part 91 or not

[peter185]

I don't have an FAR/AIM handy so I thought I'd ask the discussion board.

Company A owns an airplane that is registered in their name and employs the pilots that operate said aircraft. Company B owns 20% of Company A and wants to use the aircraft on a limited basis.

Can company A operate these flights Part 91? Can company A be reimbursed by company B for these flights?

 

[340drvr]

Yes, this can be 91. 91.501 specifies the allowed "charges," where I guess your co. A is a subsidiary of B. (I don't have my FAR handy either).

 

[Lead Sled]

Be VERY careful with this one. Things have changed. You really haven't given us enough information. The correct answer will probably be "It all depends..." Bottom line is what was allowed (or tolerated) by the FAA as recently as a few years ago, now would cause them to take a look at the operation. We recently went through a similar scenario. PM me.

LS

 

[ultrarunner]

It's a company operation and will tolerate AND pass both the FAA AND IRS test.

THE most important thing is to have internal and external counsel that are versed in these matters. The FAA AND IRS make a point of taking advantage of businesses that can't adequately defend themselves.

Like the bumper sticker says...

Ignorance is expensive.

 

[Lead Sled]

THE most important thing is to have internal and external counsel that are versed in these matters.

Bingo

 

[bluefishbeagle]

I don't have an FAR/AIM handy so I thought I'd ask the discussion board.

Company A owns an airplane that is registered in their name and employs the pilots that operate said aircraft. Company B owns 20% of Company A and wants to use the aircraft on a limited basis.

Can company A operate these flights Part 91? Can company A be reimbursed by company B for these flights?

The quickest way to find out is to crash. The FAA will let you know.

 

[taters]

Charter???

Heres my scenario
My company owns and pays me to fly airplane A which is in the shop. A "friend" of the boss loans us his a/c at no charge plus gas which is the same type for the week. I told the boss that this plane needs to be registered in his name before I can fly it P91. Am I right?




FAA

 

[bluefishbeagle]

Heres my scenario
My company owns and pays me to fly airplane A which is in the shop. A "friend" of the boss loans us his a/c at no charge plus gas which is the same type for the week. I told the boss that this plane needs to be registered in his name before I can fly it P91. Am I right?

No, you are flying your boss (company people) and you are their employee.

However you need to check with your insurance company and let them know you want coverage while flying the "loaner aircraft". Most policies allow for this.

Also your company needs to be listed as a named insured on the other policy. The arrangement you describe is allowed by FAR's and is considered swap time (similar aircraft types operating costs). Most likely your boss’s friend will want that favor returned if his aircraft breaks down. Having a written agreement would be nice but not necessary.

 

[Seadogrun]

There seems to be a bit of a knee jerk reaction to rules of part 91. It is legal to borrow an airplane and fly it part 91. It is legal to rent an airplane and fly it part 91. A airplane doesn't need to be registered to the passenger to qualify for part 91.

 

[Lead Sled]

In ALL cases like this, you really do need competent, experienced, legal counsel to make sure that you don't unintentionally violate any regulations. There are many "gotchas". 18 months ago we were in the middle of doing something similar. We ended up using an attorney and it really kept us from getting in over our heads. As we discussed our particular situation I mentioned 91.501 and a few other regulations. The attorney countered with FAA interpretations and court rulings that really altered what we were able to do and how we were able to do it.

The bottom line is that when it comes to legal matters and bureaucracies, things are never simple. This especially applies to the FAA. The problem is that the FAA doesn't have the manpower to police every little aspect of our operations. (Thank goodness!) Many legal issues don't come to light until, as Bluefishbeagle said, you have an accident (or an incident, or a ramp check...) Then it's too late and the legal and enforcement fun begins. (Let's not for get the possible insurance ramifications as well.) Some people think that because they been doing it a certain way for years that it's OK. Not necessarily so.

In our case, I resisted following the attorney's advice at first - this issue seemed so cut and dried and couldn't really be that complicated and he was making such a big deal out of it. He finally convinced me and was able to come up with a program that allowed us to do exactly what we wanted to do. It is significantly different from the way I had contemplated doing it using the "conventional widsom" that I have accumulated over a 41 year flying career. The cost was minimal and I can sleep well at night knowing that ALL of my "I's" are dotted and my "T's" are crossed.

LS

Note: Results not typical, your mileage may vary. Offer not valid in the states of Minnesota, Louisianna, and New York. No animals were harmed in the posting of this thread. Hillary is insane.