The court carries out the airlines transparency from Biden, the supervisor

A base that would require The largest airlines in the country To reveal any service fees – such as additional luggage fees or reservation change fees – was banned by the Federal Appeal Court, threatening its chances of arrival.

The Ministry of Transport (DOT), which argued that the travelers were excessive to pay their prices due to the so -called “unwanted fees”, in a report that the base would have provided consumers more than $ 500 million annually. On the contrary, the country’s largest airline’s commercial group claimed that there is nothing in the results of the department that has proven that the base would help consumers, so that it will interfere with the efforts of airlines to meet customer needs.

The United States’ Appeal Court for the Fifth Circuit did not stop any of the controversy. Instead, she ruled that the point “failed to completely comply with the requirements” under the Administrative Procedures Law, which governs the process in which federal agencies developed and issued regulations. The court still supports the administration’s right to impose such rules. Instead, it sent the issue to the point so that the airlines and others can comment on the costs of the costs that the administration estimated the passengers by making certain fees more transparent.

Under the Biden Administration Base, airlines will be asked to include any fees associated with the purchase of a ticket, known in this industry as “auxiliary fees”. Dot – led by Pete Buttigieg – spent years in fighting for this rule, claiming that airlines were wandering in billions of dollars in unexpected luggage fees, sitting, change and cancellation. During the Buttigieg period, DOT issued more than $ 164 million of penalties against airlines for consumer protection violations.

The expert tells the responsibility for FAA to American airlines, a helicopter crashes: “Bad Administration” We are at risk “

The airlines of America, the commercial group that represents companies of major American companies such as US Airways, Jetblue and Alaska Airlines, were pleased with the ruling, saying that the court admitted that the administration “relied on information that was not granted to the public and airlines an opportunity to evaluate or comment on.”

The group argued that the legal suspension had revealed that the base “will interfere with the efforts of long airlines to meet the needs of customers.” He also said that transport companies are investing in web sites and easy -to -use applications that provide transparent prices and that “this rule embodies the organizational transgression that will confuse consumers who will immerse the information that would only complicate the purchase.”

Erane Watei, Consumer Protection Director of the US Consumer Union, said this was not a “complete victory” of the aviation industry.

“What they were looking for actually was to completely retreat from the authority of the point to issue rules at all based on an unfair and deceitful behavior,” Weati said. And the fifth circle actually painted the line and said: “No, we will not go to this extent. “

While taking court actions may end up until it is an incentive to kill the base, it is important to note that The court did not prevent the base permanently.

This means that the current administration can implement a similar base, as long as the management follows the appropriate procedure. However, Witte is not sure that this happens.

“This issue will be a priority for President Donald Trump, who launched a Initiative to cancel the enormous restrictions When he takes office. Born does not support this step, saying that “the base has always been unnecessary red tape.” He also agreed with airlines that the base will not only mix passengers.

Flight of the budget stops in emergency situations after the collapse of the pilot: “rough and frightening”

“Most passengers are aware of enough on reservation trips and know that you can pay additional fees for services such as checking bags or having trips that you can cancel at any time,” he said. “The airlines demanding the total prices of all these services in advance will be confused for customers and harm to competition by distorting low -cost travel opportunities on budget airlines.”

Bill McGgy, an older colleague in the US Economic Freedom Project, criticized the power of the argument that this would prove consumers, describing him as one of the “weakest” arguments he seen at all. McGE has argued that if airlines managed to implement the fees quickly – sometimes overnight – they should also be able to inform customers with them.

“There is a shock of stickers in airlines … this is what is going on around it,” McCgy said. “It is a very simple hypothesis.

Witi also asked about the reaction of airlines, given that the base did not talk about a comprehensive ban on unwanted fees.

She said, “The airlines were not even prohibited. I think voters may have been supporting this type of base.” “All the rule did is, tell people, tell them in advance, and it is easy for them to know how much they can fly from A to B and bring a bag.”

Get Fox Business on the Go by clicking here

McGe still considered the ruling a “great victory” as some people were concerned that “the court would say that the point did not enjoy the authority to do so in the first place.”