![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Recently, Jim Logajan posted:
"Neil Gould" wrote: Thanks, and I understand the logic of your interpretation. It clarifies the 50% notion that I've been taught, but it seems to make the regulation rather pointless so long as there is some rationale to the application of "pro rata" (for example, shares of ownership in the aircraft or number of club members). If the FAA agrees with this usage then the matter is settled! However, I'm still skeptical, given the precedence of such as free ferrying to be considered "compensation". The following web page titled "Traps For The Unwary: Business Flying And The 'Compensation Or Hire' Rule" discusses "pro rata" issues, among others (such as the judicial invention of the "common purpose" test): http://www.aviationlawcorp.com/content/traps.html This article does seem to embody some of my earlier notions of the interpretation of this FAR. However, I think AirplaneSense's explanation is more concise and precise than the article. Neil |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Is expense of a new sailplane the reason? | Nolaminar | Soaring | 0 | January 7th 05 03:40 PM |
expense analysis | Rosspilot | Owning | 12 | August 25th 03 03:34 AM |