On Tue, 9 Aug 2005 17:17:59 -0700, "RST Engineering"
wrote:


How does FAR 61.113b work ?
Let's say I work for that widget company mentioned in the AvWeb article
and usually manufacture little widgets. For a trade show I am asked to
fly some sample parts using a rented airplane. It seems that the "no

A private pilot and part 91? They'd be out of their ever lovin'
minds. Now I can see them asking an employee such as an engineer or
sales staff who has a reason for going and who plans on flying to take
some parts along.

Most companies will not even let their employees fly their own plane
to business conferences. The company I retired from had that policy.
I still flew, but I'd take vacation the day before and the day after
the show, conference, or school so I could get there and back on my
own time. I heard a lot of grumbling, but no one ever said anything
to me about it directly. For "compensation" I was allowed to claim
the same for mileage as if I had been driving a car.

Most of the time I ended up going either commercial or on the company
plane. It was both cheaper and faster back then. Now I can usually
beat the jets on a radius of Michigan to Denver or central Florida.
Given the extended check in times and lay-overs (hardly anything flys
direct from here to any where) and weather that does not cause me to
have to stop for fuel, I can usually beat them by a comfortable
margin.

compensation or hire" rule does not apply in this case and (given the
willingness of the CEO) I could charge the company 100% operating
expenses and "pilot bonus".

You are not being employed as a pilot. You are being employed to make
widgets. The fact that you choose to use an airplane instead of an
automobile to get to your widget show is not the pivot point. Your company
can rent you the airplane and pay your normal salary or hourly wage on your
trip. HOWEVER, you cobbed the system up by saying "pilot bonus". Now you
ARE being employed as a pilot and without a commercial certificate, you
can't do that.

It gets even more complicated depending on which auditor you draw.
:-))
But the company is probably not going to want to rent an airplane for
one of their employees to fly to the show even if the boss rides
along. Insurance and liability issues aside, There limits as to how
much they can deduct and that varies with how they are set up and who
owns the airplane.

For me, the most I could deduct flying my own plane (or renting) was
the equivalent of a non discount, coach class airfare. The company
can do that per filled seat. Big multinational corporations can
afford to own flying offices and conference rooms as their execs are
worth more per hour than the airplane, but it'd be a very rare small
company of individual that could afford much more than a small plane.
Generally it's far more expensive to fly even a 172 than go commercial
unless paying a non discount airfare. Even then the 172 probably costs
more for a relatively long trip.




Now let's say the CEO wants to go to that trade show as well. He would
be a passenger and now 61.113b2 applies since he is a passenger and
therefore I may not collect any money at all, thus have to pay 100% of
operating expenses myself.

Nope, same argument. You are not being paid to fly the CEO to the widget
show. The company can pick up the entire cost of the airplane and your
normal widgetworker salary while on the trip.

I'd hope the company was more liability savvy than that, but they
legally could do it.


That's the way I read the regulation.\

Me too. :-))

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com


Jim