Full article

Europe Opens the Door to Hand Luggage Surcharges: A Turning Point with International Repercussions

For years, air transport in Europe has been defined by a delicate balance between passenger protection and the commercial freedom of airlines. One of the most sensitive issues has been hand luggage: something that should, in principle, be an inseparable part of the transport service, but which has become one of the main sources of tension between travelers, carriers, and regulators. The recent decision of the European Commission to launch infringement proceedings against Spain for fining airlines that charged for cabin baggage marks a turning point of major significance. If this approach is consolidated, it will not only affect millions of European passengers but also international travelers flying within the EU, and it could set a regulatory precedent on a global scale.

At the heart of the dispute lies the interpretation of Regulation (EC) No. 1008/2008, which guarantees the freedom to set prices within the single European air transport market. Spain, through its Air Navigation Act, had established a protective standard: treating hand luggage as an essential element of the transport contract, meaning no airline could impose surcharges for carrying a reasonably sized cabin bag. This policy materialized in record fines against several low-cost carriers, including Ryanair, Vueling, EasyJet, Norwegian, and Volotea, amounting to €179 million. The message was clear: charging for what constitutes a minimum and indispensable part of air travel is contrary to passengers’ rights.

The European Commission, however, has taken the opposite view. Brussels argues that the Spanish sanctions infringe upon the principle of pricing freedom enshrined in EU law. According to its interpretation, the only item that must be guaranteed free of charge is a small piece of baggage that fits under the seat in front, provided it meets safety and reasonable size requirements. Beyond that threshold, any bag requiring storage in the overhead compartment may be considered an additional service, subject to a surcharge freely determined by the airlines. This is not entirely new: as far back as 2014, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), in Case C-487/12 (Vueling Airlines SA v. Instituto Galego de Consumo), had already ruled that checked baggage could be subject to extra fees, while hand luggage had to be admitted free of charge if it met reasonable conditions. What is new now is the broadness with which the Commission interprets those limits, effectively granting airlines near-total discretion in setting baggage policies.

The immediate consequence of this approach is twofold. On the one hand, it reinforces the low-cost business model, which has relied on unbundled fares: a very low base price that increases with every additional service. On the other hand, it weakens the regulatory authority of Member States seeking to protect their consumers from what they see as abusive practices. Spain has become the first battlefield, but Brussels’ warning is directed at the entire bloc: any country that attempts to penalize airlines for charging cabin baggage fees may face similar infringement proceedings.

From an international perspective, the implications are significant. Any non-EU passenger buying a ticket for an intra-European flight will also be subject to these rules. A Latin American tourist flying Madrid–Paris or a U.S. business traveler on a Rome–Berlin flight will have to comply with the carrier’s surcharge policy. This gives the issue a global dimension, as it affects Europe’s attractiveness as a destination and the predictability of travel costs. Comparatively, in the United States, the Department of Transportation has followed a different path: it allows airlines to impose numerous surcharges but requires high levels of transparency during the booking process. Consumers know from the outset what services are included and how much the extras will cost. Europe, by contrast, risks consolidating a system where transparency is weaker, with apparently low ticket prices that increase sharply at boarding, generating frustration and disputes.

Consumer associations have already raised their voices. They argue that granting airlines full freedom to charge undermines passenger rights and makes the concept of an all-inclusive fare illusory. Since there is no binding EU-wide standard defining what dimensions or weight should be considered “reasonable,” carriers can set extremely restrictive limits (for example, 40 × 20 × 25 centimeters), which in practice force almost every traveler with a conventional cabin bag to pay extra. This could trigger a wave of legal claims, both individual and collective, alleging abusive practices or lack of contractual transparency. In this context, it is not unlikely that national courts will refer new preliminary questions to the CJEU, once again placing the European judiciary at the center of the pricing debate.

Airlines, for their part, welcome Brussels’ implicit backing. They argue that the low-cost model has democratized air travel in Europe, enabling millions of people to fly each year thanks to ultra-competitive fares. From their perspective, banning surcharges does not protect consumers; instead, it raises the base fare for everyone, including those who travel with little or no baggage. Differential pricing, they claim, is a form of fairness: passengers pay only for what they use. However, this argument overlooks the issues of transparency and proportionality. A surcharge may be legitimate, but if it is excessive or imposed arbitrarily, it becomes an abuse.

The road ahead is uncertain. Spain has two months to respond to the Commission’s infringement procedure, and if no agreement is reached, the case could be brought before the Court of Justice of the European Union. A judgment in this area would have binding force across the entire bloc, setting a uniform standard. The range of possibilities is wide: from a strict interpretation obliging airlines to admit free of charge at least one standardized cabin bag throughout the EU, to a full validation of pricing freedom with transparency as the only condition. Between these extremes, intermediate solutions could emerge, such as obliging airlines to offer at least one fare including a cabin bag alongside more basic option.

Ultimately, the debate goes beyond the mere dimensions of a suitcase. What is truly at stake is the model of air transport that Europe wishes to offer its citizens and the world. Will it be a fully liberalized market where every service is charged separately, at the risk of fueling frustration and legal disputes? Or will it be a system where certain passenger rights are deemed non-negotiable, even if this limits the commercial freedom of airlines? The answer will define not only the experience of flying within Europe but also the international perception of the EU as a guarantor of consumer rights vis-à-vis large corporations.

In conclusion, Brussels’ move to endorse surcharges for hand luggage marks a watershed moment. If this approach is consolidated, the highly unbundled pricing model similar to that of the United States will spread across Europe with full legal legitimacy. This will benefit airlines, which will gain new revenue streams, but it will also increase the risk of litigation and consumer distrust. The key issue in the coming months will be how to balance the freedom to set prices with the minimum protection owed to passengers. On that balance depends not only the future of low-cost carriers but also the credibility of the European Union as a space of rights.