dublinpilot wrote:
What is new, is that two airport, Colmar and some other one I’ve forgotten, have a NOTAM demanding prior customs notification.
No – Colmar is back to normal.
Shorrick_Mk2 wrote:
AIP GEN 1.2.1All aircraft arriving from abroad and entering the French territory should perform the first landing on an airport provided with Customs, Police and Sanitary controls. Also, all aircraft leaving the French territory abroad should have their last stop in the French territory on such type of airport.
quoting just the headlines does not do good in most regulatory/legal issues.
French AIP Gen 1.2.1
Further down, there are rules for cases, where the general rules are reduced/amended.
In particular, there are rules for unscheduled, non-commercial flights (yes, mixed into many other cases) for which it is just a flight plan.
Can you please quote which part of the rules dispenses non scheduled non commercial flights from the AoE obligation?
“Moreover, the first landing and the last take off of any non commercial flights must be made at an airport open to international traffic.”
@Peter a customs check is not a check on the person as if you have nothing to declare you won’t have to show any ID so for all they know you could be a wanted criminal.
Customs officers are very visible at least in Swiss airports.
Also do not confuse “free movement” and Schengen. There are EU countries that have the right to free movement yet aren’t part of the Schengen agreement (no, not the UK).
Peter wrote:
To me, a customs check is for all practical purposes a check on the person also. Politically (especially “mainland Europe politically”) and emotionally there is a difference, probably. Those watching you are probably behind a one-way mirror (at most big airports).
There is a real practical difference as explained by Achim.
Movement of persons (immigration) is governed by the (drum roll) Schengen agreement. Period. Switzerland, as an example, is signatory to the Schengen agreement and as such has free movement of persons with other Schengen agreement signatory states.
Movement of goods is subject to customs regulations, not immigration. In Europe (not limited to EU), this is governed by the Dublin agreement and Switzerland is NOT a signatory to this agreement.
Most, if not all, EU states are signatory to both agreements and people tend to use the word Schengen to mean both immigration and customs, which is more convenient but wrong.
A good example is the Zurich airport, where there is no passport control for passengers to/from other Schengen countries like France, Germany, etc. Passengers to non-Schengen countries (UK, Croatia, etc) do pass through a passport control both coming and going. There is a very complex control of people movement within the airport to ensure passengers are kept separated for the various situations. However, ALL arriving passengers (i.e. exiting the airport into Switzerland) need to pass through the common Green/Red decision paths, regardless of flight originating country. This is the customs control.
Schengen has become irrelevant: if you are flying in or out of France, you must make a customs declaration and use a customs-capable airport.
Not so. Unless NOTAMed otherwise one can fly from/to France to/from any other EU/Schengen country without any formality.
You got a fine becuase you didn’t comply with that. Schengen has never operated between Switzerland and the rest of the zone for GA traffic.
Schengen operates just fine. LFEY is not a customs airport so direct flights to/from Switzerland or Norway, neither of which are in the EU, are not allowed. That was my immediate reaction when I read about the flight, but I thought that it might have been done thanks to the special status of the Geneva airport and the fact that French immigration/customs are present there as well as at the Geneva train station.
I can however fly to/from for example Lausanne or Geneva from Toussus or Pontoise (which lost their AOE status ca 2012) provided I notify customs beforehand IAW AIP. Neither has immigration. Lausanne also require PN.
What is new, is that two airport, Colmar and some other one I’ve forgotten, have a NOTAM demanding prior customs notification.
That is no longer so in the case of Colmar. The NOTAM changed a while back and PN is required only for extra-Schengen flights. I called OPS to verify that a while back when helping @aart planning a flight from Spain.
Wrt to Norway, you need to send PN to Norwegian customs prior to conducting a Schengen flight to or from Norway unless you plan on departing/landing at a customs airport.i
@Shorrick
That language IMHO applies to “other cases”.
Filing a flight plan. That’s it.
PS not checked for non-EASA regs or extra-Schengen flights. I mainly dig to the bottom for my own benefit ;-)
Peter wrote:
What if you are “carrying” a plane?
This is the real customs question, but has nothing to do with Schengen. I believe there are other thread(s) on the customs issue and there are real examples of GA pilots having customs problems in Switzerland due to various scenarios. I believe there might also have been a case in Germany. For the normal case of someone on a trip, then this is treated a bit like travelling in a car, except that the country of registration may not be the country of “residence” of the aircraft so the VAT-paid country becomes determining since that should correspond to the aircraft country of “residence”.
It is related to the EU VAT status (in free circulation) check box in autorouter which indicates if EU VAT has been paid. While this indicates EU VAT status, I suspect that this means Dublin signatory VAT status but most people woundn’t likely understand that. Achim can certainly confirm, but I believe that if EU VAT has been paid (i.e. paid in any Dublin country), one gets a certificate confirming such that can be presented on demand to customs officials. This should allow customs-free movement of the aircraft among Dublin signatory countries, similar to the Schengen free movement of people.
I have an open question for which I haven’t heard a definitive answer, regarding flight between for example Austria and Germany (to avoid the current France confusion) of an aircraft without EU VAT free circulation status. This would normally be the case of a UK-reg, CH-reg, etc or N-reg (i.e. VAT-paid) based in UK, CH, etc. My recollection is that someone was caught up on a flight like this because they flew AT→DE between two non-customs airfields and charges were laid by German customs. The pilot(s) assumed that because Schengen allows such direct flights, this flight was legal.
chflyer wrote:
It is related to the EU VAT status (in free circulation) check box in autorouter which indicates if EU VAT has been paid. While this indicates EU VAT status, I suspect that this means Dublin signatory VAT status but most people woundn’t likely understand that. Achim can certainly confirm, but I believe that if EU VAT has been paid (i.e. paid in any Dublin country), one gets a certificate confirming such that can be presented on demand to customs officials. This should allow customs-free movement of the aircraft among Dublin signatory countries, similar to the Schengen free movement of people.
This is to establish the legal status as “in free circulation in the EU”. It is one of the fields you have to provide in a UK GAR form.
chflyer wrote:
I have an open question for which I haven’t heard a definitive answer, regarding flight between for example Austria and Germany (to avoid the current France confusion) of an aircraft without EU VAT free circulation status. This would normally be the case of a UK-reg, CH-reg, etc or N-reg (i.e. VAT-paid) based in UK, CH, etc.
There is no requirement to pay VAT or customs for a vehicle that is only temporarily in the EU. An aircraft stationed in Switzerland performing trips to various countries would not be considered to be stationed in the EU. The EU has no special formalities for this, other countries such as India and many African countries do — there you have to deposit money when entering, get a carnet and only when you leave the country and stamp the carnet within the prescribed timeframe, you get your deposit back. This is to make sure vehicles are not smuggled into the country (usually they have high customs on imported cars).
chflyer wrote:
My recollection is that someone was caught up on a flight like this because they flew AT→DE between two non-customs airfields and charges were laid by German customs. The pilot(s) assumed that because Schengen allows such direct flights, this flight was legal.
There should be no problem. Flying from Austria to Germany has no implications on movement of people or movement of goods because both countries are members of both Schengen and the EU. As a special provision, VFR flights between Austria and Germany do not require a flight plan as long as they do not include controlled aerodromes in Austria.
So there’s nothing to this. Same like driving your CH car from Switzerland to Austria and then to Germany and pass a few days of sightseeing in each country. Only becomes a problem if you decide to permanently park your CH car in Austria/Germany. Then you would have to pay customs, VAT and get another license plate. Same with the airplane only that you can keep the license plate.
@ch.ess – “filing a plan that’s it” has been proven wrong in practice. It only refers to the fact that you get an authorisation to enter French airspace upon filing the flight plan, without further requirements (e.g. overfly permit) if your country of registry allows the same. It does not refer to where you must land at / depart from. The “international airport” prescription applies to all non commercial flights, just like e.g. the sanitary prescription below it does.
