Can I bill my airplane travel expenses to a client?

On Fri, 01 Aug 2003 16:48:23 GMT, "Michael 182"
wrote:

I have a PPL, no commercial. I travel for my consulting busines, which I
own. Can I bill my client some reasonable rate for travel expenses when I
use my plane? I am not using the plane to generate income, it is tangential
to my business, which happens to be technology litigation consulting.

The followup question is, if I can't bill the expense, would I be able to if
I got the simplest level of a commercial license?


Since there seems to be a fair amount of misinformation, let me repeat my
response to another poster (and concur with Mike Rapoport's early
response):

======================
61.113 (b) A private pilot may, for compensation or hire, act as pilot in
command of an aircraft in connection with any business or employment if:

(1) The flight is only incidental to that business or employment;
and
(2) The aircraft does not carry passengers or property for
compensation or hire.
=====================

Flying yourself to a business meeting, or sales calls, where the business
is essentially unrelated to aviation, is specifically allowed as a
situation in which you can be compensated as a private pilot.


Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

"Ron Rosenfeld" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 01 Aug 2003 16:48:23 GMT, "Michael 182"
wrote:

I have a PPL, no commercial. I travel for my consulting busines, which I
own. Can I bill my client some reasonable rate for travel expenses when I
use my plane? I am not using the plane to generate income, it is
tangential
to my business, which happens to be technology litigation consulting.

The followup question is, if I can't bill the expense, would I be able to
if
I got the simplest level of a commercial license?


Since there seems to be a fair amount of misinformation, let me repeat my
response to another poster (and concur with Mike Rapoport's early
response):

======================
61.113 (b) A private pilot may, for compensation or hire, act as pilot in
command of an aircraft in connection with any business or employment if:

(1) The flight is only incidental to that business or employment;
and
(2) The aircraft does not carry passengers or property for
compensation or hire.
=====================

Flying yourself to a business meeting, or sales calls, where the business
is essentially unrelated to aviation, is specifically allowed as a
situation in which you can be compensated as a private pilot.

Yes, but he's not asking for compensation for the flight, only if he can
bill for the direct/indirect costs for the flight.

For example: if he calculates his plane costs $175 per hour to operate with
all direct costs and reserves (maint, OH, avionics), can he bill that to the
client?

He's not billing the client for HIS compensation (unless his contract allows
him to bill at his normal hourly rate for travel time).

First - thanks all for the replies.

I figure it cost me about $130 an hour to fly my '79 TR-182, including
direct and indirect costs. My usual trip to see my client in Phoenix takes
about 8 hours round trip, or $1,040. I can fly economy commercial, and park
my car for about $500. While I'd love to charge my client the difference, I
really can't justify it. On the other hand, I'll happily pay the incremental
$540 out of pocket and have my own first class seat...


Michael



"Tom S." wrote in message
...

For example: if he calculates his plane costs $175 per hour to operate
with
all direct costs and reserves (maint, OH, avionics), can he bill that to
the
client?

He's not billing the client for HIS compensation (unless his contract
allows
him to bill at his normal hourly rate for travel time).

Did I state your question properly?

Tom

"Michael 182" wrote in message
news:66YWa.51594$o%2.26023@sccrnsc02...
First - thanks all for the replies.

I figure it cost me about $130 an hour to fly my '79 TR-182, including
direct and indirect costs. My usual trip to see my client in Phoenix takes
about 8 hours round trip, or $1,040. I can fly economy commercial, and
park
my car for about $500. While I'd love to charge my client the difference,
I
really can't justify it. On the other hand, I'll happily pay the
incremental
$540 out of pocket and have my own first class seat...


Michael
"Tom S." wrote in message
...

For example: if he calculates his plane costs $175 per hour to operate
with
all direct costs and reserves (maint, OH, avionics), can he bill that to
the
client?

He's not billing the client for HIS compensation (unless his contract
allows
him to bill at his normal hourly rate for travel time).

On Sat, 2 Aug 2003 16:35:42 -0700, "Tom S." wrote:

Yes, but he's not asking for compensation for the flight, only if he can
bill for the direct/indirect costs for the flight.

First of all, he's not asking that. He's asking "Can I bill my client some
reasonable rate for travel expenses when I use my plane?"

And the answer is "Yes".

There is no prohibition in the FAR's, in the circumstance of using an a/c
for business travel of this sort, for billing for the use of the aircraft.




Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

In article ,
"Tom S." wrote:


Since there seems to be a fair amount of misinformation, let me repeat my
response to another poster (and concur with Mike Rapoport's early
response):

======================
61.113 (b) A private pilot may, for compensation or hire, act as pilot in
command of an aircraft in connection with any business or employment if:

(1) The flight is only incidental to that business or employment;
and
(2) The aircraft does not carry passengers or property for
compensation or hire.
=====================

Flying yourself to a business meeting, or sales calls, where the business
is essentially unrelated to aviation, is specifically allowed as a
situation in which you can be compensated as a private pilot.



The key to that is flying "yourself". If you take along your partner to
the business meeting ... you've blown it.

Edward

On Sat, 02 Aug 2003 21:12:35 -0500, Edward Todd
wrote:

In article ,
"Tom S." wrote:


Since there seems to be a fair amount of misinformation, let me repeat my
response to another poster (and concur with Mike Rapoport's early
response):

======================
61.113 (b) A private pilot may, for compensation or hire, act as pilot in
command of an aircraft in connection with any business or employment if:

(1) The flight is only incidental to that business or employment;
and
(2) The aircraft does not carry passengers or property for
compensation or hire.
=====================

Flying yourself to a business meeting, or sales calls, where the business
is essentially unrelated to aviation, is specifically allowed as a
situation in which you can be compensated as a private pilot.



The key to that is flying "yourself". If you take along your partner to
the business meeting ... you've blown it.

Edward

Edward,

I'm not sure of the answer to that. And even after reviewing the FAQ's on
the FAA web site, I remain confused.

It seems to me that if one is merely carrying a coworker to a business
meeting that the pilot *is also* attending, that the private pilot can be
compensated by his employer. Certainly he can carry passengers that are
NOT co-workers and still be reimbursed:

In addition, the FAQ's state: "...But the FAA in all its past policy
statements and legal interpretations have always taken a very strict
interpretation on § 61.113(b)(1). Previous examples that have been offered
to explain what is meant by ". . . The flight is only incidental to that
business or employment . . .", [i.e., § 61.113(b)(1)] would be where the
holder of private pilot certificate uses the company aircraft for
transportation on an infrequent, non-reoccurring basis, and some of the
other company personnel elect to go along to attend a meeting. The flight
has nothing to do with that business or employment and is just a means of
transportation."

"If a private pilot is conducting a flight that fits into the ". . . flight
is only incidental to that business or employment . . ." exception [i.e.,
paragraph (b)(1) of § 61.113], it is legal for a private pilot to be
reimbursed by his/her employer regardless of whether any other passengers
are carried or not. Thus for example, a wife or husband of a private pilot
may go along on a flight, and in essence get a "free" ride. This kind of
flight [i.e., ". . . flight is only incidental to that business or
employment . . ."] is an exception to the shared expense provisions of
paragraph (c)."

It has always seemed to me that the key is whether or not the pilot is
carrying passengers *for compensation or hire*. If that's not his job, and
the a/c is used only for transportation to a meeting that has nothing to do
with aviation, then under 61.113b he should be able to be compensated (or
reimbursed).


Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

Let's take this to a real world example (me).

I own a car dealership. The car dealership is a corporation, and
owns the aircraft, pays for all costs directly. As a company vehicle,
those costs are expensed as occurred. have owned the same plane
for a long time, so it's long ago depreciated to zero.

I am the only pilot. I have a commercial rating, but I don't think
that's of any consequence on this discussion. Figure I'm like
any other private pilot. I am an employee of the same corporation
that owns the airplane.

The aircraft is used virtually 100% to take me to meetings and
car auctions, or recurrent training. The few times I use it for
personal use, I pay for the variable expenses personally. That may
or may not be enough for the IRS, but would at least show an
attempt to comply, and probably avoid a fine, if not a taxable
perk.

So, up to here, we're mostly OK with the IRS and
totall OK with the FAA.

Now, if another employee goes with me, does that change
anything with the FAA? (it clearly does not with the IRS).
Sometimes another employee of the same corporation will
attend a meeting with me. Sometimes I will take a couple
people with me to an auction. They drive cars back.

Still no problem for the IRS, the business purpose is there, but
does taking another passenger along violate the "incidental"
part of 61.113(b)?

(name with held pending answer to the question!!)



"Ron Rosenfeld" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 02 Aug 2003 21:12:35 -0500, Edward Todd
wrote:

In article ,
"Tom S." wrote:


Since there seems to be a fair amount of misinformation, let me
repeat my
response to another poster (and concur with Mike Rapoport's early
response):

======================
61.113 (b) A private pilot may, for compensation or hire, act as
pilot in
command of an aircraft in connection with any business or employment
if:

(1) The flight is only incidental to that business or employment;
and
(2) The aircraft does not carry passengers or property for
compensation or hire.
=====================

Flying yourself to a business meeting, or sales calls, where the
business
is essentially unrelated to aviation, is specifically allowed as a
situation in which you can be compensated as a private pilot.



The key to that is flying "yourself". If you take along your partner to
the business meeting ... you've blown it.

Edward

Edward,

I'm not sure of the answer to that. And even after reviewing the FAQ's on
the FAA web site, I remain confused.

It seems to me that if one is merely carrying a coworker to a business
meeting that the pilot *is also* attending, that the private pilot can be
compensated by his employer. Certainly he can carry passengers that are
NOT co-workers and still be reimbursed:

In addition, the FAQ's state: "...But the FAA in all its past policy
statements and legal interpretations have always taken a very strict
interpretation on § 61.113(b)(1). Previous examples that have been
offered
to explain what is meant by ". . . The flight is only incidental to that
business or employment . . .", [i.e., § 61.113(b)(1)] would be where the
holder of private pilot certificate uses the company aircraft for
transportation on an infrequent, non-reoccurring basis, and some of the
other company personnel elect to go along to attend a meeting. The flight
has nothing to do with that business or employment and is just a means of
transportation."

"If a private pilot is conducting a flight that fits into the ". . .
flight
is only incidental to that business or employment . . ." exception [i.e.,
paragraph (b)(1) of § 61.113], it is legal for a private pilot to be
reimbursed by his/her employer regardless of whether any other passengers
are carried or not. Thus for example, a wife or husband of a private pilot
may go along on a flight, and in essence get a "free" ride. This kind of
flight [i.e., ". . . flight is only incidental to that business or
employment . . ."] is an exception to the shared expense provisions of
paragraph (c)."

It has always seemed to me that the key is whether or not the pilot is
carrying passengers *for compensation or hire*. If that's not his job,
and
the a/c is used only for transportation to a meeting that has nothing to
do
with aviation, then under 61.113b he should be able to be compensated (or
reimbursed).


Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

On Sun, 3 Aug 2003 17:56:51 -0700, "CarSalesman" wrote:

Still no problem for the IRS, the business purpose is there, but
does taking another passenger along violate the "incidental"
part of 61.113(b)?

Not according to John Lynch's FAQ's on the FAA web site.

...examples that have been offered to explain what is meant by
". . . The flight is only incidental to that
business or employment . . .", [i.e., § 61.113(b)(1)] would be where the
holder of private pilot certificate uses the company aircraft for
transportation on an infrequent, non-reoccurring basis, and some of the
other company personnel elect to go along to attend a meeting. The flight
has nothing to do with that business or employment and is just a means of
transportation."


Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

CarSalesman wrote:

Now, if another employee goes with me, does that change
anything with the FAA? (it clearly does not with the IRS).
Sometimes another employee of the same corporation will
attend a meeting with me. Sometimes I will take a couple
people with me to an auction. They drive cars back.

Still no problem for the IRS, the business purpose is there, but
does taking another passenger along violate the "incidental"
part of 61.113(b)?

I don't think it does, provided:
1) you personally are not receiving compensation for the
flight
2) taking the flight is "optional" for the employees, they
could drive or fly commercial if they wish but choose
to come with you

The reason I think this is true is that the flight is still
"incidental" to the business ie, your business is buying and
selling cars, not buying and selling airplanes or using airplanes
to photograph cars from the air or what-have-you.

Cheers,
Sydney