Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

An interesting point of view on Europe, from a US pilot

As a private person owning an aircraft you don’t need a CAMO ( which btw means “Continuing Airworthiness Management Organisation” a quick check on the internet reveals that) – a part145 shop can issue an ARC. Taking care of ADs and SBs and running times of magnetos can be handled by the aircraft owner himself.
So Garrett is wrong here. He has always kept his N-reg here in Europe, so why is he troubling over CAMO ?
For aircraft parts you pay 19% VAT for import – no tariffs. UPS and Fedex know that, DHL makes often mistakes and they tell you to get your money back from Customs …
thats why I cannot recommend them.
In Germany Garrett has only been based at one place, namely EDFE Egelsbach, which is somewhat special as a Berkshire Hathaway Inc. property with quite high landing fees and a lot of aeroclubs and flying schools serving nearby Frankfurt.
But in his episodes he generalizes. It is fun to read at times but not always the truth.

EDxx, Germany

CAMO is a voluntary option. A private owner does not have to have one. And then I can go and just have things done as and when i want.
And with the right shop there is also pragmatism and flexibility.
The bit about about FI is equally superficial. There are freelance FIs and there are CRIs.
Just some licencing issues require an ATO as per EASA.
Fine for a rant, not fully correct, though ;-)

...
EDM_, Germany

As a private person owning an aircraft you don’t need a CAMO ( which btw means “Continuing Airworthiness Management Organisation” a quick check on the internet reveals that) – a part145 shop can issue an ARC.

That’s a bit like saying you don’t need a god because (if you don’t mind the higher ambient temperature) the devil can give you what you need

I know we did the CAMO / no CAMO debate in other threads but the reality on the ground is pretty obviously very dependent on the country and the local politics. Here in the UK for example, most people are totally forced to use a CAMO, simply because they

  • are over 1200kg
  • have the choice of exactly one maintenance company which wants …. a CAMO!
  • if below 1200kg (ELA1) they don’t know a freelancing EASA66 guy who can read the regs and is willing to sh*t-stir in the local-airfield-political climate which is usually dominated (if not owned outright) by the one maintenance company

If you are N-reg, the last point above also applies because your freelancing A&P/IA (this being the best scenario possible) needs to avoid sh*t-stirring on the local scene. Generally he will be desirable to them because all the local firms need his services to inspect and sign off any N-reg they work on, but this works both ways and if he freelances “too much” they will hit back by getting somebody else. Talk to any freelance engineer for a review of airfield politics He needs to be pretty careful – “walking on eggs” is the usual expression, and not every one of them gets this right as some not a million miles away from EuroGA will know…

But in his episodes he generalizes. It is fun to read at times but not always the truth

I agree.

However there is a sizeable learning curve in aircraft ownership and it takes a lot of dedication (and often luck) to sort out a good “ground situation”. The big difference between the US and the European GA scenes is that in the US the default position is the freelance-work (individual freedom) one, whereas in Europe the default position is the company-does-the-work one and you have to fight for your freedoms. And most owners don’t have the appetite to fight. They just want to keep a plane somewhere, with good access, preferably where they have good access and birds don’t sh*t on it 24/7, and they want to fly.

Europe could have what the US has (and for the most part I do now have that, except with maintenance hangar difficulties) but it is hard for most owners to achieve it. ELA2 is being delayed partly because of maintenance industry objections but will still be limited in accessibility for above reasons. One can do it but it is likely to take you years of patient work and chipping away.

For aircraft parts you pay 19% VAT for import – no tariffs. UPS and Fedex know that, DHL makes often mistakes and they tell you to get your money back from Customs …

IME, DHL mostly screw up on the customs classification so you pay not only import VAT (correctly) but also pay import duty (incorrectly) because the DHL person could not read the words “aircraft parts” (assuming the US vendor has actually put that on the paperwork, or something similar). I have just concluded a long fight over the TKS parts shipment, exactly for this reason. And here we find that DHL is the best organised company in Europe – much more reliable than UPS Fedex TNT etc. The US doesn’t get this trouble because it is, ahem, one country

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Peter wrote:

IME, DHL mostly screw up on the customs classification so you pay not only import VAT (correctly) but also pay import duty (incorrectly) because the DHL person could not read the words “aircraft parts” (assuming the US vendor has actually put that on the paperwork, or something similar

Yes, aircraft parts should travel duty free, in both directions. I’ve had to explain that to US customs when hand carrying parts from Europe, but have never had to pay duty. I have had to pay German VAT on parts being exported from Germany. Believe it or not, personal vehicle parts attract VAT in Germany even when exported, and that includes aircraft parts. However, I don’t pay sales tax on parts being imported to the US.

Re renting versus owning: all property is owned by somebody, there is no ‘reduction in hassle’ when the owner rents his property to others instead of selling it to them, there is instead an increase in total hassle due to the extra players and periodic transactions. In the end, somebody somewhere pays for that extra hassle.

I don’t know anybody in the US who financed the purchase of their plane, except maybe with a cash-out mortgage refinance on their home, which BTW will no longer be tax deductible under new tax law unless a story can be justified that the money was used to improve or repair the house.

In relation to parts for a Cub, even a PA-11 which is one of the less common variants, they are generally easier to get than for a Cessna or newer Piper, almost everything for a Cub is available from Univair or other suppliers.

Last Edited by Silvaire at 13 Jan 15:59

When I was on the (mostly American) Socata owners group site, 2001-2008, I came across many pilots who bought their plane with a loan.

One notable aspect of these was that they were very unhappy (very vocally unhappy) when anyone suggested that the market value of a TBxx, year YY, was less than $zzzzz – presumably because they borrowed more than zzzzz

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Peter wrote:


When I was on the (mostly American) Socata owners group site, 2001-2008, I came across many pilots who bought their plane with a loan.

I can imagine that has more correlation to people who would ‘invest’ in a new French-manufactured aircraft for operation in the US than aircraft owners in the US more generally.

(Says he, the guy who hand carries his aircraft parts from the other side of the world!)

Last Edited by Silvaire at 13 Jan 16:53

Silvaire wrote:

will no longer be tax deductible under new tax law unless a story can be justified that the money was used to improve or repair the house.

So in the States it appears that you are saying that one can offset house improvement/ maintenance against income tax?

Here in the UK it was possible and was known as SCHEDULE A, unfortunately dropped years ago like a lot of other things.

quatrelle wrote:

So in the States it appears that you are saying that one can offset house improvement/ maintenance against income tax?

If you refinance a US home mortgage, thereby increasing the loan amount to make cash available for home improvements, the entire larger amount of interest paid on the new mortgage remains tax deductible. Until a very recent change in the US Federal tax law the cash could be used for anything, not just on the home itself, and the interest would remain tax deductible as long as you lived in the house. That meant you could buy a plane using a home mortgage refinance and the interest paid to finance your plane was partially recovered by income tax savings.

This of course was one of the factors that led to the ‘housing crisis’ about ten years ago – people habitually increased the loan amount on their house to finance consumer debt because it was tax deductible. I did that several times myself but used the money to buy more real estate, instead of a plane, and the equity on all of the property was maintained at a solid level. Actually now that I think about it I believe my plane purchase coincided with mortgage refinances somehow, but I can’t remember the details!

Last Edited by Silvaire at 13 Jan 17:18

I’ve never had to pay import duty on civil aircraft parts. However, it can be a bit of a struggle to train some US suppliers to quote the correct airworthiness tariff suspension code from Chapter 88 of the Combined Nomenclature and to include a copy of the airworthiness certificate with the shipping documents attached to the OUTSIDE of the package…

For instance:

__8803 30 __
- Other parts of aeroplanes or helicopters :
__8803 30 00 10 __
- – For use in civil aircraft (TN100)
ERGA OMNES (ERGA OMNES)
Measures for import:
Import control of fluorinated greenhouse gases (01-01-2017 – ) (CD786) (CD787)
R0517/14
__[Show conditions] __
Measures for import:
Non preferential duty under end-use (01-01-2007 – ) : 0 % (EU001)
R1549/06
__[Show conditions] __
Measures for import:
Airworthiness tariff suspension (01-01-2008 – ) : 0 % (CD333)
R1147/02
[Hide conditions]
C1 Presentation of a certificate/licence/document A 119 Apply the mentioned duty
C2 Presentation of a certificate/licence/document Measure not applicable
__
Additional information/Documents produced/Certificates and authorisations
A119 Airworthiness certificate or declaration in the commercial invoice containing the elements of the airworthiness certificate issued or a document annexed to the invoice

Glenswinton, SW Scotland, United Kingdom

I find the article with a lot of “typical american” few of things
lots of facts completly wrong as Nobbi already said.

no need for CAMO, , (i can also do a lot of pilot owner maintnance) as it is written in my IHP for my ELA2 aircraft also lots of items “on conditions” etc.

the whole issue what he describes with freight and parts is a lot of “OWT” as they say in the USA as if you know a bit what you are doing ( that should be the case if you doing it yourself) it is all easy
I had in the past fuel cells orderd in the US and between order via phone and arrive at my office desk there was less than 38hrs and cost of 200US for freight, the same experiance I had for Cylinders,wing bolts etc.
all import was handeld via FED EX and no import duty paid (just email the freight handler copy of invoice and 8130 so it can be seen that it is aircraft parts) if in doubt let them know the “custom” type number
also there are so many supplier in Europe that you can have most stuff next day as most companies have no stock anyway lol

and if he had a N reg plane in europe he can do the same as in the US or use a 145 or similar and have it signed of from a A&P/IA i think this is the way for N but for sure Peter knows better

I can not speak for the UK but in the 4 different Location I was based in Germany I never ever had any issue with having work done on my plane, as long there is no oil spillage etc on floors and you dont start to repaint your plane in the hangar this is of coure completely different to the experiance from Peter

I think one should always “adapt” to the Local culture and dont expect that all is the same as in your home country and I know this might be a bit diffiult for the Yanks!!
and dont later make write ups were the facts are wrong and dont blame your own non knowladge on the system or culture differance

because if you come from a country that thas the “world series” in Baseball https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_World_Series as a national championship you may have a very different few of culture and understanding lol

fly2000
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top