They would leave and take their tax revenue with them.

Would they really? Because they can't fly?

A very questionable assertion, that is trotted out any time we talk about making the rich pay for their excesses.

Being able to fly domestically is not the sole reason wealthy people live in France

Pay to play. If they want a piece of the economy they pay to get it.

I mean I guess carbon capture could be an option but it's probably bottom of the list in terms of effective things to use the subsidies for. Primarily I'd imagine it going to cost offsetting the transition to greener alternatives for things like natural gas energy as I already mentioned. The point in doing it that way is to get a greater reduction in emissions, that it's a less aggressive approach is just a bonus.

> you need to focus on that anyway if you put a tax on their behavior

Definitely don't set the focus to 0 but the bigger focus is reducing overall emissions not whether an individual thing crosses some personal threshold for creating too many emissions.

But taxing means there's an opportunity for revenue to build more green infrastructure. Yes, that tax needs revisited in the future to make sure it's still accomplishing it's goal, but Europe is currently in the midst of an energy crisis due to lack of investment in local green power infrastructure (and instead relying on Russian gas for electricity). What solves this problem? Investment! What does investment require? Money! What do taxes generate? Money!