But do the FAA/CAA really care if somebody who owns a plane, gets reimbursed a share of his indirect costs too? As long as the total costs do not exceed, say, the wet rental fee of a comparable aircraft?
The only objective of this regulation is to prevent people from flying for free or for hire on a mere PPL. So as long as the pilot has to contribute *something* to the flight, the intent of the law has been met, AFAIC.
So I can't see the FAA/CAA making a big fuss over this. Heck, otherwise you could just incorporate your plane somehow, and rent the plane from that corporation. The net effect would be the same.
Quite apart from the fact that IME people don't advertise their rates or calculation methods. You fly with a few mates, you tell them what the flight is going to cost in total - they have no clue how that amount is calculated anyway - and calculate what an equal share is. But even if they wanted to, the FAA/CAA are not going to be able to track this, let alone prosecute somebody over it. It'll only surface when you start abusing this rule big time, or if an incident/accident happens and your little money-making scheme is discovered in the aftermath.