Airport fees up 53% — TDRI questions transparency of AOT hike

Airports of Thailand Plc, or AOT, is preparing to raise the passenger service charge for outbound international travellers at six major airports by 53%, prompting the Thailand Development Research Institute to question the transparency of the move.

The new passenger service charge, or PSC, will rise from 730 baht to 1,120 baht for passengers departing Thailand on international flights from six AOT-operated airports: Suvarnabhumi, Don Mueang, Chiang Mai, Phuket, Hat Yai and Chiang Rai. The increase will take effect on June 20, 2026, and will be included in airfares.

TDRI recently published an article titled “Airport fee hike: questions over transparency”, written by Dr Sumet Ongkittikul and Kittiya Yisthanichakul from its transport and logistics policy research team.

The article said international travel from Thailand would become more expensive after the Civil Aviation Board approved AOT’s request to raise the international PSC at the six airports.

The new increase marks the largest adjustment in the past decade. The PSC was previously raised from 500 baht to 700 baht in 2007, before being lifted again to 730 baht in 2024 to support automated passenger service systems.

At present, Thailand’s PSC rates vary depending on the airport operator and type of journey. Domestic charges are lower than international charges, and the latest increase will not affect domestic airfares.

AOT has said the increase is needed to cover operating costs and support future service improvements at the six airports. However, TDRI said there has not yet been a clear public explanation of the additional costs or how the higher charge is linked to future airport development plans.

The researchers noted that AOT’s financial position has remained strong over the past 10 years. Although the company was hit by Covid-19, it has since recovered, with operating profit reaching 25.86 billion baht in 2025.

When performance is assessed by airport, major airports such as Suvarnabhumi, Don Mueang, Phuket and Chiang Mai generated operating profits, while Hat Yai and Chiang Rai remained loss-making due to their higher share of domestic flights.

TDRI said this suggests domestic PSC rates may not fully reflect actual costs, leading to losses at some airports. Airports with a higher share of international flights receive higher PSC revenue and may be helping offset losses at airports with weaker performance.

Global comparison raises questions for Thailand

TDRI said international examples show that airport fee structures often explain the reasons behind pricing more clearly.

In Europe, airports may set different charges where service costs differ. Airports under Aéroports de Paris in France, for example, charge lower passenger fees for domestic or Schengen-area flights, while non-Schengen and international flights are charged at rates more than twice as high due to different service costs.

Singapore’s Changi Airport also sets passenger charges based on how the money will be used. TDRI said 17% of passenger fees collected there is allocated for future airport development.

Airports around the world operate under different models, including state-run systems and privately managed airports. But because airports are monopoly businesses requiring heavy investment and cannot easily be duplicated, effective regulation is essential to control prices, service quality and investment efficiency.

Without clear oversight, airport operators may have opportunities to set excessive prices or make inefficient investments, TDRI said.

In the United Kingdom, Heathrow Airport charges are regulated under a price-cap system set by the Civil Aviation Authority, which reviews the framework every five years. The review considers passenger forecasts, operating costs, efficient cost levels, investment plans, project progress, financial factors, asset bases and service-quality indicators such as passenger waiting times and cleanliness.

The UK regulator also holds stakeholder consultations and publishes relevant reports for the public.

Australia uses a more flexible model, allowing airports to negotiate prices with airlines. However, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission continuously monitors and publishes airport performance, including aviation and commercial revenue, operating margins, historical charges, facility adequacy and passenger processing efficiency.

Although the Australian regulator does not directly control prices, TDRI said public monitoring and reporting help encourage airports to set charges more reasonably.

TDRI calls for clearer disclosure

TDRI said Thailand faces a particular regulatory challenge because AOT is both a state enterprise, with the Finance Ministry holding a 70% stake, and a listed company. This creates differing incentives between generating returns for shareholders and setting appropriate fees for airport users.

Although AOT has submitted information on the PSC adjustment to the Civil Aviation Authority of Thailand and held stakeholder consultations in line with a Civil Aviation Board resolution, TDRI said the details behind the increase have not been clearly disclosed to the public.

This differs from practices in the UK, where detailed information is made public as part of the regulatory process.

TDRI added that if private airport operators seek similar fee increases in the future, the government will need clear criteria and a transparent mechanism for assessing such requests.

The institute said the current PSC increase still has limitations in terms of public disclosure when compared with international practices. As a result, the rationale behind the adjustment may not be clear enough for airport users.

TDRI warned that if airport fee regulation lacks transparency, the consequences could affect both foreign tourists and domestic travellers, while also undermining confidence in Thailand’s regulatory system.