This issue has been solved in general by the FAA getting beneficial owner details.
I am sure there is a strong correlation between a particular aircraft type, and whether it was bought with the proceeds of criminal activities 
but I doubt those users will be using a US trust.
RobertL18C wrote:
These trusts seem somewhat mom-and-pop outfits, while sometimes there are succession and contingency plans if the trustee is incapacitated (physically or legally), am not sure how robust they are.
Peter wrote:
Most trusts are one-man bands.
I have a different view, and this sounds to me more like gossip than fact. Given all the false information floating around the internet, we all have a responsibility to be careful about spreading gossip. One or two cases does not make them the norm. There are mom-and-pop on-line shops too, and no one would claim that they represent on-line businesses as a whole.
I know of two companies that operate US trusts for N-reg aircraft and both are very professional. One of them is part of a larger group of companies that also provide insurance and investment. Neither are mom-and-pop outfit or one-man band.
I think such generalizations are misleading to the pilot population and unfair to the well-run companies providing a very very useful service.
My “one man band” comment was really that the ultimate person who meets the US ownership criteria is usually a single individual, in the trusts I have known about. They tend to have admin staff of course.
The bizjet sphere uses the “75% US lawyer” kind of setup which is a lot more expensive.
I have been with Southern Aircraft Consultancy since 2005 and have always found them really great. I also know that they work closely with the FAA and comply with all the requirements.
The press is bad at understanding this. I spent 1hr+ on the phone with some BBC reporter when they were researching the famous PA46 footballer crash. They “got” some of what I told them but only some. The US trust angle was completely irrelevant to the accident, as it always is.
What is interesting is how bad news spreads faster and further than good news. The situation subject of this thread is important to share. At the same time, it is an opportunity to not only inform the pilots here about bad apples to avoid, but also indicate some of the reliable companies that are providing a fine service to those who wish to take advantage of all the benefits of operation under N-registration.
Of course, there is no need to incur the costs of a large trust organization in the US. Only the basic legal requirements of incorporation need to be met. What is more important is the partner company in Europe that manages the trusts. The quality of this company is determinant in the legal trust contractual arrangement and management. My aircraft trust was managed by Anglo Trust in the CI from 1991 until 2002 when it was sold it to the Heritage Group. The principal, after selling Anglo Trust in 1998, decided to start up again fresh and established Avcorp Registrations Ltd based at Gloucestershire Airport. I moved my aircraft trust to them due to the long and strong personal relationship. I have only good things to say about this company. Apparently they get a significant amount of business from unsatisfied owner pilots. They are able to perform an audit of an existing trustee corporation, some of which have shown substantial defects. Their annual fee, while not cheap, includes up to 2 BFR/IPCs.
Peter wrote:
This issue has been solved in general by the FAA getting beneficial owner details.
There seems to be at least one DA who obviously doesn’t think it is solved…
chflyer wrote:
but also indicate some of the reliable companies
As far as I can see, the debate (which was originally started by a local Texas tv station) is more about the general model of trusts itself rather than about bad ones or good ones.
I’m absolutely sure that the vast majority of US trusts do a very fine job – the question is if the US want this job to be done at all.
What’s a DA?
District Attorney (state prosecutor).
@chflyer what I mean by ‘mom and pop’ is that at the lighter GA end, these trusts are not regulated, it is not clear what financial capital, professional indemnity or governance (compliance structure) is protecting you from the trust succumbing to problems not related to your asset.
This does not mean that the team running them are not good, honest practitioners that have built up a good franchise based on good customer service and practice.
Thanks for your recommendation and if I become an owner of an N reg, will keep them in mind, also SAC.
@malibuflyer I would be surprised if the FAA went against the trust concept – the bizjet community, largely based in the USA would lobby against this.
RobertL18C wrote:
I would be surprised if the FAA went against the trust concept – the bizjet community, largely based in the USA would lobby against this.
Perhaps Silver is better positioned to comment. FAA, however, is a (federal) government agency. My impression of the US system is that the justice system is much stronger in disputes against government agencies than in most European countries. Therefore the question could become more if FAA has the power to save it…
On the other side, I don’t think it would be a major issue for the bizzjet community if, e.g. the rules would be changed that beneficial owner must not be a foreign corporation. For most biz jet operators it would be quite simple (if they not already have this) to set up a US corporation for the purpose of owning the plane. This US corporation has (from the point of the current dispute) the advantage, that it is under the control of the SEC/IRS/etc. and therefore it is at least easier for the administration to investigate into where the money comes from. If the beneficial owner is the “1st EuroGA aircraft holding inc” in guadeloupe, the US effectively have no ways to investigate if it is paid by bad or good money…
RobertL18C wrote:
This does not mean that the team running them are not good, honest practitioners that have built up a good franchise based on good customer service and practice.
That part is actually the key. The company one engages with to manage the trust, including oversight, is the most important part. As mentioned, my trust manger has audited some other trusts that leave a lot to be desired. Regulation alone doesn’t protect from abuse or negligence. Unfortunately, many people make their selection based entirely on price.
