Recently, Gig 601XL Builder wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net posted:

Neil Gould wrote:
Recently, BT posted:

As long as the total of reimbursements are less than 50% of the
cost of the flight, it doesn't conflict with the FARs. OTOH, if
someone has a bug up their posterior and wants to hassle you, they
don't have to be right or interpret the FARs correctly.

Neil

As long as their total contribution is not more than their pro rata
share of the cost of the flight.
50% if there is only one person going with you.. but the example was
three others.

Reading of 61.113 (c) is pretty clear:

(c) A private pilot may not pay less than the pro rata share of the
operating expenses of a flight with passengers, provided the expenses
involve only fuel, oil, airport expenditures, or rental fees.

So, the 50% figure *is* the "pro rata share" that the private pilot
must pay *for the flight*. It doesn't matter how many contributors
there are.

Neil

WHAT! If there are 4 the pro rata share of $100=$25. If there are 100
the pro rata share is $1.

pro ra·ta (pro ra't?, rä'-, rat'?)
adv.
In proportion, according to a factor that can be calculated exactly.

Your generalized application of the term "pro rata" does not account for
the 50% requirement. For example, one could easily "calculate exactly"
20% of the cost of a flight, but if that is all a private pilot pays, then
the FAA is likely to consider the other 80% paid compensation.

As long as the private pilot must pay 50% of the cost of the flight, the
sum of all other contributions can't exceed that amount. Now, if someone
can support the notion that the private pilot doesn't have to pay 50% of
the cost of a flight except under the remaining 61.113 guidelines, that is
a different matter. However, such a notion would make 61.113 (c) moot, so
it seems a pretty remote possibility to me.

Neil
Who will continue to pay 50% of the cost of the flight.