20.12.2013 Views

Economic Regulation - IATA

Economic Regulation - IATA

Economic Regulation - IATA

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

DEFINING AND VALUING<br />

AN APPROPRIATE ASSET BASE<br />

Another crucial influence on regulatory decisions and<br />

outcomes is the scope adopted in defining and valuing a<br />

regulatory asset base (RAB) on which an allowable return<br />

is calculated. In accounting terms, the RAB represents<br />

the capital investment in the business, for which a return<br />

is required, and its depreciation represents the use of<br />

capital over its life-cycle.<br />

There are several different approaches to calculating<br />

a RAB. However, each approach must ensure that the<br />

RAB represents a true reflection of the capital invested<br />

by the airport or ANSP operator and the risk that it takes.<br />

It should not allow airports or ANSPs to exploit their<br />

monopoly power by artificially inflating asset values in<br />

order to increase their total returns.<br />

For example, the standard approach adopted for utility<br />

industries (including airports) in the UK and Ireland is<br />

to calculate the RAB in accordance with the value that<br />

investors initially placed in the company at the time of<br />

privatisation, based on its enterprise (debt plus equity)<br />

value.<br />

If the assets were undervalued at the time of privatisation<br />

it can result in a gain to the company (e.g. in terms of<br />

a subsequent uplift in equity market capitalisation) but<br />

not one that customers should be forced to pay for<br />

through higher charges on a revalued asset base. The<br />

RAB is changed for each regulatory control period on the<br />

basis of incurred capital expenditure, depreciation and<br />

expected inflation.<br />

BOX 3: LAND REVALUATION<br />

i) New Zealand:<br />

Auckland International Airport Limited (AIAL) revalued its<br />

own asset base in July 2006, increasing the valuation<br />

by NZ$1.4 billion, or 123%. This asset revaluation led<br />

to a corresponding increase in the “property, plant<br />

and equipment revaluation reserve” included under<br />

Shareholder Equity on the AIAL balance sheet, reducing<br />

its gearing ratio from 66% to 33%.<br />

The higher asset base and lower gearing ratio (that<br />

increases the weighted cost of capital through a higher<br />

equity share) are likely to be used as justification for<br />

higher user charges. If these artificially higher values<br />

were applied, airline charges could be expected to<br />

increase by NZ$35-40 million (over 50%), despite using<br />

the same assets and with no change in efficiency or<br />

service quality.<br />

AIAL is currently subject to light-handed regulation,<br />

despite having previously been found by the NZ<br />

Commerce Commission to have exploited its market<br />

power. In the absence of formal regulation, the freehold<br />

held by AIAL allows them to make the change through<br />

accounting practice, with no protection against the<br />

exploitation of market power over airline users unless<br />

(and very unlikely in the current climate) the government<br />

enacted new legislation to stop the revaluation.<br />

ii) Australia:<br />

Several of the price monitored Australian airports<br />

attempted to raise their land values in keeping with<br />

increases in land prices in surrounding areas, and to<br />

reflect those higher values in higher aeronautical charges<br />

from 2007 onwards.<br />

The Australian Productivity Commission’s October 2006<br />

Draft Report on its review of airports accepts that land<br />

revaluations can represent unearned windfall gains<br />

to airports but, due to it previously not having a stated<br />

view, proposes that “revaluations made by airports up<br />

to 30 June 2005…should be allowed to stand, but any<br />

subsequent revaluations should be excluded.”<br />

While <strong>IATA</strong> fully supports the PC’s stance that land<br />

revaluations should not be used to justify increases in<br />

airport charges, it does not see any justification for future<br />

increases in charges that can be based on revaluations<br />

made before 30 June 2005 (the last revaluation in the<br />

Regulatory accounts). Land revaluations represent<br />

unearned windfall gains. Its valuation should reflect the<br />

value at the time of privatisation and while the land is<br />

owned by government and/or restricted to an airport use<br />

only there can be no land revaluations.<br />

AIAL’s Earnings Before Interest and Taxation (EBIT)<br />

margin was 66% in its fiscal year 2006, by far the highest<br />

EBIT level among the top 50 airports in the world.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!