MU2 in Europe - Dispatch services - Local copilots - Trip itinerary

If I get a customs official who feels that I am somehow doing illegal charter by carrying around EU folks, especially given that twin turboprops in Europe are generally not privately owned and often engage in charter, how do I argue my way out of that, particularly when I don’t speak the language? They claim I would be breaking cabotage rules, and presto, give us 20% of your aircraft value in VAT, or we impound.

Well you aren’t doing illegal charter are you? Plenty of people fly turboprops and jets over to Europe. An MU2 is not that unique – King Airs, Cheyennes are all around Europe. Most turboprops and jet aircraft are owned by companies.

Otherwise, corporations would all have N registered aircraft and avoid VAT.

That’s not correct. I’ve been N-reg since 2005. The only countries in Europe known to [try to] prohibit long term parking of N-reg certified aircraft (N-reg homebuilts are a whole different game) are Denmark and Norway.

Those rules on carrying EU citizens are to do with being in the EU but not paying the import VAT ie. a temporary import.

especially given that twin turboprops in Europe are generally not privately owned

Many King Airs are privately owned, for example. Equally many private planes are company owned. Probably more than 50% of nice shiny IFR tourers are company owned.

Cabotage is a different thing. I suggest a search here for cabotage and read what you find. It’s not an issue at all unless you are carrying paying passengers. It could be an issue, and has been raised by the French as such, if you were carrying cost sharing passengers. Now… if you wanted to be really paranoid, IMHO, IANAL, there could be scenarios, post-accident, where it could be financially advantageous for passengers to claim they had paid to be carried. But those would apply in the USA too, because an illegal act by the pilot is likely to increase passenger compensation. I have never heard of cabotage being an issue in reality. But, who knows, GA (especially bizjets) does a certain amount of illegal charter (AOC busting) and maybe somebody tried that angle on somebody… obviously it would be very helpful for the pilot to be dead.

I think the basic rule here is that I have to establish POSITIVELY this is a “private use” of the aircraft, despite the fact it is a business class aircraft, despite the fact it is registered to a corporation, despite the fact I am potentially carrying unrelated EU citizens aboard on a flight within the EU.

IMHO, IANAL, it would hang on whether they paid you some money. That isn’t a good idea anyway; for example cost sharing in an N-reg is illegal in UK airspace (ref: the aerial work in foreign reg a/c ANO article – 225?). I never cost-share.

And I have been ramp checked in France only two weeks ago (France is realistically the only place this will arise). If the aircraft is owned by a company they want to know that you own the company. And for passengers they want to make sure that they aren’t paying passengers. Essentially they want to make sure it isn’t some illicit AOC operation.

Neil wrote:

However, for me the USA seems to be a very adversarial place as I frequently hear that one shouldn’t even speak to the FAA without a lawyer because they are out to get you. I expect that’s an exaggeration too.

Been there, done that. And yes, in the end it was a little exaggerated.

Peter wrote:

Cabotage is a different thing. I suggest a search here for cabotage and read what you find. It’s not an issue at all unless you are carrying paying passengers.

Exactly. What would happen in France is that upon landing two nice police or gendarmerie officers would interview pilot and passengers separately and specifically ask about the nature of the flight, how the pilot knows the passenger, how the passenger knows the pilot… They will try to establish whether the flight is a cost sharing flight (promoted through a specialized website) or commercial flight (revenue flight). If the versions agree that will be the end of it.

There is so much scaremongering on this and other forums. It seems to be a characteristic of pilot forums to debate endlessly the potential pitfalls of every circumstance, and how rules can be interpreted in the most restrictive way.

Such ramp checks that are made (a minimal number), and such complicated rules that are in force, only exist to stop those who try to cheat their way out of paying tax that is properly due. By that I primarily mean those EU citizens and/or companies who try to import goods and avoid VAT, or those who try to use foreign registers to do illegal charters.

Visitors to Europe are welcome and are not persecuted. As Jason says you are clearly a bone fide visitor, not engaged in an illegal charter. You will not have any problems.

JasonC wrote:

If the aircraft is owned by a company they want to know that you own the company.

I fly a company-owned DA42 (F-reg) and a company-owned DA40 (N-reg). I was ramp checked twice in the DA42 within a couple of months and the fact that I was flying a company-owned airplane with a PPL was not an issue at all. Prior to that I had never been ramped checked anywhere in the world in 20 years of flying.

Neil wrote:

Visitors to Europe are welcome and are not persecuted. As Jason says you are clearly a bone fide visitor, not engaged in an illegal charter. You will not have any problems.

+1

There is so much scaremongering on this and other forums. It seems to be a characteristic of pilot forums to debate endlessly the potential pitfalls of every circumstance, and how rules can be interpreted in the most restrictive way.

I think whether it is “scaremongering” or not depends on how it is qualified. The most irritating problem in forums is that certain people toss in a one-liner written as “I know something because I am clever but I am not going to waste my precious time writing any useful detail”.

It is IMHO fine to mention cabotage, ramp checks, etc, provided that one explains the context in which it is a problem. You did exactly that with

Such ramp checks that are made (a minimal number), and such complicated rules that are in force, only exist to stop those who try to cheat their way out of paying tax that is properly due. By that I primarily mean those EU citizens and/or companies who try to import goods and avoid VAT, or those who try to …. do illegal charters.

and that’s great. IMHO Mike is well clear of any of these problems, but maybe this needs to be explained more than it has been.

Unfortunately there are loads of signs of certain national CAAs spreading FUD. Lately, the French one (the DGAC) has been honing its FUD spreading techniques. No it’s no wonder that some of it sticks. The bit about cabotage did come from French Customs (or whatever they call themselves) and it led to them being forced to admit it is nonsense in most practical scenarios. I carry a copy of that letter – will try to get a photo of it and post it. Mike: have a read of the Benefits and Drawbacks lists here

BTW, I deleted the bit about foreign registers because illegal charters are done just as much in G-regs etc and if I was doing them I would do that too because it’s going to attract less attention

As stated, a company owned plane is not an issue at all. Just make sure you don’t accept any money from passengers because that could lead to various issues.

The “black hat” approach to life tends to result in a much smoother life