Ancillary Fees Archives - Travel Tech Association

On Wednesday, September 20th, the Travel Technology Association (Travel Tech) submitted supplemental comments in response to supplemental comments by Airlines for America (A4A) regarding the U.S. Department of Transportation’s (DOT) proposed “Enhancing Transparency of Airline Ancillary Service Fees” rulemaking. In these comments, Travel Tech refutes A4A’s assertion that the DOT rulemaking is unnecessary.

“Travel Tech supports the Department’s rulemaking as it has rightly determined that a problem exists for consumers,” said Laura Chadwick, President and CEO, in the comments. “While fees for ancillary services aren’t mandatory, many passengers need to purchase these services. As such, consumers ought to have the ability to know and compare the true cost of their air travel before they purchase it, which includes these critical ancillary fees.”

Furthermore, in response to A4A’s claim that “a healthy market exists today,” Chadwick responds,

“Travel Tech agrees with A4A that contracts between Global Distribution Systems and airlines that include ancillaries are a positive development, but progress has been slow and incomplete and has been happening in the shadow of DOT’s repeated efforts to address the lack of pricing transparency caused by airline unbundling. Travel Tech respectfully urges that now is the time for the Department to act and to effectively address this issue.”

Travel Tech continues to advocate in support of the DOT’s proposed rule, as modified to ensure that all intermediaries who provide fare and schedule data to online ticket and travel agents receive ancillary information from airlines. Doing so will ensure consumers have transparency into the full cost of an airline ticket and won’t be surprised by hidden critical ancillary fees.

The Travel Technology Association (Travel Tech) empowers traveler choice by advocating for public policy that promotes marketplace transparency and competition. Travel Tech represents the leading innovators in travel technology, including online travel agencies, metasearch engines, short-term rental platforms, global distribution systems, and travel management companies.

To schedule an interview with a Travel Tech spokesperson, contact Bradford Williamson of Glen Echo Group at 202.870.3234 or bwilliamson@glenechogroup.com.

Inclusion of Travel Technology Industry Priorities Support Travelers and Industry Members

On Thursday, July 20th, the Travel Technology Association (Travel Tech), the voice of the travel technology industry and consistent advocate for public policy that supports a competitive and transparent marketplace, praised legislators for advancing H.R. 3935, the Securing Growth and Robust Leadership in American Aviation Act through the U.S. House of Representatives.

“We are also especially grateful to Rep. Dina Titus and Rep. Gus Bilirakis, chairs of the House Travel & Tourism Caucus, along with Reps. John Garamendi, Marco Molinaro, and Susan Brownley for introducing H.R. 3780, the ACPAC Modernization Act,” said Chadwick. “Due to Rep. Titus’s leadership, ticket agents are one step closer to being able to offer their unique expertise on improving airline customer service.”

H.R. 3780, the ACPAC Modernization Act, was merged into the House-passed FAA Reauthorization bill (H.R. 3935). It will add a ticket agent representative to the U.S. Department of Transportation’s (DOT) Aviation Consumer Protection Advisory Committee (ACPAC).

Prior to the House vote on H.R. 3935, Travel Tech sent a letter to Congress to express its support for the legislation. Travel Tech’s letter, however, noted its opposition to the inclusion of Section 701 of the bill, which repeals the DOT’s long-standing Full Fare Advertising Rule. This rule requires that the entire price for airfare, including taxes and fees, be disclosed to consumers in the first instance following an itinerary search.

Laura Chadwick, Travel Tech’s President & CEO, argued that “Its repeal will undermine consumers’ ability to effectively comparison shop and choose the best travel option to meet their needs and budget.”

To schedule an interview with a Travel Tech spokesperson, contact Dan Rene of kglobal at 202-329-8357 or daniel.rene@kglobal.com.

At the recent U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) hearing on its proposed “Enhancing Transparency of Airline Ancillary Service Fees” regulation, Laura Chadwick, Travel Tech President and CEO, submitted a coalition letter signed by U.S. Travel, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the American Society of Travel Advisors (ASTA), the Global Business Travel Association (GBTA), Hopper, and Sabre to express their shared concerns about the proposed rule’s first-page search results requirement. Chadwick noted during her testimony that this letter demonstrates “in one document the many stakeholders who take issue with this part of the proposed rule.” Recently, the Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA) joined this letter as a signatory as well.

Across their written comments to the Department, these organizations detailed how the mandatory inclusion of ancillary fee information on the first-page of search results would negatively impact consumers. In the letter submitted by Chadwick, they collectively ask the Department to allow for flexibility and innovation in how ancillary fee information is presented to consumers so long as it is early in the purchase process.

The Travel Technology Association (Travel Tech) submitted supplemental comments regarding the U.S. Department of Transportation’s (DOT) proposed “Enhancing Transparency of Airline Ancillary Service Fees” rulemaking. In these comments, Travel Tech provided its response to the recommendations made by the Aviation Consumer Protection Advisory Committee and recent survey findings cited by Laura Chadwick, Travel Tech President & CEO, during the Department’s recent hearing on the proposed rule.

In its supplemental filing, Travel Tech responded to ACPAC’s recommendations regarding the DOT’s proposed rules on ancillary fees; GDS access to ancillary fee information; change and cancellation rules; data sharing; and proposed compliance timeline. You can read Travel Tech’s supplemental filing here.

“Travel Tech welcomes every opportunity to share our knowledge about empowering traveler choice in written comments, presentations, meetings, testifying, and beyond,” said Chadwick. “Our member companies are the foremost experts in supporting millions of consumers every year in their travel planning. The input we provide is not only effective but technically feasible too. It will lead to better travel experiences for all.”

The DOT’s Aviation Consumer Protection Advisory Committee (“ACPAC”) convened on January 12, 2023, to make recommendations on the Department’s “Enhancing Transparency of Airline Ancillary Service Fees” rulemaking. Membership of ACPAC is limited by law to four representatives: an air carrier representative; an airport operator; a law enforcement officer; and a consumer advocate.

Travel Tech continues to advocate that a Ticket Agent representative be added to the membership of ACPAC. Doing so will expand the advisory committee’s industry knowledge base and improve the quality of its recommendations. In a recent white paper on its 2023 FAA Reauthorization priorities, Travel Tech advocates that Congress amend the law governing ACPAC membership.

“New ideas and perspectives are needed right now to improve airline travel for consumers. Ticket agents, which include online ticket agents and metasearch engines represented by Travel Tech, can offer ACPAC deep technical expertise and long-standing commitment to innovation,” said Chadwick.

The Travel Technology Association (Travel Tech) empowers traveler choice by advocating for public policy that promotes marketplace transparency and competition. Travel Tech represents the leading innovators in travel technology, including global distribution systems, online travel agencies, metasearch companies, travel management companies, and short-term rental platforms.

To schedule an interview with a Travel Tech spokesperson, contact Dan Rene of kglobal at 202-329-8357 or daniel.rene@kglobal.com

The hearing, separately petitioned for by both Travel Tech and Airlines for America, focused entirely on the proposed rule’s requirement that critical ancillary fees must be shown on the first page of search results alongside fare and schedule information. Today, additional optional services, including checked bags, specific seat selection, and carry-on bags, are presented to consumers early in the flight search process.

“Travel Tech firmly believes that our member companies are best positioned to innovate and determine how ancillary fee information should be presented to consumers,” stated Chadwick. “In addition to our written comments and those of our members, we pursued this hearing because we are concerned about the deep impact this proposed first-page search results requirement would have on consumers. This is especially true for those shopping on travel comparison sites that display hundreds of flight combinations across a multitude of different airlines.”

In its rationale for the proposed first-page search results requirement, the DOT cited that “because most passengers travel once per year or less, they may not be aware of certain ancillary service fees, such as those related to seat selection.” However, in an online survey commissioned by Travel Tech of over 1,000 U.S. American adult consumers from March 24-26, it was found that:

Chadwick, in her testimony, observed that, “Consumers know that critical ancillary fees are now a part of travel – they expect these fees and know that they are optional services and not required. There are no surprises here. As such, there is no need to overload the first-page search results with the extra information this rule would require.”

Hearing witnesses from Travel Tech member companies Amadeus, Priceline (as part of Booking Holdings), and Skyscanner shared their expertise with the DOT, testifying to the technical infeasibility of the proposed first-page search results requirement. Their testimony, along with other witnesses, can be accessed here.

The Travel Technology Association (Travel Tech) empowers traveler choice by advocating for public policy that promotes marketplace transparency and competition. Travel Tech represents the leading innovators in travel technology, including global distribution systems, online travel agencies, metasearch companies, travel management companies, and short-term rental platforms.

To schedule an interview with a Travel Tech spokesperson, contact Dan Rene of kglobal at 202-329-8357 or daniel.rene@kglobal.com.

March 30, 2023 – Public Hearing – U.S. Department of Transportation’s Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Enhancing Transparency of Airline Ancillary Service Fees

Whether Consumers Are or Are Likely To Be Substantially Injured or Misled by Airlines’ Current Disclosures of Ancillary Service Fees

I am Laura Chadwick, president and CEO of the Travel Technology Association, also known as “Travel Tech.” Our mission is to empower traveler choice. To do so, we bring together travel innovators to promote transparency and competition through education and advocacy. Our members include online ticket agents, metasearch engines, global distribution systems, travel management companies, and short-term rental platforms. I am proud to be a witness today alongside member companies Priceline, as part of Booking Holdings, Skyscanner, and Amadeus.

Thank you to the Department for granting Travel Tech’s petition for this hearing to discuss the proposed “Enhancing Transparency of Airline Ancillary Service Fees” rule, specifically regarding its requirement that critical ancillary fees must be shown on the first page of search results. We took this extra step of filing this hearing petition because we strongly hold that Travel Tech member companies are best positioned to determine how ancillary fee information should be presented to consumers. You will hear from three experts from Travel Tech member companies later today who testify to the intense efforts that their companies pursue to serve the needs of their consumers.

Travel Tech, as it did in 2014, supports this rulemaking. Advocating for transparency for consumers is who we are and what we do. It’s in our member companies’ DNA – transparency was a driving force behind the founding of their companies years ago to support consumers.

But before we can address issues relating to how critical ancillary fees can and should be presented to consumers, we must discuss the critical ancillary fee data itself. This is so important because the transparency of ancillary fee data is impossible without permanent access to the data in the first place.

Travel Tech and our member companies strongly agree with the Department’s finding that consumers are or are likely to be substantially injured or misled by airlines’ current disclosure of ancillary service fees. And we likewise agree with the DOT’s proposed requirement that critical ancillary fee data must be provided by airlines. It is indeed unfair and deceptive that consumers purchasing their tickets through the indirect channel do not have guaranteed access to critical ancillary fee information. Ticket agents, however, cannot provide to consumers what ticket agents do not themselves have – that is, the fee data itself.

Now, to whom critical ancillary fee data is provided is a different story. As we extensively detail in Travel Tech’s written comments, we strongly believe the Department must alter its proposed rule and require airlines to provide critical ancillary fee data to all intermediaries the airlines use to distribute their schedule and fare information. This includes providing the ancillary fee data to global distribution systems.

Travel agents of all sizes greatly rely on Global Distribution Systems to provide schedule and fare information from across the 400 airlines operating around the world. It’s hard to overstate how essential GDSs are in facilitating comparison shopping on Travel Tech members’ consumer-facing sites.

Allowing airlines to skip over GDSs and provide the ancillary fee data directly to ticket agents – as the proposed rule currently states – will have a tremendous impact on a ticket agent’s ability not only to digest but also then display critical ancillary fee information, much less so on the first page of search results. Ticket agents today have no existing infrastructure whatsoever to match ancillary fee data with the schedule and fare data provided to them by the GDSs. It will take years of work and massive investments to build these duplicative capabilities and not the six months that the Department has proposed. The years of work needed to make this happen will greatly delay the achievement of the overall goal of this rulemaking: providing transparency of critical ancillary fees to consumers.

Witnesses from Travel Tech members will highlight how difficult displaying critical ancillary fees would be without the involvement of GDSs in addition to their technical expertise about the Department’s proposed first-page search results requirement.

Whether Disclosures of Itinerary-Specific Ancillary Fees at the Time of First Search Will Result in the Display of Incomplete or Inapplicable Ancillary Fee Information, Cause Consumer Confusion, and Distort the Marketplace

Thank you again to the Department for granting this hearing and for the opportunity to speak today.

Travel Tech, in its written comments and in our hearing petition, expressed its deep concerns about the Department’s proposed first-page search results requirement. As I stated earlier, we took this extra step of filing a hearing petition because we strongly hold that Travel Tech member companies are best positioned to determine how ancillary fee information should be presented to consumers.

This proposed rule would mandate that carry-on and checked baggage fees, change and cancellation fees, and family seating fees be shown in text only on the first page of search results. It would specifically ban the use of rollovers or web links. This provision would apply to both airline and ticket agent sites.

You will hear from true experts on flight search display from Travel Tech members today. They will provide great detail about the technical infeasibility of this provision. They will also speak directly to the deep impact it would have on consumers, especially those shopping on travel comparison sites that display hundreds of flight combinations across a multitude of different airlines.

I want to take a moment to highlight the other organizations – beyond Travel Tech and the airlines – that submitted comments on this proposed rule and what they said about this first-page search results provision.

The US Chamber of Commerce wrote, “…Without the ability to display fee information via pop-ups or roll-overs, the strict and prescriptive display requirements required under the NPRM would have the effect of bombarding consumers with irrelevant fee and fare information on a single webpage, making ticket agent webpages difficult to navigate and cluttered.”

US Travel stated, “Additionally, more and more consumers are utilizing mobile devices rather than web browsers to make travel plans. Increasing the amount of required information to be shared during the purchase process on smaller screens will lead to an inferior user experience, increased consumer frustration and the type of information overload that diminishes consumer interest and comprehension.”

The Global Business Travel Association is “concerned by the sheer volume of proposed ancillary fee information on the first page creating confusion for travelers. The requirement to include all information on the first page may actually have a negative effect, as screen real estate is consumed by ancillary fee information, reducing the number of available flights able to be displayed in a single webpage, and requiring substantially more search time to compare options.”

And even the AARP submitted comments and wrote, “However, without additional guidance, there is the potential that displaying all fees in the same place as the fare could be visually overwhelming for some consumers, adding confusion rather than reducing it.”

And there are further comments noting concern about the first-page search results beyond what I have now presented. Today, Travel Tech is submitting a letter signed by US Travel, the US Chamber, the American Society of Travel Advisors (ASTA), the Global Business Travel Association (GBTA), Hopper, and Sabre to the docket to demonstrate in one document the many stakeholders who take issue with this part of the proposed rule.

The rationale of this first-page search results requirement – as described in the NPRM’s “Need for a Rulemaking” section – was quote “because most passengers travel once per year or less, they may not be aware of certain ancillary service fees, such as those related to seat selection.” According to the Department and per consumer advocates, consumers continue to be surprised by these optional services, and therefore, all critical ancillary fees must be shown on the first page of search results along with schedule and fare information.

We at Travel Tech were “curious, not judgmental” about this conclusion and wanted to hear directly from consumers about what they knew about ancillary fees and their understanding of optional services, like checking bags or selecting a seat.

To do so, Travel Tech fielded an online survey of over 1,000 U.S. adult consumers from March 24-26, a few days ago. The topline results that I will now share were weighted to be representative of the overall population.

These results are clear evidence – even though they may travel once a year or less – that consumers are incredibly aware of the existence of critical ancillary fees. Not too many consumer surveys reach numbers of 96% awareness. Consumers know that critical ancillary fees are now a part of travel – they expect these fees and know that they are optional services and not required. There are no surprises here. As such, there is no need to overload the first-page search results with the extra information this rule would require.

Thank you again to the Department for granting Travel Tech’s hearing petition and for the opportunity to speak today. I have greatly enjoyed hearing from all of the witnesses on this matter of first-page search results. We greatly appreciate references and call-outs from other companies and organizations about how much more difficult this proposed provision would hit the independent channel, which shows consumers fares from a multitude of different carriers all at once.

I appreciate Andrew Applebaum’s observations about Expedia’s website. We are glad that you are pleased with how ancillary fee information is presented today. However, if you are pleased today, then I must ask why do we need this first page search results provision?

I also wanted to address John Breyault’s testimony regarding Travel Tech’s petition. He says that we could ask for consumer data at the search input screen. This is not what the proposed rule would require. Further, this proposed change from the proposed rule would face the same exact technical infeasibility issues that the first-page results do, which you will hear about in great detail from the witnesses from Travel Tech member companies.

Right before lunch, we heard from Corey Vezna of Priceline, and prior to that Jay Richmond from Amadeus and Katie Hinchin of Skyscanner. And we are pleased to hear Jay and Corey speak once more today on question 3. But all three of these experts in flight search from Travel Tech members have already touched on the technical infeasibility of the proposed first-page search results requirements and its negative impact on consumers.

I wanted to quickly take an opportunity to share thoughts from another Travel Tech member company who were unable to join us at this hearing today.

Glenn Wallace, head of product of technology at Fareportal, and previously a founding employee at Expedia, told me that, “The pricing permutations of flight schedule, fare type/cabin, and specific seats are huge, and requiring that all options and therefore all combinations are shown at the first page will place a huge computing and communication burden on industry systems, and lead to slower page retrieval times, larger web pages, and materially slower page loading times.”

U.S. Department of Transportation Grants Travel Tech’s Hearing Petition on Proposed First Page Search Display Requirements

The Travel Technology Association (“Travel Tech”) successfully convinced the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) to grant its hearing petition on DOT’s proposed “Enhancing Transparency of Airline Ancillary Service Fees” regulation. Travel Tech requested this hearing to “address multiple disputed technical, economic, and other factual issues raised by DOT’s proposed requirement to display the ‘critical’ ancillary fee information…on the first page of online search results.” The hearing will be held virtually on Thursday, March 30^th

Travel Tech continues to express its support for DOT’s efforts to ensure consumers have access to critical ancillary fee information. For too long, consumers have lacked the consistent ability to know the true cost of different flight options. However, in its comments and hearing petition filed in January, Travel Tech highlighted deep concerns about the proposed mandate to display carry-on and checked bag fees, change and cancellation fees, and family seating fees in text on the first page of search results.

“Our members are the leading innovators in creating and maintaining consumer-friendly online travel comparison sites,” said Laura Chadwick, president and CEO of Travel Tech. “If the DOT’s proposed rule is adopted as written, these first-page search display regulations will clutter and confuse consumers’ online air travel shopping experience. This is especially true for travel comparison sites that display multiple airlines’ schedules and fares.”

“We are grateful for DOT’s interest in these matters and our member’s point of view,” Chadwick continued. “We look forward to assisting the DOT in making decisions that empower traveler choice, enable marketplace competition, promote transparency, and are indisputably in the public interest.”

Concerns raised by Travel Tech were echoed in many other responses to the NPRM from several agencies and organizations, including AARP, Google, U.S. Travel, U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and many more. These comments featured throughout Travel Tech’s #WeAgree campaign and can be found on LinkedIn and Twitter.

The Travel Technology Association (Travel Tech) empowers traveler choice by advocating for public policy promoting marketplace transparency and competition. Travel Tech represents the leading innovators in travel technology, including global distribution systems, online travel agencies, metasearch companies, travel management companies, and short-term rental platforms.

To schedule an interview with a Travel Tech spokesperson, contact Dan Rene of kglobal at 202-329-8357 or daniel.rene@kglobal.com.

“Travel Tech has long supported the U.S. Department of Transportation’s efforts to ensure consumers have access to critical ancillary fee information. We did so in 2014 and are doing so again in 2023,” stated Laura Chadwick, President & CEO of the Travel Technology Association. “For too long, consumers have lacked the consistent ability to know the true cost of different flight options.”

In its comments, Travel Tech addresses how ancillary fee information should be provided to ticket agents. In its proposed rule, the DOT seeks to omit global distribution systems from receiving mandatory ancillary fee data from airlines.

“Travel Tech strongly recommends that ancillary fee data be shared with all channels that distribute fare and schedule information,” Chadwick continued. “It is the most simple and direct way to solve the issue of ancillary fee transparency for consumers.”

Travel Tech also filed a petition today requesting a hearing on DOT’s proposed requirement to display the critical ancillary fee information on the first page of online search results. Travel Tech addresses this matter in its comments.

“Our members are the leading innovators in creating consumer-friendly online travel information sites. We are deeply concerned about the DOT’s first-page search results requirements included in the proposed regulation. These rules, if adopted as written, will clutter and confuse the online air travel shopping experience for consumers. This is especially true for travel comparison sites that display multiple airlines’ schedules and fares,” said Chadwick.

“In our comments and hearing petition, we argue that the Department should not displace ticket agents’ well-established expertise with a government-regulated website design mandate. Ticket agents should have the flexibility to design appropriate displays of ancillary fees and develop innovative new methods for consumers as well,” Chadwick continued.

The Travel Technology Association (Travel Tech) is the voice of the travel technology industry, advocating for public policy that promotes transparency and competition in the marketplace to encourage innovation and preserve consumer choice. Travel Tech represents the leading innovators in travel technology, including global distribution systems, online travel agencies and metasearch companies, travel management companies, and short-term rental platforms.

To schedule an interview with a Travel Tech spokesperson, contact Dan Rene of kglobal at 202-329-8357 or daniel.rene@kglobal.com.

On behalf of the Travel Technology Association (“Travel Tech”), thank you again for the opportunity to address this meeting of the Aviation Consumer Protection Advisory Committee (ACPAC) about the Department of Transportation’s (DOT) Ancillary Fees Transparency Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) proceeding. Travel Tech advocates for public policy that promotes market transparency and competition to encourage innovation and preserve consumer choice. We represent the leading innovators in travel technology, including online travel agencies and metasearch companies, travel management companies, global distribution systems, and short-term rental platforms.

As I stated earlier, the Travel Technology Association applauds the Department’s continuing work and commitment to this vital consumer protection matter. Travel Tech has long advocated not only for ancillary fee transparency for airlines but resort fee transparency for hotels as well. In 2014 and 2017, we supported the Department’s proposals to require airlines to share their ancillary fee information with ticket agents so that consumers could have complete visibility into the cost of their flight options, regardless of whether they use a direct or indirect channel to book their air travel. This is a worthwhile undertaking, and we stand ready to support you, ACPAC members, and the Department as it moves forward.

Today, the current state of play is this: as the text of NPRM notes, “While fare, schedule, and availability information are currently provided by the airlines to the GDSs, and by GDSs to the agents that display and sell to consumers, information about the cost of ancillary services is not typically shared.” (emphasis added.) As a practical result, consumers lack transparency about the ancillary fee costs prior to the purchase of their tickets through online travel agencies. Nonetheless, this same NPRM does not specify how critical ancillary information is to be disseminated to ticket agents, many of which currently receive fare and schedule information from a range of sources. The Department proposes to exclude GDSs from distributing ancillary fee information, even though the Department itself acknowledges that “GDSs may provide the lowest cost and most efficient way of distributing [fee] information to ticket agents that sell or display the carrier’s ancillary services.”

Many are asking the reasonable question as to why the Department would forgo such an obvious solution to the distribution of ancillary service fee information when the airlines are already choosing GDS technology to distribute their fares, schedules, and availability. The Department shares its reason why in the NPRM itself: stating that it is “attempting to minimize government interference with business relationships.”

The Travel Technology Association strongly believes that DOT must require the airlines to share ancillary fees through the same distribution channels utilized by ticket agents and metasearch sites for fare, schedule, and availability information. The Department should reconsider its conclusion to exclude GDSs in an effort to minimize government interference with contracts between airlines and GDSs. The cleanest, most direct way to solve the issue of transparency for consumers is for the airlines to provide the ancillary fee data to GDSs along with fare, schedule, and availability information as they already do. Travel Technology Association members agree that this is the most sensical approach, as do many of the other stakeholders gathered here today. Additionally, GDSs are not the only source of information for ticket agents, and distribution through all channels used to distribute fare and schedule information – such as ATPCO, and other intermediaries and aggregators – should also be required.

In the end, any requirement by the Department that airlines must share fee information with ticket agents will necessarily have some impact on business relationships. It’s inescapable. Under the Department’s NPRM proposal, ticket agents will nonetheless be forced to forge new business relationships and negotiate with more than 200 airlines in order to display this ancillary fee information. This does not make sense. Ticket agents will have to supplement the fare, schedule, and availability information they already receive through the GDS and match it to the ancillary data provided directly by the airline, a herculean task beyond the scope of a ticket agent’s day-to-day operations. Ticket agents will each individually need to take on resource-intensive development costs to make the ancillary information visible and usable on their platforms. These costs are prohibitive for many agents and a hardship as well since a clear solution already exists and is widely used – that the airlines provide ancillary data through all distribution sales channels already utilized by ticket agents and metasearch sites, including GDS, ATPCO, and other intermediaries and aggregators. This is the Travel Technology Association’s position on the matter. Again, it is the cleanest, most direct way to solve the issue of transparency for consumers, and we hope, ACPAC members, that you will agree.

There is no reason to draw the line arbitrarily at GDSs and force ticket agents to take on the development and business costs that have already been provided by the GDSs. The Department announced a different approach in 2017. After considering the substantial number of comments filed on the issue in response to its 2014 rulemaking notice on ancillary fees, it issued a supplemental rulemaking notice where it concluded that airlines should be required to share ancillary baggage fees with GDSs. We submit that the Department was right then and should follow that same determination here. Otherwise, in the end, it will be the consumer who will suffer, when this rulemaking’s ostensible purpose is to improve consumer outcomes.

On behalf of the Travel Technology Association (“Travel Tech”), thank you for the opportunity to address this meeting of the Aviation Consumer Protection Advisory Committee (ACPAC) about the Department of Transportation’s (DOT) Ancillary Fees Transparency Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) proceeding. Travel Tech advocates for public policy that promotes market transparency and competition to encourage innovation and preserve consumer choice. We represent the leading innovators in travel technology, including online travel agencies and metasearch companies, travel management companies, global distribution systems, and short-term rental platforms.

Travel Technology Association members are critical stakeholders in this matter as they will directly implement many provisions of the final regulation. Millions of Americans rely on our member companies to do comparative searches to find the best flight options and to book their airline travel. Many of the proposals in the proposed NPRM will impact intensely complex back-end systems maintained or supported by Travel Tech members and the corresponding display of billions of dynamic data points. As such, our members continue to review the text of the proposed rule and develop our written comments to be submitted in a few days on December 19^th, 2022 or, as we hope, on some extended due date that will allow us further time to complete our deliberations and provide robust comments to the Department.

First and foremost, the Travel Technology Association applauds the Department’s continuing work and commitment to this vital consumer protection matter. Travel Tech has long advocated for ancillary fee transparency for airlines and resort fees for hotels as well. In 2014 and 2017, we supported the Department’s proposals to require airlines to share their ancillary fee information with ticket agents so that consumers could have complete visibility into the cost of their flight options, regardless of whether they use a direct or indirect channel to book their air travel. This is a worthwhile undertaking, and we stand ready to support you, ACPAC members, and the Department as it moves forward.

One of the core provisions of the proposed ancillary fee rule would require the first-page display of the fees for a first checked bag, a second checked bag, and a carry-on bag, adjusted based on passenger-specific information along with the sought-after fare and schedule information – with no links, roll-overs or other forms of flexible display allowed. The proposed rule would also require first-page display of the change and cancellation fees, and family-travel seat fees, again with no links and roll-overs or other forms of flexible display allowed[U1] . These provisions taken together are problematic for both consumers and Travel Tech members alike.

Consumers value online travel agents for their ability to facilitate the easy comparison and booking of multiple multi-brand options in a single location. By their very nature, our members’ sites offer consumers an array of flight options and information. For example, flying to Washington, DC, can entail flight search results for three different airports across at least 20 different airlines – the results can be overwhelming even for those who make this area our home. To mitigate the impact of a dizzying amount of information, online travel agents routinely invest in user interface (UX) design upgrades and usability testing to maximize customers’ satisfaction and streamline their buying experience. Travel Tech members, as a result, are deeply concerned about the Department’s proscriptive requirements to display ancillary fee information on the first page of search results and not on subsequent pages that customers routinely navigate through once a particular flight option has been selected.

A first search page display requirement for all critical ancillary fees will result in unacceptable screen clutter that will make locating flight options and information more, not less, of a challenge for consumers. Such information overload would diminish the very value our Travel Tech members offer to consumers in the first place. An overwhelming search experience could provide a real impetus for consumers to forgo comparison shopping altogether. Instead, they would potentially seek out airlines’ far more streamlined and to-the-point web pages since airlines only need to display their ancillary fee information alongside their flight offerings.

Members of the Travel Technology Association strongly believe that flexibility is essential on when and where ancillary information is displayed in search results – so long as consumers can view this information before purchase. Indeed, the Department itself states the same in the proposed rule on Page 63725 — that the goal is “to ensure that fee information about ancillary services that are critical to a consumer’s decision making is disclosed at all points of sale before ticket purchase.” (emphasis added)

Further making a case for flexibility is that the Internet is changing, and how consumers search for flight information will undoubtedly change too. I speak from my recent and direct experience working with cutting-edge innovators developing virtual, augmented, and mixed reality technology, encompassing Web3 and metaverses. The internet searches of the future will be far more immersive and embodied, with the results contextualized, even when viewed on a laptop or mobile device. Information will no longer be statically placed on a webpage or traditional seat map. Instead, it could be “seen” online floating over the seat in a “digital twin” replica of the interior of an airplane. Leading consumer brands have already begun to offer products online in this manner as if the internet shopper is viewing them in person; one can imagine how this could apply to many facets of the travel industry. By requiring the use of weblinks, rollovers, or even an opt-out option, the Department may inadvertently forestall the development of better, more innovative display options for consumers in the future.

I thank members of the ACPAC and the Department for the opportunity to address these important points about the need for flexibility in the display of critical ancillary fees to support customers and innovation as well. I welcome your questions and comments.