Just to be clear- I can fly an N reg aircraft in the UK with a LAPL licence? Sorry to ask again but I've £50,000 at stake - not rich enough to have it sitting there and be unable to fly it.
I don't think anybody is going to give you a clear reply. If the FAA Chief Counsel rules that the LAPL meets 61.3 then you are good to go within EASA-land for sure. Why not write to him? That would be the simplest solution.
The next simple solution would be to write to the FAA (not sure who to presently). If you clearly describe the situation, describe the LAPL, etc, and you get an affirmative, then you are good to go. Nobody can prosecute you. Also send the reply to your insurer.
For example here is a reply I got from the FAA which says the IMCR is valid for an N-reg. Some people disagree with that, but there is no way anybody can prosecute me when I have this in my hands.
Best answer yet thanks wilco on that one.... John
I am almost completely sure that it's illegal in Germany to fly N-reg with LAPL. The text I have says "EASA registered aircraft up to 4 seats and 2000 kg"... but as Peter said, contact them directly
Whose text is it?
Also, in EASA terminology, "EASA aircraft" does not normally mean EASA registered aircraft. It means aircraft subject to EASA regulation i.e. basically everything (maybe completely everything) with an ICAO CofA.
"Non EASA" aircraft is for example homebuilts, UK LAA, Annex 2, etc - not my speciality but that sort of thing.
[edit - I see you have added the word "registered" 
in which case you may be right but can we see the source?]
The Authority issuing a licence can list its privileges so far as it own jurisdiction goes but it cannot grant you privileges or place limitations in areas outside its jurisdiction.
Flying an N Reg is as stated in Far Aim, it does not place any limitation on the type of licence issued by another State where the privileges are exercised, it simply allows you to exercise the privileges of a licence issued by and valid in that State to fly an equivalent aeroplane. That is all you need, how others interpret it is of no relevance.
"EASA aircraft" does not normally mean EASA registered aircraft. It means aircraft subject to EASA regulation
Not quite; it means it would be subject to EASA regulation if it were registered in a member State!
Wasn't the aim of the whole European project to harmonise and simplify across the continent.
Seems to be working... 
Tumbleweed is right as usual
A long list of non EASA aircraft is on page 31 here
Wasn't the aim of the whole European project to harmonise and simplify across the continent
The EU Objectives for EASA:
Maintain a high uniform level of safety in Europe (Lowest common Denominator)
a) Environmental Protection
b) Freedom of Movement of goods, persons and services
c) Cost Efficient Regulation and avoid Duplication
d) Compliance with ICAO Recommendations
e) Promote Community Views Worldwide
f) Level Playing Field
There are two sets of rules, and both must be met to fly an N reg on an LAPL.
Firstly, the US rules: everyone seems to be agreed that FAR 61.3 allows the LAPL to be used (because it's valid in the country where the flying is taking place) and 61.3 makes no restriction on the type of licence (such as it being ICAO compliant). So, no problem from the US side.
Secondly, the European rules: the EASA regulation (FCL.105.A) states (as published in the Official Journal or the European Union): "(a) The privileges of the holder of an LAPL for aeroplanes are to act as PIC on single-engine piston aeroplanes-land or TMG with a maximum certificated take-off mass of 2 000 kg or less, carrying a maximum of 3 passengers, such that there are never more than 4 persons on board of the aircraft."
'Aeroplanes' are not defined in terms of country of registration, so there is nothing in the EU legislation either that prevents an N reg aircraft being flown on a LAPL (except no turbine aircraft or very light jets!)
What seems to be causing some confusion in the UK is that the CAA appears to be adding a gloss all of its own and, as far as I can see, without giving any legal authority for the extra conditions it tries to impose. CAP804 Part B Subpart 1 (p188 of the latest edition) states that "The holder of an EASA LAPL(A) may exercise the privileges of the licence to fly EASA aeroplanes registered in the EU__ and non-EASA aeroplanes registered in the UK that come within the privileges of the licence.
The addition of the CAA requirement for the aircraft to be registered in the EU appears NOT to reflect EU law. Are other EU member states trying to do this as well?
CAP 804 has no legal status whatsoever. Except where it relates to obtaining or converting a National licence that requires an action by the CAA, it can largely be ignored.
