Yet another way for the UK government to tax people. Is this just a case of 'People are having fun, lets put a stop to that!' ?

I have a mavic pro, and my son has a DJI spark, that means we'll  have to pay £33 per year for the privillage of flying our drones.
We don't actually use them that much. I've only flown my Mavic Pro two or three times this year.

If  we have to start paying a tax (which I strongly object to) then I am  going to be getting my moneys worth and flying it a LOT more.
I doubt this is the intended concequence of the scheme, but I think other people will think the same way.



If anyone wants to air their views, you can do at the UK CAA site here:


https://consultations.caa.co.uk/finance/drone-registration/

My understanding is that if your son is under the age of 18 he will not be able to register as a drone operator (owner) so only you will have to pay the £16.50 for both drones on the understanding that you are responsible for both. Once you have registered you will both need to pass the on line test separately as 'remote pilots' which is free of charge with no minimum age and each of you being given a flyer number valid for 3 years. If your son is over 18 and owns the Spark then yes, each of you will need to pay as separate operators. I'm not sure if this means that under 18's will need to be accompanied by the registered operator to fly?

If the ‘tax’ helps ensure people fly legally and safely, I think it’s a small price to pay, the majority suffering for the actions of a few folks who shouldn’t be allowed a drone.

ChrisJG Posted at 5-3 03:29
If the ‘tax’ helps ensure people fly legally and safely, I think it’s a small price to pay, the majority suffering for the actions of a few folks who shouldn’t be allowed a drone.

And how would paying a tax have any effect on people flying legally or safely?

Hello and good day mickr1969. Thank you for sharing these information and this link with us. Great find and thank you for your support.

AG0N-Gary Posted at 5-3 05:16
And how would paying a tax have any effect on people flying legally or safely?

If the proceeds were used to administer a register of drone fliers and their drones?

ChrisJG Posted at 5-3 07:33
If the proceeds were used to administer a register of drone fliers and their drones?

If you were going to do something illegal with a drone, would you really register it?
There is a register for guns, but yet criminals still have guns......

ChrisJG Posted at 5-3 03:29
If the ‘tax’ helps ensure people fly legally and safely, I think it’s a  small price to pay, the majority suffering for the actions of a few  folks who shouldn’t be allowed a drone.

so the Majority of legal flyers have to pay / be penalised for the minority of illegal flyers?

I firmly believe that this will have no impact on the type or number of drone incidents in the UK.

And while I have already registered my drone and I am more than happy to take a test I am not happy about paying out for something that will not positively impact drone flying in the UK IMO.

Next I'm going to have to register my mountain bike and pay a riding fee just incase I hit a tree....

I think a simple test with a license should be enough to satisfy the government. Adding taxes to our hobby is a little over the top to me and who is going to be in charge of that money and what will go for. A slippery slope if you ask me.

16.50 as a one off charge would have been maybe  ok, but per year, a rip off.  A passport is only 8 per year.

Be certain to express your views in the CAA consultation above.(for uk )

so what happens for visitors to our country, do they have to register?

Perhaps those outside the U.K who already pay a registration fee (USA, Éire, Canada etc) or tax as it's referred to in the title can give us an insight of what we might expect regarding visitor registration

The CAA  indicates that the level of the administration fee is set so that only model flyers within the U.K are paying for the administration of the system.

So if this is the case, then in that respect it seems fair, and perhaps not unreasonable if it is saving on taxes for every non flyer.

The alternatives of course might be be to drop the registration system, or get the tax payers to cover the costs.