Is this 135?

[Cessna340]

is this 135 or 91?

I work for company A flying part 91. Company A was created as an LLC to protect the assests of company B. I fly the owners of Company A often. They are all owners/partners of company B. They charge Company B for the expense of using the plane for business. OK. Now, the owners of A want to fly other employees (non-owners of the aircraft) of company B and charge B for the expense. Does this now make A 135 holding out to B?

Thanks!

 

[pilotyip]

looks like "holding out"

It would depend upon the relationship, if it was one or two private groups with a cost sharing basis you might not be "holding out". But if it is word on the street that company A is available to anyone to fly, you are in trouble. Providing transportation to the public from point A to point B for compensation is holding out.

 

[Timebuilder]

Now, the owners of A want to fly other employees (non-owners of the aircraft) of company B and charge B for the expense.

This sounds like the company, and not the individual employees, are being charged. It's an accounting technique, not a "ticketing" technique. Essentially, they may be seen by the FAA as the "same" company.

NBAA should have some insights as to how this is understood by the feds before actually asking the feds.

 

[challengerpic]

nope

I agree it's an accounting shuffle. Most large corps arrange the flight dept this way to put some distance between the potentially high loss/risk equipment and the corporation. Sounds like the company is taking it's own money out of one pocket and putting it into another.

 

[mike1mc]

This is just the way many corporations (and private owners) setup aircraft usage. The owner of the aircraft (individual or corporation) will setup a second company for liability and financial reasons listed above. As long as the aircraft is being used for company use only (or owner's personal use for that matter) and "Company B" is not holding out, you are fine. Most (if not all) corporations will bill aircaft usage to the principal department using SIFL rates established by the IRS. This is going beyond my scope of knowledge, so I'll just stop there.

 

[CelticCitation]

Not any kind of expert info, but had a guy on the field flying in a similar situation, though a little more vague. Anyway, LONG story short, the "owners" were sending all kinds of passengers with him, and caught the interest of the FAA. They couldn't get him on that matter, but they started digging, and you know the rest of the story...

Anyway, CYA.

 

[JumboCat3]

135 or 91

Dear Friend,

It sounds to me that no matter how you put it, the same company owns the plane and you work for that company.

To me, if company A owns company B and only employees of either company embark on that plane, it would be FAR 91.

But, If any passengers are paying company A or B for service rendered to take them from point A to point B then it becomes FAR 135.

I guess the best thing to remember is:

If a passengers is not paying or the ride is free to them, its 91.

Good luck.

JumboCat3