This seems to be a somewhat inefficient system. There is no absolute need to consider aviation fees to be taxes and collect them through a federal agency.
Individual airports should be capable of financing their local ATC as they see fit, be it their own airport fees or, IDK, a surcharge on hamburgers sold in the local McD or a gift from a wealthy sponsor; and they should only have a duty to maintain certain technical standards.
There’s a whole network of radars and communication centers that are not part of any specific airport. How would you fund that through use fees at an airport?
On the other hand, if the fees corresponded to actual use, that would mean that the infrastructure along the most frequented corridors would automatically be the best funded one, which would probably be overall positive.
For VFR flights, communication with ATC is optional until/unless you get into busy Class D or better airspace.
If the fees are paid by any pilot passing through the ARTCC's zone, regardless of whether they use ATC, then it wouldn't be fair for the single engine piper putzing around over his backyard.
If the fees are paid by only pilots who use ATC, then pilots will stop voluntarily using ATC, leading to decreased overall safety.
In the US system, any revenue collection needs to be authorized by Congress. In fact, it is one of the arguments currently being argued in front of the Supreme Court about the tariffs.
It's a perfectly fine system. It just relies on our elected representatives not playing a game of chicken to get what they want, and act in the best interests of the country. Unfortunately, for a whole lot of reasons, they haven't been able to do this intermittently since the mid nineties.
Then if you collect too little? Where does the excess come from? Do you keep the fees high and pay that back next year? Do you account for inflation or charge points?
Is there some reason you _don't_ want this system to have slightly more funding than it "needs?"
And I do not use "fucking around" lightly. The FAA's repeatedly delayed and ineffective upgrade effort makes even the original healthcare.gov look like the Apollo program.
Certain is a strong word, but in many other contexts, this is the actually used system, even in aviation. The FAA requires certain standards of maintenance for aircraft, for example, but individual mechanics aren't FAA employees.
Yeah, maintenance seems extremely different from ATC though. Defining and enforcing maintenance standards is trivial and happens well outside the second-to-second operational loop of aircraft actually coordinating.
The problem is that tax collection also happens with congressional approval.