Before that, for instance, it would not have been legal for a Canadian to do
a
bare-boat charter on a documented vessel from Hinckley.

it is still not legal for a Canadian to lease a bare-boat charter on a
documented vessel from Hinckley if the Canadian operates the vessel in an
exclusive manner for an extended period of time (two weeks or a month is not an
extended period of time jeffies).

jeffies, the above is beyond your capability to understand. don't try.

"JAXAshby" wrote in message
...
Before that, for instance, it would not have been legal for a Canadian to do
a
bare-boat charter on a documented vessel from Hinckley.

it is still not legal for a Canadian to lease a bare-boat charter on a
documented vessel from Hinckley if the Canadian operates the vessel in an
exclusive manner for an extended period of time (two weeks or a month is not
an
extended period of time jeffies).


What's your point? I've already stated that creating complex legal structures
to hide the ownership is probably illegal for recreational vessels; it certainly
is for commercial vessels. In my first post I said:

"A non-citizen may not own (or in any way have a controlling interest in) a US
"Documented" vessel."

and the next day:

"it is patently illegal for a non-citizen of the US to own, or in
any way have a controlling interest, in a US Documented vessel. The laws go on
at great length
closing as many loopholes as the lawyers could think of. There is no exemption
for recreational
vessels. Vessels in violation certainly lose their documentation, and might be
liable for seizure."

If you want to show us the law where a certain length lease would be illegal,
feel free. I already gave you the URL for searching the US Code, it would be in
Title 46.

Now, you've just conceded that a one month bareboat charter would be legal.
Before, you were claiming that 2 hours was illegal. We're making progress.

"probably"??

Before that, for instance, it would not have been legal for a Canadian to
do
a
bare-boat charter on a documented vessel from Hinckley.

it is still not legal for a Canadian to lease a bare-boat charter on a
documented vessel from Hinckley if the Canadian operates the vessel in an
exclusive manner for an extended period of time (two weeks or a month is
not
an
extended period of time jeffies).


What's your point? I've already stated that creating complex legal
structures
to hide the ownership is
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------- probably
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

illegal for recreational vessels; it
certainly
is for commercial vessels. In my first post I said:

"A non-citizen may not own (or in any way have a controlling interest in) a
US
"Documented" vessel."

and the next day:

"it is patently illegal for a non-citizen of the US to own, or in
any way have a controlling interest, in a US Documented vessel. The laws go
on
at great length
closing as many loopholes as the lawyers could think of. There is no
exemption
for recreational
vessels. Vessels in violation certainly lose their documentation, and might
be
liable for seizure."

If you want to show us the law where a certain length lease would be illegal,
feel free. I already gave you the URL for searching the US Code, it would be
in
Title 46.

Now, you've just conceded that a one month bareboat charter would be legal.
Before, you were claiming that 2 hours was illegal. We're making progress.

The only person that touches Jax's pee pee is his mommy!