Cost-efficiency - Austria
PRB monitoring
▪ The en route 2024 actual unit cost of Austria was 45.41€2017, -9.3% lower than the determined unit cost (50.07€2017). The terminal 2024 actual unit cost was 223.51€2017, +25% higher than the determined unit cost (179.02€2017).
▪ The en route 2024 actual service units (4.0M) were +14% higher than the determined service units (3.5M).
▪ The en route 2024 actual total costs were +6.6M€2017 (+3.8%) higher than determined. This is mainly due to higher staff costs for Austro Control (+14M€2017, or+13%), partially compensated by lower costs in the other cost categories. The NSA attributed the impact on staff costs to higher traffic leading to higher overtime, and higher pension costs than determined.
▪ Austro Control costs of investments were 26M€2017 in 2024 for both en route and terminal charging zones, -19% less than determined (32M€2017). According to the NSA, this reduction is due to delayed investments resulting from the prolonged impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. Through RP3, Austria has not provided an annual breakdown of the average net book value, depreciation, or leasing costs for any investment of Austro Control. There is therefore a lack of adequate and detailed information on investments to ensure transparency and compliance with reporting requirements.
▪ The en route actual unit cost incurred by users in 2024 was 57.28€ (+2.6% above the 2024 DUC), while the terminal actual unit cost incurred by users was 257.67€ (+29% above the 2024 DUC). The difference between the AUCU and the DUC for the terminal charging zone is mainly due to the inflation adjustment and cost risk sharing adjustment.
▪ Austria should provide all the required information regarding investments in RP4, in the con-text of the annual monitoring process and the cost-exempt reporting, to enhance transparency for airspace users.
▪ Austria should take additional measures to manage the cost-risk associated with pensions for RP4 in view of the difference between actual and determined pension costs observed during RP3.
▪ Austria did not report funding from Union assistance programmes in RP3, while SESAR Deployment Manager data indicates payments for 11M€ during the reference period. Austria should review the facts and ensure that all appropriate reimbursements as other revenues are made as soon as practicable.
En route charging zone
| Actual and determined data |
| Total costs - nominal (M€) |
2020-2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
| Actual costs |
363 |
211 |
221 |
227 |
| Determined costs |
381 |
202 |
196 |
196 |
| Difference costs |
-17 |
9 |
25 |
31 |
| Inflation assumptions |
2020-2021 |
2022 |
2023 |
2024 |
| Determined inflation rate |
NA |
2.5% |
2.0% |
2.0% |
| Determined inflation index |
NA |
110.3 |
112.5 |
114.8 |
| Actual inflation rate |
NA |
8.6% |
7.7% |
2.9% |
| Actual inflation index |
NA |
117.3 |
126.3 |
130 |
| Difference inflation index (p.p.) |
NA |
+7 |
+13.8 |
+15.3 |
AUC vs. DUC
In 2024, the en route AUC was -9.3% (or -4.66 €2017) lower than the planned DUC. This results from the combination of significantly higher than planned TSUs (+14.4%) and higher than planned en route costs in real terms (+3.8%, or +6.6 M€2017). It should be noted that the actual inflation index in 2024 was +15.3 p.p. higher than planned.
En route service units
The difference between actual and planned TSUs (+14.4%) falls outside the ±10% threshold foreseen in the traffic risk sharing mechanism. The resulting gain of additional en route revenues is therefore shared between the ANSP and the airspace users (see the main ANSP gain in Box 11).
En route costs by entity
Actual real en route costs are +3.8% (+6.6 M€2017) higher than planned. This is the result of higher costs for the main ANSP, Austro Control (+5.2%, or +7.9 M€2017) and the NSA/EUROCONTROL (+5.7%, or +0.7 M€2017) and lower costs for the MET service provider (-16.9%, or -1.9 M€2017).
En route costs for the main ANSP at charging zone level
Significantly higher than planned en route costs in real terms for Austro Control in 2024 (+5.2%, or +7.9 M€2017) result from:
- Significantly higher staff costs (+13.1% or +28.2 % in nominal terms), due to overtime hours to cope with increased traffic, the impact of inflation and higher pension costs than planned,
- Lower other operating costs (-1.8%), due to the impact of the inflation index (+15.3 p.p.) since in nominal terms other operating costs were above planned by +11.2%,
- Significantly lower depreciation (-19.8%), reflecting delays in investments due to COVID,
- Significantly lower cost of capital (-30.8%), reflecting delayed investments and “short-term financing conditions of the Republic of Austria, due to which the average net working capital was subject to interest at 0% in 2024”,
- Significantly lower exceptional costs (-11.7%), due to the inflation index (+15.3 p.p.) since in nominal terms the actual costs were equal to those planned, and
- A higher deduction for VFR exempted flights (+3.2%).
RP3 summary
When considering the whole of RP3 (2020-2024) for Austria en route charging zone, actual TSUs are +10.1% higher than planned, while actual costs in real terms are -0.9% lower than the determined costs (some -7.7 M€2017). As a result, the weighted average actual unit cost over RP3 (62.11 €2017) is -9.9% lower than planned in the PP (68.96 €2017).
Actual unit cost incurred by the users (AUCU) (PI#1)
| AUCU components (€/SU) – 2024 |
| Components of the AUCU in 2024 |
€/SU |
| DUC |
55.85 |
| Inflation adjustment |
5.23 |
| Cost exempt from cost-sharing |
1.58 |
| Traffic risk sharing adjustment |
-4.27 |
| Traffic adj. (costs not TRS) |
-0.89 |
| Finantial incentives |
-0.21 |
| Modulation of charges |
0.00 |
| Cross-financing |
0.00 |
| Other revenues |
0.00 |
| Application of lower unit rate |
0.00 |
| Total adjustments |
1.43 |
| AUCU |
57.28 |
| AUCU vs. DUC |
+ 2.6% |
| Cost exempt from cost sharing by item - 2024 |
€'000 |
€/SU |
| New and existing investments |
-5,455.6 |
-1.36 |
| Competent authorities and qualified entities costs |
-82.9 |
-0.02 |
| Eurocontrol costs |
759.3 |
0.19 |
| Pension costs |
11,095.4 |
2.77 |
| Interest on loans |
0.0 |
0.00 |
| Changes in law |
0.0 |
0.00 |
| Total cost exempt from cost risk sharing |
6,316.1 |
1.58 |
The actual en route unit cost incurred by airspace users (AUCU) in respect of activities performed in 2024 (57.28 €) is +2.6% higher than the nominal DUC (55.85 €). The difference between these two figures (+1.43 €/SU) is due to:
- the positive inflation adjustment resulting from higher than planned inflation (+5.23 €/SU);
- the impact of adjustments resulting from the costs exempted from cost sharing mechanism (+1.58 €/SU);
- the deduction of the traffic risk sharing adjustments (-4.27 €/SU);
- the deduction of the traffic adjustment (-0.89 €/SU) for the costs not subject to traffic risk sharing; and
- financial incentives (-0.21 €/SU).
The share of the regulatory result (see items 10 to 14) in the AUCU (before the deduction of other revenues) is 1.7%.
Austro Control net gain/loss on activity in the Austria en route charging zone in the year 2024
Austro Control reported a net gain of +0.6 M€, as a combination of a loss of -6.0 M€ arising from the cost sharing mechanism, with a gain of +7.5 M€ arising from the traffic risk sharing mechanism and a loss of -0.9 M€ relating to financial incentives.
Austro Control overall regulatory result (RR) for the en route activity
Ex-post, the overall RR taking into account the net gain from the en route activity mentioned above (+0.6 M€) and the actual RoE (+0.9 M€) amounts to +1.5 M€ (0.8% of the en route revenues). The resulting ex-post rate of return on equity is 12.3%, which is higher than the 7.3% planned in the PP.
RP3 summary
When considering the whole of RP3 (2020-2024), Austro Control generated a cumulative gain in respect of cost sharing of +3.0 M€, as actual total costs for RP3 were lower than planned. The traffic risk sharing mechanism generated a gain of +21.1 M€. Adding the actual RoE (+5.2 M€ over RP3) leads to an overall regulatory result of +29.3 M€, which corresponds to an average ex-post rate of return on equity of 40.9% (compared to 7.3% initially planned in the PP).
Note 1: The analysis presented in items 11 to 13 excludes MET services of Austro Control since MET data are disclosed separately in en route and terminal reporting tables. The regulatory result of Austro Control’s MET services is shown in item 14.
Note 2: Ex-ante and ex-post RoE are computed based on the notional gearing of 85% debt used in the Performance Plan for RP3. The actual gearing of Austro Control should be reported.