N Registered Aircraft Based in Canada

[ScudRunner-d95]

So hypothetically I buy an N Registered Aircraft for private use only,


-Aircraft based at a Canadian Airport.
-Comply with US Maintenance schedules.
-Hold a US Pilot licences validation (based on my TC licence)


What are the issues with such a scenario?

[Goose]

I believe the aircraft would have to be "based" in the U.S.  I looked briefly into having a C-registered in the US and determined as long as it went home to Canada every now and then it was completely fine.

[Colonel]

Scud:  Both TC and the FAA will be unhappy
with you, but for different reasons.

PS  You don't need an FAA ticket to fly N-reg
in Canada (TCA licence will do) and you don't
need a TCA licence to fly C-reg in the USA (FAA
pilot cert is fine).  I can dig up the applicable
reciprocal FARs and CARs (have done it many
times).

Goose: are you obliquely referring to a CARs
or FARs requirement?

[ScudRunner-d95]

[quote author=Goose link=topic=5585.msg14651#msg14651 date=1486518954]
I believe the aircraft would have to be "based" in the U.S.  I looked briefly into having a C-registered in the US and determined as long as it went home to Canada every now and then it was completely fine.
[/quote]


So what if the aircraft went to the USA a few times a year.


Colonel, I would want to hop the line a few times per year so I would require a FAA licence validation.


The reason I bring this up, I was speaking with a trusted source about a future aircraft purchase. We began discussing some maintenance schedules,  prop overhaul differences between the two countries came up. Canada TBO or every 10 years the prop must be overhauled however down in the USA its when mtc is required. He then brought up why bother importing it or switching registrations at all, which got my gears turning. He knows and I know of a few N registered airplanes that call Canada home which brings me to the is that legal or under what regiment are they doing this under. 

[ScudRunner-d95]

Found more so incorporate in Deleware or another tax friendly state and bobs you uncle ?? I get that right?


[quote]Division V — Operation of Foreign Aircraft


Period of Time Present in Canada


202.42 (1) Subject to section 203.03, no person shall operate in Canada an aircraft that is registered in a foreign state that has been present in Canada for a total of 90 days or more in the immediately preceding twelve-month period unless


(a) the foreign state is a contracting state;


(b) the operator of the aircraft is


(i) the foreign state,


(ii) an individual who is not a Canadian citizen or a permanent resident but is a citizen or subject of the foreign state, or


(iii) an entity that is incorporated or otherwise formed under the laws of the foreign state; and


(c) if the operator of the aircraft is an entity described in subparagraph (b)(iii), the aircraft is operated in Canada


(i) in accordance with an air operator certificate, or


(ii) in any operation other than an operation that would require a private operator certificate if the aircraft were registered in Canada.


(2) For the purposes of calculating the 90-day period,


(a) if the aircraft is present in Canada for any part of a calendar day, that part shall be counted as one day; and


(b) an aircraft is deemed to be present in Canada as soon as it enters Canadian airspace.


SOR/2003-271, s. 5.[/qoute][/quote]

[Goose]

[quote author=Colonel Sanders link=topic=5585.msg14653#msg14653 date=1486527009]
Goose: are you obliquely referring to a CARs
or FARs requirement?
[/quote]


Unfortunately it has been a few years and I cannot remember the exact details.  I wish I could provide a source but I was dealing with the opposite situation so it would be irrelevant anyways.  Just sharing my experience.


Scud, (b)(iii) is basically what I was getting at by the "based" thing.

[tommywcom]

[color=rgb(12, 49, 94)][font=Arial][size=13px]CAR 202.42 states foreign registered aircraft cannot be in Canada for more than 90 days in a 12 month period. [/size][/font][/color]
[color=#0c315e][/color]
[color=#0c315e][font=arial, sans-serif][/size][size=2]I recall one of the latest issues of COPA mentions someone got fined for that, but I don't have that in front of me. Below is another example.
[/size][size=13px][/font][/color]
[color=rgb(12, 49, 94)][font=Arial][/size][/font][/color]
http://tc.gc.ca/eng/civilaviation/stand ... e-3661.htm


I looked into this myself a number of years ago as my original license was from the FAA and I used to live in the US so I am very familiar with the system over there. But in the end it just doesn't work out well unless you truly plan on basing the aircraft over there. In many cases owners were also required to to pay the GST on it as well even though it was never imported per se.

[John Swallow]

There is a Canadian chap that comes in here in a US registered aircraft.  He might be taking advantage of this:?  (I've deleted portions that don't pertain.  Possibly got a "company" in the States...?)

"Subject to section 203.03, no person shall operate in Canada an aircraft that is registered in a foreign state that has been present in Canada for a total of 90 days or more in the immediately preceding twelve-month period unless (it is)
(iii) an entity that is incorporated or otherwise formed under the laws of the foreign state; and the aircraft is operated in Canada
(ii) in any operation other than an operation that would require a private operator certificate if the aircraft were registered in Canada."

Worth looking into...

[Four Bars]

The biggest initial advantage is not having to pay sales tax on the purchase.
This can be diminished by having to annually pay a percentage of the aircraft's  value as a luxury tax, might be State specific...

[ScudRunner-d95]

The attraction to doing this is from a few angles,
-Larger aircraft pool to select from without having to import and pay GST,
-Easier resale to a larger market of customers.
-Maintenance schedules (prop example)