Question on 91 Ops
06-18-2008, 10:23 AM
#1
Line Holder
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Position: BE-50 Left
Posts: 35
Question on 91 Ops
I'd love to hear what you guys think.
According to the rules (as I understand them), a Part 91 owned and operated corporate aircraft can be used by any "sister" companies as well without a lease, and without being Part 135.
My question is this:
Does the primary holding company "bill" the sister companies for time used including flight crew, etc., or are they only allowed to bill DOC's?
I was asked for input, read the regs, and I wanted a second opinion. Your help is appreciated!
According to the rules (as I understand them), a Part 91 owned and operated corporate aircraft can be used by any "sister" companies as well without a lease, and without being Part 135.
My question is this:
Does the primary holding company "bill" the sister companies for time used including flight crew, etc., or are they only allowed to bill DOC's?
I was asked for input, read the regs, and I wanted a second opinion. Your help is appreciated!
06-18-2008, 12:13 PM
#2
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,377
Talk to an aviation lawyer.
But I think you will find that as long as all companies are under one umbrella holding company there are ways to transfer expenses...ie holding company reimburses airplane company, and then holding company charges sister company. I'm not certain about sister company billing airplane company directly.
This all assumes that all travel is incidental to holding company's business, and that the travel itself is not THE business. Standard common carriage vs. private carriage rules apply.
But I think you will find that as long as all companies are under one umbrella holding company there are ways to transfer expenses...ie holding company reimburses airplane company, and then holding company charges sister company. I'm not certain about sister company billing airplane company directly.
This all assumes that all travel is incidental to holding company's business, and that the travel itself is not THE business. Standard common carriage vs. private carriage rules apply.
06-18-2008, 12:50 PM
#3
Chief Jeppesen Updater
Joined APC: Oct 2005
Position: Executive Transport Driver
Posts: 3,080
Personally, (operating in such a circumstance), I leave it up to the corporate lawyers to work out. As far as I'm concerned, I'm carrying employees and customers/visitors of the company of official business of the company... Everything else is above my pay grade.
The only thing that I know we are asked to provide is information about our operating costs (hourly).
If an owner is asking for your opinion about such an operation, I would highly recommend that you take Rick's advice and find a lawyer that is well versed in both aviation regulations as well as tax law. There can be some complicated issues from a tax standpoint as well, particularly if you are carrying employees for non-business purposes.
The only thing that I know we are asked to provide is information about our operating costs (hourly).
If an owner is asking for your opinion about such an operation, I would highly recommend that you take Rick's advice and find a lawyer that is well versed in both aviation regulations as well as tax law. There can be some complicated issues from a tax standpoint as well, particularly if you are carrying employees for non-business purposes.
06-18-2008, 03:22 PM
#4
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,377
Originally Posted by FlyerJosh
Personally, (operating in such a circumstance), I leave it up to the corporate lawyers to work out. As far as I'm concerned, I'm carrying employees and customers/visitors of the company of official business of the company... Everything else is above my pay grade.
It's much easier to yank the pilot's tickets, and the historical precedent is that they will do just that, and then call it a day.
06-18-2008, 06:40 PM
#5
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Position: retired
Posts: 645
Originally Posted by rickair7777
Talk to an aviation lawyer.
But when I'm feeling grumpy, and need to answer a question like this, I go talk to my FSDO...
06-19-2008, 07:18 PM
#7
New Hire
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Posts: 4
The answer is yes. The aircraft in this senario does not have to be part 135 to bill. Pilots (usually salary but, if its per diem you also add that in), catering, landing fees, etc will be figured into the Direct Operating Costs for the flight. What you can bill however is just the DOC and DOUBLE the Fuel and Oil consusmed during the flight(s).
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
