grubertm 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
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".
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.
Yes, no, maybe ?

If I may have a go at this (correct me when/where I got it wrong):

If your employer, the CEO of Widgets-R-Us, asks you to go to
the trade show (without specifying *how*) and that you decide to
fly yourself there (assuming it doesn't go against Widgets-R-Us
corporate policies, as it often does...), as opposed to, say,
drive, or ride a bike, or a pogo stick or walk there, whatever,
then you are in the clear as far as I understand it, even if you
are a private pilot renting the aircraft from your local FBO or
flying club; the reasoning is that you would be going anyway,
flying is just incidental, and that you are paid by your employer
to go -- including expenses to cover your travel costs -- and
attend a trade show, and are not paid to fly. I reckon it
would be equally fine should the CEO comes along.

Things become a lot murkier if your boss specifically asks you to
*fly* there, and down right bad should you decide to charge a
'pilot bonus'... unless the aircraft is owned/leased/operated
by Widgets-R-Us and that you are a commercial pilot...

--Sylvain