Pro-Rata Expenses, Common Purpose.... but local sightseeing flight

AggieMike88

Touchdown! Greaser!
Joined
Jan 13, 2010
Messages
20,805
Location
Denton, TX
Display Name

Display name:
The original "I don't know it all" of aviation.
Through my years on this and other aviation forums, I feel I have a good handle on the rules concerning splitting of flight expenses as they apply to a private pilot.

Especially when you are departing from your local airport and travelling to a distant airport.


What I am a little sketchy on is if it is a local sightseeing flight. Am I allowed to ask for pro-rata share of the wet rental price?
 
If your talking about sharing expenses with a friend,who’s to know or care.
 
Though I have no numbers to back it up, I’d venture to guess that the vast majority of flights given to friends by private pilots are local flights whether they be sightseeing, fellowship, or just an intro to flying sort of thing. Regardless, as long as the pilot is paying his pro rata share it should be fine. I don’t think that the destination must be a different airport nor the common purpose an event or activity at a destination. Flying in and of itself as well as sightseeing is a purpose unto itself.
 
If you want a strict technical answer, maybe :)

Here's what i think it comes down to: the FAA requires a common purpose other than transporting someone. So it's about whether the sightseeing flight is for your friend or for both of you. That's a pretty close question and subject to a lot of iffy ands and buts.

For one example, it's your home base and you have a friend visiting, so you want to show him the sights you are very familiar with. Strong case the purpose of the flight is to transport your friend, so no common purpose and no cost sharing.

On the opposite end, you are visiting your friend and you want the tour with your friend pointing out the sights from the air. Let's make it a good one: you are from Ohio and visiting a friend on Long Island, NY. You really want to do the Hudson River corridor and do it with your friend. Strong case for a common purpose for that sightseeing flight.

Yeah, both of those can be argued back and forth, and I personally would not charge a friend for either of those, but since you asked...

And "nobody cares unless there's a problem, is as practical an answer as any.
 
And "nobody cares unless there's a problem, is as practical an answer as any.

I'd go with this, just keep it on the QT...
 
One of the great things about flying Light Sport. I've never asked anyone for cash for sharing a flight. I was once selling a plane and the prospective buyer offered to reimburse me for the 1/2 hr. flight. What's the point of asking for $3?

Easy to stay legal in an LSA.
 
I've never run into a situation where I thought I might be flying with someone who'd cause a problem in this regard. My pax usually volunteer to help defray the cost of the flight and no one else has ever gotten involved. Heck, unless you're advertising, or are trying to run some kind of "pirate air taxi" , I don't think anyone's gonna even think about your passengers helping you to defray your costs. Just make sure pax understand you are a private pilot, and not "for hire".
 
If you and a buddy decide to go for a flight, I don’t see an issue. You said this is someone you have not met. So does it make a difference if it’s a total stranger says, “Hey, if I pay for half the cost, will you take me up for a ride”?
 
If you want a strict technical answer, maybe :)

Here's what i think it comes down to: the FAA requires a common purpose other than transporting someone. So it's about whether the sightseeing flight is for your friend or for both of you. That's a pretty close question and subject to a lot of iffy ands and buts.

For one example, it's your home base and you have a friend visiting, so you want to show him the sights you are very familiar with. Strong case the purpose of the flight is to transport your friend, so no common purpose and no cost sharing.

On the opposite end, you are visiting your friend and you want the tour with your friend pointing out the sights from the air. Let's make it a good one: you are from Ohio and visiting a friend on Long Island, NY. You really want to do the Hudson River corridor and do it with your friend. Strong case for a common purpose for that sightseeing flight.

Yeah, both of those can be argued back and forth, and I personally would not charge a friend for either of those, but since you asked...

And "nobody cares unless there's a problem, is as practical an answer as any.
So, are you saying you can't sight see around your local area? I do, every time I fly. My least favorite training flight was hood work, mostly because I didn't get to see anything outside.

I don't get that line of thinking at all.

And, transporting your friend to where he started, .?? Huh
 
The person who asked is a local community member I have yet to meet.

If this community leader called most local FBOs and asked if they would take him on a sight seeing ride, they would have to refuse because they do not have a letter of authorization from the FAA for sight seeing rides, and the commercial pilot conducting the flight is not on a drug test program.

Out of the blue he calls a private pilot he doesn’t even know. I not saying it is illegal, but I think you are pushing the envelope.
 
I've never met any of the tower folks at FTG, but our EAA chapter has a standing offer any time to any of the controllers who want a ride to see what it's like from our POV during Young Eagles or any time. Even if they offer, I don't think any of us would take the $.
 
Not speaking for the FAA, but I will tell you Inspectors are not out there bringing in forensic accountants to shake out pilots who allowed passengers to pay more than their pro-rata share of a flight. The regs are written to address situations where folks might take advantage of cost sharing to set up a subsidized flying operation using the general public as passengers. Could you imagine the FAA going after a college student with a 61.113 violation because his dad asked him to fly somewhere and footed the bill? It just isn't going to happen.
 
Another thing. If no money changes hands until after the flight... you’ll know “nothing happened” during the flight before any money is involved... ;)
 
Not speaking for the FAA, but I will tell you Inspectors are not out there bringing in forensic accountants to shake out pilots who allowed passengers to pay more than their pro-rata share of a flight. The regs are written to address situations where folks might take advantage of cost sharing to set up a subsidized flying operation using the general public as passengers. Could you imagine the FAA going after a college student with a 61.113 violation because his dad asked him to fly somewhere and footed the bill? It just isn't going to happen.
There are people online who can imagine all kinds of things! ;)
 
What's truly sketchy is bothering to ask for payment on a local sightseeing flight.
 
So dude calls you up and ask to take him on a flight? Id say thats beyond the scope of a private pilot. But if you were already going sight seeing anyway then its common purpose so all is good.

I have never asked for a dime from passengers. Usually if its a common purpose im going regardless, so if you want to tag along I wont ask for anything. Ive never really understood the pro rata share thing...hey everyone im going to oshkosh who wants to go with me and help share the costs?? I don't know that rubs me wrong...I flew last year to OSH and I was going either solo or a full plane. Had a buddy go with me just because and I didn't ask for nor expect a dime. However on the same token I will offer to pay my share if im a tag along on a cross country but in my plane I don't expect anyone to pay for anything.

Now you call me up and ask me to take you somewhere...well that's a different ball game and I aint no commercial pilot so.....
 
Asking for payment is irrelevant. Good will, the possible return of the favor, has been ruled compensation.

Seriously? So if a buddy of mine asks me to take him somewhere for visiting his family or something and I don’t even ask for the pro rata share but he buys me lunch.... that’s compensation?
 
Seriously? So if a buddy of mine asks me to take him somewhere for visiting his family or something and I don’t even ask for the pro rata share but he buys me lunch.... that’s compensation?
Semi seriously. Not your buddy as an act of friendship. It's still pretty loose in terms of definition, but the good will the FAA looks askance at is business goodwill - expectation of future business opportunity. Stuff like that. It's actually arguably regulatory. Transporting business guests without a fee is a special benefit of large and fractional aircraft under Part 91, Subpart F and is extended by special exemption (and special requirements) to light aircraft used by NBAA members.

There have been a few enforcement cases in which good will compensation has been applied. One was a pilot who did multiple trips to transport people to a Super Bowl party at a facility when the charter originally hired crapped out. Another involved Disney. If I recall correctly it was about transporting people as a way of closing the deal.

You can read either case with a very critical eye, but what the FAA does for the most part is go after operations which "quack like a duck" - a duck running a charter. One of the tools they use are malleable definitions of "compensation."

Avoid quacking.
 
Last edited:
Hi, I'm new and been lurking.

I don't see how a local sightseeing flight couldn't be a common purpose. It seems to be so by its very definition. I'm not taking a sightseeing flight just cause and a passenger isn't going up in a small plane just to appease me (well, maybe my wife LOL).
 
The official rule from here on out:
Pilot pays for the costs.
Passenger buys the meal.
 
What's truly sketchy is bothering to ask for payment on a local sightseeing flight.

It's all very well being high and mighty about it but as a university student renting for $200+ an hour, back in the day, if I didn't share costs with friends who wanted to go for a quick flight, I couldn't have flown. Not everyone is in a position to fling money around. Try renting for $250+ an hour in the NL when you earn 40k euros and pay 50% income tax, for example.
 
Not speaking for the FAA, but I will tell you Inspectors are not out there bringing in forensic accountants to shake out pilots who allowed passengers to pay more than their pro-rata share of a flight. The regs are written to address situations where folks might take advantage of cost sharing to set up a subsidized flying operation using the general public as passengers. Could you imagine the FAA going after a college student with a 61.113 violation because his dad asked him to fly somewhere and footed the bill? It just isn't going to happen.
some people need to get a life....and not worry with such petty issues.
 
You can read either case with a very critical eye, but what the FAA does for the most part is go after operations which "quack like a duck" - a duck running a charter. One of the tools they use are malleable definitions of "compensation."

Avoid quacking.

Exactly. IMHO, if the FAA is pursuing you over a pro-rata cost sharing issue, you've got much bigger problems and you were going to get popped either way (probably because you've been doing something stupid, like running an illegal charter operation). I can't fathom that FAA Inspectors have the time or inclination to go after Job Blow private pilot for violating the cost sharing rules on a flight with his mom/dad/brother/friend. Of course, when Joe Blow private pilot starts "cost sharing" with random strangers he meets on the internet or facebook or craigslist (or via word of mouth), I'd guess the odds the FAA gets interested grow pretty quickly.
 
Strictly technical answer: Yes, as a private pilot you can ask another passenger in the plane to pay their pro-rata share of the expense of a sightseeing flight, as long as you are not operating an air tour business, and as long as there is common purpose.

Good article from AOPA: https://pilot-protection-services.a...ust/01/pro-rata-cost-sharing-the-math-matters
That begs the question. Most of the Chief Counsel opinions and NTSB cases in this area involve whether there was a common purpose or not.

My all time favorite of the genre is one going all the way back to 1977 (to show how old all this stuff is). A pilot asked the Chief Counsel whether he could contribute to a political campaign by transporting the candidate for the price of gas only. One would think the desire of both to get this guy elected wold be a common purpose, but, in addition to pointing out that paying for gas was not a pro rata expense, the Chief Counsel's office had this to say (I removed the paying for gas part):

to come within the exception to [the no-compensation rule] the flight must constitute a joint venture .... Since it is not a joint venture (you are not running for office), this operation would also be in violation of [the rule]​
 
Back
Top