Flying Your Aircraft for Business Purpose as an Employee of a Business

petrolero

petrolero

Pattern Altitude
Joined
May 1, 2014
Messages
2,399
Location
Denver, CO
Display Name
Display name:
petrolero
I'm in the oil & gas biz and may have occasion in the future to travel medium distances to fields that my company buys. These (as yet unpurchased) fields are near small towns somewhere in the plains east of the Rockies. It is a royal PITA to get to them via normal air carriers and ruins most or all of a day if you drive (from Denver). Seems like a business case for using my personal aircraft in furtherance of a business (pursuant to Part 91 regs).

I know business owners do this all the time, but since I am an employee of a 200-person company, we're into the muck of liability and policy and HR, etc. It is far far easier for them to simply say "no" than do go through all that mess. And for this reason I have decided not to bring it up** unless/until I have an iron-clad business case for it. Oh and... I am the only pilot that I know of at this company.

I'm curious if anyone out there is using his/her aircraft in furtherance of someone else's business, how big is the company, and (how) did you get them to allow it? What arrangement to pay for it? Can you carry company passengers?

I've read NBAA's discussion of the topic, but it's generic and I'm more interested in some anecdotes from fellow business pilots, especially those who've been the first ones at their company to bring it up.

**EDIT: that is, I have decided neither to bring it up nor to do the deed. That bridge has not, so far, even been built for crossing. But with this thread I am weighing whether it will ever be suitable to do so.
 
Last edited:
Unless they already have a specific policy against it, I would not say anything and simply put in the mileage for a car. I work for a fortune 5 company that does have a policy against using a plane so I'm stuck.
 
Good luck.....

If you're willing to take the "forgiveness rather than permission route", probably the best approach is to let them assume you're driving, and get reimbursed the IRS mileage rate...
 
I did it a couple times for a small (30+ employee) family owned company.

Then they looked at their insurance and now I don't. :mad:

Sucks to drive all day, there and back, for meetings when it could be a half day with the plane.

When(if??) I finally get my IR done, I will try to get the insurance adjusted so I can do this more. Its way more efficient by air.
 
Do they allow commercial air travel? If they do, why is THAT ok vs you flying? It's nothing more than stigma. 100s of people are killed on US roads daily. How many are killed daily in a plane?
 
...I think for most companies it's a liability thing. I work for a very large software company and they don't allow it...and my insurance doesn't pay out if I'm in a general aviation accident period...whether I'm flying for work or on my own or even as a passenger.

If you are flying somewhere for work and crash into a school and kill a bunch of kids then guess who all the lawyers are going to go after? I really think it's about that simple for them.

As someone else mentioned the only way to probably get around it is to 'ask for forgiveness instead of permission' and just take the mileage reimbursement.
 
We allow it. We ask to be named as an additional insured on your policy. Reimbursement at the GSA rate.

We're ~100 people, it becomes a problem when the company is big enough to hire someone whose title is "Risk Manager" and they think no risk is too small to obsess over.
 
Unit74 said:
Do they allow commercial air travel? If they do, why is THAT ok vs you flying? It's nothing more than stigma.
Click to expand...
Just to play devil's advocate, I would imagine that it's partly because the spam can accident rate per passenger mile is far, far worse than scheduled airlines.

And, as has already been noted, even in the event that you are involved in a scheduled airline accident, it's very unlikely that the employer will end up named in any subsequent lawsuits.
 
Unit74 said:
Do they allow commercial air travel? If they do, why is THAT ok vs you flying? It's nothing more than stigma. 100s of people are killed on US roads daily. How many are killed daily in a plane?
Click to expand...

There's good data on this. GenAv isn't quite "death eating" level of madness, but it is quite clear that there is higher risk than commercial air travel. Especially when you start to use GenAv to travel on a schedule, rather than just for fair-weather $100 pancakes and boring of holes in the sky.

Comparing to driving, there are ~600k active pilots in the US (of all types, private and commercial); there are almost 200,000,000 drivers licenses. To make a valid risk comparison you can't just look at numbers of deaths, but have to compare based on the amount of exposure to that risk.

I used to tell co-workers who questioned my sanity that it was about as dangerous as riding a motorcycle; which I believe to be the case, though I don't recall where I learned that comparison. More importantly, its something that is more relatable to an average person: yes there's some elevated risk involved, but the risk of riding a motorcycle is not quite the same as jumping one over the Grand Canyon.

More importantly, if the argument in favor of personal GenAv use begins with faulty numbers, it hurts the overall cause.
 
I am also in the O&G industry, albeit on the manufacturing side. I travel frequently to our other plant facilities in OK (2 locations), TX (4 locations), LA, WY, ND, and PA. It would be great if I were able to bypass the airline schedules and make the trip myself. Would probably not result in a ton of time savings on longer routes, but going to FTW is a lot better when I don't have to drive an hour across town from DFW or DAL.

Unfortunately, we have a specific policy of having to be on a scheduled airline due to the AD&D clause as well as general insurance liability in the event of an accident. Good luck, but I doubt the powers that be will want to make an exception unless you can prove significant monetary savings by allowing you to fly direct.
 
DJTorrente said:
I used to tell co-workers who questioned my sanity that it was about as dangerous as riding a motorcycle; which I believe to be the case, though I don't recall where I learned that comparison.
Click to expand...

Several years ago I started posting links to this document "Cross Modal Safety Comparisons" which contains tabulations of several research attempts on this subject; bottom line is that GA appears to be marginally safer than riding motorcycles:
https://www.atsb.gov.au/media/36229/cross_modal_safety_comparisons.pdf

Note: Definition of GA used by the Australians: http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/aviation/general/index.aspx
 
petrolero said:
I'm curious if anyone out there is using his/her aircraft in furtherance of someone else's business,
Click to expand...
Me.
how big is the company
Click to expand...
Me.

, and (how) did you get them to allow it?
Click to expand...
I asked myself.

What arrangement to pay for it?
Click to expand...
I put the amount it cost on my invoice, and the company to which I am under contract pays it.

Can you carry company passengers?
Click to expand...
Assumes facts not in evidence, specifically that there are any other people in my company (as I said above, it's just me).

That said, it's pretty much as discussed by others above -- companies can see a lot of legal and financial downsides, and not a lot of upsides. As for submitting an expense report indicating you drove when you actually flew, getting caught in that lie would be a dischargeable offense at pretty much any company I've ever heard of, especially if they'd already told you not to fly your own plane on the job.
 
Last edited:
I know that Coma24 uses his aircraft for business, and I think he has a board he had to pitch it to as well.

Hopefully he'll chime in with all the answers. :)
 
Depending upon your aircraft and qualifications. I would say fly on. Then if you get caught, and I would think there are two ways you will get caught. One would be an incident/accident, and two would be too much productivity. Near as I can tell, the company will notice that you have taken care of 3 days worth of clients before quitting time on day one, and will question you on that. At which time you can tell them how you did it. They will either say "Good show on taking the initiative and making the company money." "Now don't do it again", or, "can you do it again?" In the incident/accident scenerio they won't have to ask. And they'll probably say; "good show on taking the initiative, and trying to make the company money. But, you screwed th' pooch, an' yer fired."
Now, If you are totally up front with them, and explain what you have planned, The best that will happen is they'll allow it, and expect more productivity from you rain or shine.(you'll find yourself flying in conditions that would have the airforce grounded) Or they will tell you that it's a crazy idea, and if you ever dreamed you did that you would wake up and appologize.
If I could make a 2 hour flight GA as opposed to a six hour drive I would fly wx permitting. Also, If I could make a 2 hour flight GA, Then ~20 min drive, as opposed to a ~1hour drive, a 2 hour flight (commercial) then another hour+ drive. I would take the 2 hour GA flight. But that's just me.
 
I would just ask "If I charge the standard mileage rate...does it matter how I get there?" and leave it at that!
 
I use my plane for business when it makes sense. My company has no specific prohibition but I think if upper mgmt were to be informed they would nix it. My company has about 2400 empl worldwide. I use the plane where driving takes 3 times as long.

The most important criteria is for you to be able to say no go and sit on the ground for a day or rent a car and go get the plane another day. If you are on a tight schedule, eventually you will get in a situation that will come to grief. It's just useful as a time machine ehen both ends of the trip can be completed.

I was stuck in PHX for a day and half once. Lucky for me I can work anywhere there is an internet connection. Most people don't have that luxury.
 
For the OP, are you asking if you can be reimbursed by the company for the expense?

You can do that, if:
- you are not carrying any other passengers, and
- you are not carrying any property (ie, delivering cargo can't be the mission)
- the travel is incidental to the business. I believe the yardstick is, "would you have done this trip without an airplane anyway?"

Looks like you're good on all 3 (if you don't take anyone).

If you do take someone, then you can split the fuel/oil/rental costs for the trip, but you'd have to pay at least your pro-rata share.

So, there are a few ways to do it...the best would be if you could expense your actual costs associated with the flight (but then the company would need to bless it).

Otherwise, a write off at the end of the year is probably best.

A compromise would be to submit it as mileage, and then write off the delta between the mileage reimbursement and the actual flight costs as non-reimbursed expenses, but I would talk to your accountant when the time comes to make sure you're good.

I have access to the company airplane. For personal flights, I cover the fuel and oil. When we first got the airplane, 90% of the flights were personal.

Eventually, though, the company changed to a new line of business and as a result, I have a need to travel a whole lot more than before. It's at the point where literally 99% of the flight time is for a business trip. In those cases, I am reimbursed for the expenses. We let our insurance provider know ahead of time (once I started doing business flights) and they were fine, as long as we weren't in the business of conducting commercial flights.

Many of the places I fly would be horribly inefficient (both in terms of time and money) to reach commercially. The plane is small, fast and efficient. It's basically the GA dream. I hope you can make it work for your case.
 
My understanding is that many companies that permit employee self-flying typically require two things: an instrument rating, and for the company to be named as an additional insured on the liability coverage (with a specified amount).
I used to be in that situation myself for years and it worked out very well, for both sides. In my case, the company agreed to pay for the extra coverage, which made it even nicer. I reciprocated by not crashing. :wink2:
 
dans2992 said:
Good luck.....

If you're willing to take the "forgiveness rather than permission route", probably the best approach is to let them assume you're driving, and get reimbursed the IRS mileage rate...
Click to expand...
That will work till you get stranded by weather that would not stop you from driving

I prepared a simple spreadsheet that showed how much money they would save if I flew vs driving.

I work for a smaker companies of about 250 and the owner agreed to it.

Problem is that the way the FAA has interpretted it no one else can go with me unless we just agree to split expenses and get no reimbursement.
 
petrolero said:
I'm in the oil & gas biz and may have occasion in the future to travel medium distances to fields that my company buys. These (as yet unpurchased) fields are near small towns somewhere in the plains east of the Rockies. It is a royal PITA to get to them via normal air carriers and ruins most or all of a day if you drive (from Denver). Seems like a business case for using my personal aircraft in furtherance of a business (pursuant to Part 91 regs).

I know business owners do this all the time, but since I am an employee of a 200-person company, we're into the muck of liability and policy and HR, etc. It is far far easier for them to simply say "no" than do go through all that mess. And for this reason I have decided not to bring it up unless/until I have an iron-clad business case for it. Oh and... I am the only pilot that I know of at this company.

I'm curious if anyone out there is using his/her aircraft in furtherance of someone else's business, how big is the company, and (how) did you get them to allow it? What arrangement to pay for it? Can you carry company passengers?

I've read NBAA's discussion of the topic, but it's generic and I'm more interested in some anecdotes from fellow business pilots, especially those who've been the first ones at their company to bring it up.
Click to expand...


I have done it frequently. I don't ask, if I have to go somewhere for someone and a small plane is the best way to get it done, that's what I do. What I suggest you do is track your hours and expenses to the Nth degree so you can accurately (to IRS standards) apportion your business and personal use expenses. Another model I know guys who use their plane for business use will set the plane up under holding company structure and rent the plane back to themselves under business and personal accounts.
 
I fly both as an employee of the company I am employed by and in my role as owner of a different business. As an employee, I will typically charge the company no more than the equivalent airfare I would have otherwise paid, though in some instances where I'm saving the company a lot of labor hour costs by GA flying vs the airlines, I will charge closer to my actual cost (fuel + dry rental charge). I'm typically the project manager for the projects I'm travelling on, so it is required for me to be particularly prudent on how the budgets (typically fixed-cost) are managed.

The owners of the company are fully aware that I am flying GA. I was the 4th employee of a now 40+ employee company, so I'm cut some judgement slack that a more junior employee might get.

Flying for my own business, I charge the full cost.
 
I believe many companies conclude that employees cannot fly on business because they have not tried to get insurance to change their policy on the subject; it is a relatively-easily negotiated term.

A friend of mine worked for an engineering firm which expected engineers to learn to fly, and bought planes for them to fly; this, because they felt it gave them an unmatched competitive advantage. When the company sold, they terminated flying ops for "liability," and in the process, they lost people and accounts, as responsiveness suffered.
 
I got in trouble with my college's athletic director for flying my Cessna to a college soccer game in Oklahoma (I'm an athletic manager), with him citing "liability reasons." However, it was perfectly fine to drive my car there...makes no sense!! Three hours on the road vs. 45 minutes by air, I chose the 45 minutes, and nearly lost my job over it. Be careful. If in doubt, ask permission.
 
I do it.
I own it.
13,000 employees
I charge the company 10% less than the going rate for the airports cherokee six rental rate. @200/hr
I've been audited, no problems.
 
tlrussell said:
I do it.
I own it.
13,000 employees
I charge the company 10% less than the going rate for the airports cherokee six rental rate. @200/hr
I've been audited, no problems.
Click to expand...

Yep, that is the best way to stay kosher with the IRS.
 
You should be able to carry passengers (employees) incidental to the trip? (would you have traveled anyways without them)?

Keep in mind the tax rules. Your plane = IRS per-NM rate. Rental plane = actual rental costs. Company plane = non-issue.

The IRS has a separate rate for planes.

The IRS rate generally is enough to cover most 4-seat bug smashers up to around a 182. A 172 makes money.

coma24 said:
For the OP, are you asking if you can be reimbursed by the company for the expense?

You can do that, if:
- you are not carrying any other passengers, and
- you are not carrying any property (ie, delivering cargo can't be the mission)
- the travel is incidental to the business. I believe the yardstick is, "would you have done this trip without an airplane anyway?"

Looks like you're good on all 3 (if you don't take anyone).

If you do take someone, then you can split the fuel/oil/rental costs for the trip, but you'd have to pay at least your pro-rata share.

So, there are a few ways to do it...the best would be if you could expense your actual costs associated with the flight (but then the company would need to bless it).

Otherwise, a write off at the end of the year is probably best.

A compromise would be to submit it as mileage, and then write off the delta between the mileage reimbursement and the actual flight costs as non-reimbursed expenses, but I would talk to your accountant when the time comes to make sure you're good.

I have access to the company airplane. For personal flights, I cover the fuel and oil. When we first got the airplane, 90% of the flights were personal.

Eventually, though, the company changed to a new line of business and as a result, I have a need to travel a whole lot more than before. It's at the point where literally 99% of the flight time is for a business trip. In those cases, I am reimbursed for the expenses. We let our insurance provider know ahead of time (once I started doing business flights) and they were fine, as long as we weren't in the business of conducting commercial flights.

Many of the places I fly would be horribly inefficient (both in terms of time and money) to reach commercially. The plane is small, fast and efficient. It's basically the GA dream. I hope you can make it work for your case.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Jim Logajan said:
Several years ago I started posting links to this document "Cross Modal Safety Comparisons" which contains tabulations of several research attempts on this subject; bottom line is that GA appears to be marginally safer than riding motorcycles:
https://www.atsb.gov.au/media/36229/cross_modal_safety_comparisons.pdf

Note: Definition of GA used by the Australians: http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/aviation/general/index.aspx
Click to expand...

Per mile, it's pretty damn close to a bike.

Figure a car is 1x the risk, a bike is 7x the risk, and so is GA. Commercial is far less than driving.

I made a spreadsheet once, but bottom line is most certified GA is about that. Traditional single engine 172/182 DA20/40, gets down to a bit safer (3x driving), high performance singles (bonanza, cirrus) are about the same as a bike, while a piston twin puts you in a more risky category than the bike.

Experimental/homebuilt is about the same risk as a piston twin.
 
Pj500, you would need a commercial ticket to do it with ppl aboard. I believe this is supported by case law, just can't recall the case right now. Anyone?
 
coma24 said:
Pj500, you would need a commercial ticket to do it with ppl aboard. I believe this is supported by case law, just can't recall the case right now. Anyone?
Click to expand...


You would also need a 135 certificate unless the company owns the airplane.
 
My employer allows and reimburses travel in a private plane and I do it. I must specify the employer as an additional "named insured" on my policy of $1 million or more, and I must provide them documentation of that. I have seen the same requirement with other employers.

When the US govt was my client, they reimbursed me, with no additional insured thing. The US govt will even reimburse for miles on a motorcycle. Search for info on POV "personally owned vehicle" to find more.

It is typical for the reimbursement to be $X per mile or the cost of a commercial air ticket, whichever is less, and the latter had always applied for me.

Don't lie and claim you drove your car as was suggested by someone else in this thread.
 
Last edited:
I worked for the feds (who had a mileage rate for POV aircraft) and for a University and neither cared much if you flew or not whether you flew or not. The University actually got more concerned when I was driving with two associate directors and the VP of the University and his assistant to a meeting on one of the remote campuses. They thought that was too many key people to be in the same car.

When I started working for a small company the president was concerned again not so much of corporate liability but that he'd lose one of his key players.

Then we got bought out by a large company. Flying in small aircraft is a 100% forbidden, firing offense. Of course the large company knows small aircraft are dangerous They're the major manufacturer of small aircraft as well as engines and propellers for the same.
 
coma24 said:
Pj500, you would need a commercial ticket to do it with ppl aboard. I believe this is supported by case law, just can't recall the case right now. Anyone?
Click to expand...

bradg33 said:
You would also need a 135 certificate unless the company owns the airplane.
Click to expand...

If you are flying on business, and a co-worker flies along, as long as you are not being paid to fly (reimbursement of expenses only), you should not be regarded as flying for hire or compensation.

So, I disagree with the two posts above; am ready (always) to be shown wrong, if wrong I am.

Collect the IRS rate, or prove-up actual expenses, should be good to go.
 
flyingron said:
I worked for the feds (who had a mileage rate for POV aircraft) and for a University and neither cared much if you flew or not whether you flew or not. The University actually got more concerned when I was driving with two associate directors and the VP of the University and his assistant to a meeting on one of the remote campuses. They thought that was too many key people to be in the same car.

When I started working for a small company the president was concerned again not so much of corporate liability but that he'd lose one of his key players.

Then we got bought out by a large company. Flying in small aircraft is a 100% forbidden, firing offense. Of course the large company knows small aircraft are dangerous They're the major manufacturer of small aircraft as well as engines and propellers for the same.
Click to expand...


Only in America....:mad2::mad2::mad2::mad2:........:rolleyes:
 
I checked with my insurer about my use of airplanes to project sites and back with or without passengers whether employees or vendors and also with products for delivery. They take no exception as long as it isn't a revenue flight or specifically compensated for in my contract, which would make it commercial. The personal business provision eliminates any gray area that other insurers may use to exclude coverage.
 
SCCutler said:
If you are flying on business, and a co-worker flies along, as long as you are not being paid to fly (reimbursement of expenses only), you should not be regarded as flying for hire or compensation.



So, I disagree with the two posts above; am ready (always) to be shown wrong, if wrong I am.



Collect the IRS rate, or prove-up actual expenses, should be good to go.
Click to expand...


You're unfortunately very wrong. I agree with you that it should be ok, but the FAA disagrees with us both. Look at the Mangiamiele Chief Counsel opinion. Ok to fly yourself and be reimbursed, but as soon as you put another person on board, you can no longer be reimbursed at all. It's a ****ty opinion, but that's the stance that FAA has taken.
 
pj500 said:
You should be able to carry passengers (employees) incidental to the trip? (would you have traveled anyways without them)?

Keep in mind the tax rules. Your plane = IRS per-NM rate. Rental plane = actual rental costs. Company plane = non-issue.

The IRS has a separate rate for planes.

The IRS rate generally is enough to cover most 4-seat bug smashers up to around a 182. A 172 makes money.
Click to expand...

Are you sure? I'm not positive that is accurate as it applies to individual deductions. I think the FAA goes by actual cost which is why people set the plane up as a company and rent it to themselves.
 
Henning said:
Are you sure? I'm not positive that is accurate as it applies to individual deductions. I think the FAA goes by actual cost which is why people set the plane up as a company and rent it to themselves.
Click to expand...

I think he's talking about the GSA reimbursement rate:

http://www.gsa.gov/portal/content/100715

While the GSA rate for POVs typically matches the reimbursement rate allowed by the IRS, I can't find anything that specifically calls out the aircraft reimbursement rate. There are a lot of IRS manuals though...
 
bradg33 said:
You're unfortunately very wrong. I agree with you that it should be ok, but the FAA disagrees with us both. Look at the Mangiamiele Chief Counsel opinion. Ok to fly yourself and be reimbursed, but as soon as you put another person on board, you can no longer be reimbursed at all. It's a ****ty opinion, but that's the stance that FAA has taken.
Click to expand...

Has anyone taken this opinion to a Court?
Just curious as that may be the only way to get this absurdly thought out "opinion" removed without getting the critters in congress to do something about it. :rolleyes2:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top