest for the reasons stated in Order 2006-12-24.

In our earlier orders, we expanded our exemption to cover passenger and cargo agency conference resolutions that apply solely to agents within Europe and the other world areas covered by Flex Fares, because the agency resolutions, like IATA’s tariff coordination activities, are fully subject to the competition laws of the EU and other jurisdictions and are more properly the concern of those authorities. With the widespread expansion of Flex Fares to additional markets it would be anomalous to exempt the agency resolutions only for the countries covered by IATA’s instant applications, leaving a shrinking number of markets subject to the Department’s filing and approval requirements. In addition, the present scope of our exemptions of agency resolutions has engendered some confusion. For example, a number of pending agency agreements include resolutions applicable only in geographic areas we have already exempted, and those resolutions should not have been filed. For these reasons we will grant an exemption for the resolutions of IATA’s passenger and cargo agency conferences on a worldwide basis.

By: Michael Reynolds