Rules about a/c registration: where, if possible?

[Zio Nick]

Hi all,

I apologize if the subject has already been touched in other threads, I made a search but could not find useful infos.
As some of you know, I am in the process of purchasing my first aircraft.
I heard many stories about how useful and money saving would be registering the airplane in a Country different from the one where I live (BeNeLux). Sincerely I do not have clear ideas at this regard:
would it be possible to register -legally- the plane in a different Country?
if so: which Country do you think grants the best conditions in terms of taxes, bureaucracy efficiency and/or costs of maintenance?

Any answers appreciated.
Cheers.
ZN

[Dg800]

would it be possible to register -legally- the plane in a different Country?

This depends entirely on the country in question. EU countries generally subscribe to the idea of allowing EU citizens unlimited access in this regard as well, this is not necessarily the case with other EASA but non-EU countries such as Switzerland, where as a general rule you will have to be resident to acquire this privilege.
A few I know of where any citizen of another EU state may register his aircraft are:

Germany
UK
Italy
The Netherlands

if so: which Country do you think grants the best conditions in terms of taxes, bureaucracy efficiency and/or costs of maintenance?

With EASA regulations already in full effect you will unfortunately find that costs are more or less the same across all EU countries, there will be no major savings in registering, for example, your glider in Germany instead of in the Netherlands. You will generally have to comply with the same requirements and processing fees will be more or less the same (but not exactly). With EU regs you will be able to have maintenance performed in any EASA member state regardless of which state regs you have (as long as they're EASA), so you will always be able to take your plane where maintenance is actually cheaper for you (taking into account travel expenses, obviously).

Ciao,

Dg800

[Bob Upanddown]

The obvious answer is to register your aircraft in the USA.

You don't say what your aircraft is but the FAA regime is far better.

The costs of setting up a trust (to own the aircraft for you) and the costs to issue of the US certificate of airworthiness are not small but, compared to the potential costs involved in keeping a Cessna airworthy with all the SIDs, etc., you could be far better off.

[Zio Nick]

Thanks Bob,

But I expect that to register the a/c in the States you would need a good network to cope with bureaucracy, which at the moment I don't have.
As far as I remember there is also a number of limitations for flying N a/c in Europe, but on this I am not pretty sure.

I am buying a light a/c, most probably a Zlin which should be used for basic aerobatic competitions.

[Dg800]

I see that most Zlins that are up for sale are registered in former Eastern-block countries. Whilst it may be legal for you to keep them under the original registration, it might not be very practical unless, of course, you speak fluent Polish or Hungarian. :cool:
A transfer to the German register is probably the best option for you, I wouldn't even consider setting up a trust in order to get an N registration for such a small plane.

Ciao,

Dg800

[sharpend]

Putting your aircraft on the N reg has it's own problems.

There are advantages; for example one does not have to pay the 6% insurance tax! Moreover, the FAA does not insist on manufacturers recommended maintenance items, CAA does.

But flying an N reg to Europe can be a problem. Moreover, the FAA does not recognise the CAA IMC rating, thus cannot fly in or over 8/8 cloud as you can with an IMC rating & I don't think you can fly over populated areas or at night. However, none of this might concern you. Whatever, unless you are a US citizen, you will have to get one to own your aircraft (in trust). That will cost to set up and also anually. Finally it will be a problem when you sell!

Google the subject. It can be a minefield.

[Bob Upanddown]

Putting your aircraft on the N reg has it's own problems.

I think........

Not speaking from experience then?

The N reg is the nearest we will get to an international registration. Try flying around the world on the G reg. At some point, you WILL run out of options with maintenance. On the N reg, you can always find an A&P or FAA facility to carry out maintenance and keep you in the air.

And the problem with selling an aircraft on the N reg is???

Yes, it can be a minefield if you don't deal with someone experienced with handling N reg aircraft. There are plenty of people who have been dealing with the N reg for years.

[Dg800]

Try flying around the world on the G reg.

In a Zlin? :sad: Guys, we're not talking about a Cessna Citation here. :ugh:

[peterh337]

Load of incorrect info e.g.

the FAA does not insist on manufacturers recommended maintenance items, CAA does.

[Bob Upanddown]

Try flying around the world on the G reg.
In a Zlin? Guys, we're not talking about a Cessna Citation here.

Agreed. Just trying to correct mis-information about the N-reg in general.

[bluecode]

Those of you in CAA land may find it ironic but I know of people who put their aircraft on the G register because they find the CAA very helpful and efficient. :eek:

That's compared to the IAA in my case of course. Quite a few aircraft are maintained on the British register in this country.

Probably the best option would be to enquire at your local airfield and gain from other people's experiences.

[sharpend]

Actually, I do talk from experience

I have recently considered buying an N reg aeroplane and putting it on the G Reg...

Firstly, to do so required doing about £5K+ maintenance before the CAA would issue a C of A. Secondly, the USA trust wanted money to transfer. Lastly, to stay on the N Reg meant paying the USA trust fund it's annual dues. I could go on. There is much info on the internet re N v G; points for and against as I previously mentioned.

By the way, my main reason for wanting to transfer to G reg was because I wanted to own the aircraft, not a US trust!

I agree flying a N reg around the world is probably easier than on a G, but is is far more easy flying around Europe with a CAA licence in a G reg plane than with a CAA licence in a N reg plane. As we are generally talking about GA in the UK, European flying is far more likely than flying my puddle jumper to Bolivia ;)

[peterh337]

but is is far more easy flying around Europe with a CAA licence in a G reg plane than with a CAA licence in a N reg plane

Well, that's certainly true.

UK issued pilot papers are not usable in an N-reg outside UK airspace :)

Ref: FAR 61.3. More here (http://www.peter2000.co.uk/aviation/misc-privileges/index.html).

[Bob Upanddown]

Actually, I do talk from experience

I have recently considered buying an N reg aeroplane and putting it on the G Reg...

Why?? N reg has so many advantages (including not having the CAA advertise your name and address all over the internet via G-INFO).

Set up fee and annual cost of a trust?? What about set-up fee and annual cost of the rip-off Part M CAMO arrangement??

It looks as if your experience is all based on reading the internet......

[sharpend]

Bob, with respect, you might be missing the point. I want to own my aeroplane, not some faceless trust in the USA. OK, it has been said that if it 'flies, floats or f**ks', then rent it. So perhaps buying is not a good idea per se. But I, and many others, wish to! Additionally we all subscribe to the axiom: KISS.... Keep It Simple.

So I just don't want complications when it comes to selling. What happens if that company goes into liquidation?

OK, perhaps I worry too much...

[Dg800]

Why?? N reg has so many advantages (including not having the CAA advertise your name and address all over the internet via G-INFO).If you're worried about that than all you need to do is transfer to the D register. The Germans are even tighter than the Swiss when it comes to privacy. I speak from personal experience.

Set up fee and annual cost of a trust?? What about set-up fee and annual cost of the rip-off Part M CAMO arrangement??You don't need any CAMO arrangement (I think you actually mean CAMO+) to maintain a private aircraft to EASA standards.

[Bob Upanddown]

You don't need any CAMO arrangement (I think you actually mean CAMO+) to maintain a private aircraft to EASA standards.

No, I don't mean CAMO plus (A CAMO Plus can issue the ARC).
Small private aircraft can operate without having an arrangement with a CAMO but I don't believe anyone new to aircraft ownership can successfully manage the airworthiness and maintenance of an aircraft in the current EASA system. It has to be left to the professionals.
If you insist on managing your own aircraft, it means an ARC every year which, in my experience, can be expensive (especially if you change from CAMO Plus to CAMO Plus every year).

[Zio Nick]

Gents,

Thanks for the quantity of infos...
From what I was able to see I think the best will be to register my little Zlin in Germany.

In this decision I considered:
- experience of friends and colleagues (Dg 800 included)
- difficulties in establishing a minimum network in US for N registration
- tendency of certain countries (i.e.: Italy...) to use the a/c ownership as a tool to impose extra taxes to private persons
- logistic situation (I live less than 80km from the German border)

[Dg800]

Small private aircraft can operate without having an arrangement with a CAMO but I don't believe anyone new to aircraft ownership can successfully manage the airworthiness and maintenance of an aircraft in the current EASA system. It has to be left to the professionals.

I wonder how I managed to do it successfully until now... :ok: By the way, you are really thinking about CAMO+, which would allow you to have the ARC issued every three years but renewed twice during that period, based only on proper documentation of any maintenance performed (in other words, paper-trail-based :E). That is of course entirely optional, any owner can be their own CAMO and have all necessary maintenance (including yearly ARC reissue) performed at the part-M shop of your choice. The upside of this is that you can now do it anywhere in EASA-land regardless of registration. :D

Ciao,

Dg800

[Dg800]

From what I was able to see I think the best will be to register my little Zlin in Germany.
Excellent choice. :ok:

[georgez9]

I keep it simple , £10,000 share and just shy of £100 per month ,even if it all goes "tits" up , I can just walk away

its nice to "own" but rarely makes commercial sense , whether it flies , floats of F***ks ,............ never heard that one before:p

[englishal]

But flying an N reg to Europe can be a problem. Moreover, the FAA does not recognise the CAA IMC rating, thus cannot fly in or over 8/8 cloud as you can with an IMC rating & I don't think you can fly over populated areas or at night. However, none of this might concern you. Whatever, unless you are a US citizen, you will have to get one to own your aircraft (in trust). That will cost to set up and also anually. Finally it will be a problem when you sell!
Bizzare, completely made up comments !!!

Actually the FAA PPL allowes for VFR over the top already, and night flight. An FAA IR is cost effective and I can fly IFR anywhere I want.

We pay £250 annually to the trust (which was very easy to set up) and put the aeroplane on the N reg at an annual - this cost about 3 grand including the annual. It is so much less hassle being on the N reg and the saving on not having to pay for an ARC every year MORE than outweighs the trust fees. All the fees we have saved over the past few years on modifications to the avionics (for example) have far outweighed the cost of moving to the N reg.

[maxred]

OK, perhaps I worry too much...

Yes, Sharpend, I think you do. You mention in one of your posts, ...just Google NvG...

Can I suggest you do, actually read it, ponder, then perhaps come back with a more balanced and considered opinion. I also suggest you actually investigate -
I want to own my aeroplane, not some faceless trust in the USA.

I once learnt a value lesson in life, If you do not know what you are talking about, best to keep your mouth shut.

Live and learn:)

[georgez9]

too true, think before you speak , ....also people go on and on about "owning".... when very often , as with me , its simply a factional share they have anyway.. a sort of time-share

legal title is rarely important ,so long as one has all the rights and rewards of ownership , and the contract is ok..does "ownership" per se.. matter ?

[Bob Upanddown]

any owner can be their own CAMO and have all necessary maintenance (including yearly ARC reissue) performed at the part-M shop of your choice.

So, Dg800, are you your own CAMO?? Do you really know what is involved before making such a statement ??
No owner of a PA-28 could justify setting up their own CAMO due to cost and knowledge requirements (knowledge requirements imposed by the NAA and EASA).

N-reg.....Finally it will be a problem when you sell!

Look at the way aircraft values have dropped like a stone over the past few years. At that rate, it won't be the reg of the aircraft that determines the value but how much fuel there is left in the tanks!
Owners I have spoken to are ready to walk away from their aircraft in the next few years or if a really big repair bill looks likely before then. I would suggest devaluing your aircraft by 25% a year over the next 4 years and you will arrive at a fair value by 2016 - zero. FFS, who will spend money on an old dog to put 8.33 radios in??

[peterh337]

There is always a % of owners here who refuse to maintain to a reasonable standard, and then wonder why the thing ends up being worth almost nothing.

[Dg800]

So, Dg800, are you your own CAMO?? Do you really know what is involved before making such a statement ??

Yes, believe or not, I am the sole person responsible for the continued airworthiness of my own aircraft. Of course, I'm not the one actually performing maintenance (unless pilot/owner maintenance is specifically allowed in the maintenance program) or doing the yearly ARC renewal, I sub-contract all that to a Part-M facility of my choice. I really fail to see what the big deal should be?

[172driver]

or over 8/8

Wrong. This rule has gone the way of the Dodo with EASA.

[Bob Upanddown]

So, Dg800, are you your own CAMO?? Do you really know what is involved before making such a statement ??

Yes, believe or not, I am the sole person responsible for the continued airworthiness of my own aircraft. Of course, I'm not the one actually performing maintenance (unless pilot/owner maintenance is specifically allowed in the maintenance program) or doing the yearly ARC renewal, I sub-contract all that to a Part-M facility of my choice. I really fail to see what the big deal should be?

Sorry, that's not the same as being a CAMO - a company with a Part M approval such as DE.MG.1234. Every owner can be responsible for their own aircraft's airworthiness but that is not the same as being a CAMO. The knowledge required to be a CAMO is way above what you think an aircraft owner needs. I doubt you are doing anything like the work of a CAMO. Most owners rely to a huge extent on their maintenance organisation.

No, it's not a big deal to be the owner. It is a big deal being the CAMO which is why CAMO's charge.

[Dg800]

You obviously have no understanding of the whole CAMO thing and how it currently applies to privately owned aircraft, so let's just drop the discussion and agree to disagree, OK? The whole thing is already off-topic enough and is also turning into a personal N-reg vs EU-reg crusade and that's really besides the point.

Ciao,

Dg800