Scenario: you acquire an aircraft through a company that you founded with the sole purpose of being its registered holder and operator to rent it out to those pilots who so wish. Let's say you're the only shareholder for simplicity but you're not an employee.
Now you're also a pilot, and you carry out a private operation with this aircraft that you hire from your company in order to take your doctor friend out and back to see some patients. Both you and your friend incur costs for the flight – invoiced by your company – which you split evenly due to the private nature of the flight. The fee your company charges is equivalent to (at least) twice the actual costs and expenses it incurs itself (fuel, oil, airways and landing fees, insurance, engine overhaul, ...). Nothing illegal here, companies survive by charging for services and (try to) make profits in return. Your friend pays her share, you pay yours – all fair and square. Since the fee charged is twice the actual cost, her share covers those costs and while your share becomes an immediate personal loss, it becomes a profit for the company. This profit will be paid out back to you as a dividend (≠ wage/reward) at the end of the fiscal year (or you can leave it in the company).
A more realistic case would obviously have to account for GST, and double taxation avoidance since the dividend payback will also be subject to taxation. I'm no expert of the Aussie taxation system but you get the general idea.
Is there any obvious hole in that scenario or would that allow to bypass the requirement for the company to have an AOC? The idea is obviously not to make a quick buck on your friend's back but to be remain law abiding while helping her in her requirement to see patients and not losing money yourself. Eventually she has an operational requirement to fly around so it's reasonable to expect her to pay for the flight expenses.
Last edited by Okihara; 28th Jul 2019 at 10:29.