Aircraft financing - a brief guide to Cayman

Published: 4 May 2022
Type: Insight

Legal and administrative service providers in the Cayman Islands such as Appleby can offer aircraft owners and financiers much more in the way of financing, leasing, securitisation and ownership structures not limited to Cayman registered aircraft. A common component to these structures is the use of a Cayman Islands special purpose vehicle (“SPV”) through which funding and leasing arrangements may allow for certain tax, accounting and regulatory relief.


SPV contractual arrangement

Subject to the nature of the particular finance package and the commercial drivers in any particular deal, the general goal of any contractual arrangement which is set up using an SPV in these circumstances is to:

  • achieve an off-balance sheet structure which does not affect the accounting position of the financier, the airline, the trustee, or the originator;
  • achieve bankruptcy remoteness from the originator – particularly where there is a connection with the United States bankruptcy courts, which have a power to consolidate groups of companies in certain circumstances;
  • ensure the SPV does not part of the assets available to creditors of the trustee or originator if either were to become insolvent; and
  • achieve limited recourse – the recourse of the financiers will be limited to the aircraft and any other supporting security provided by the SPV over its ancillary assets. In order to provide the best possible security to the financiers, the aircraft can be ring-fenced by comprehensive security over the aircraft so that in the event of insolvency of the SPV the aircraft will not form part of the insolvent estate of the SPV.

SPV Formation

In a typical transaction structure utilizing a Cayman Islands incorporated bankruptcy remote SPV, the company is incorporated as an exempted company, the shares of which are issued to a Cayman Islands trustee (usually a licensed trust company) for the benefit of a charitable or purpose trust. The aim is to ensure that the SPV’s shares are vested in a third party so that it is not regarded as a subsidiary of the originator or financier and is therefore often referred to as an orphan SPV.

A charitable trust is used most regularly to facilitate  these transactions however alternative structures can of course be considered.

In respect of such an orphan SPV, any potential profit upon an eventual sale of the aircraft must be considered, as this could become payable to the charity upon termination of the trust arrangements at maturity of the transaction. It is usual for the SPV to receive a small profit (eg. US$1,000) which is helpful for commercial benefit issues of the SPV and also ultimately paid to the charity. Because recourse to the SPV is usually limited, the small profit can usually be justified by the minimal risk involved.

The SPV will also appoint an administrator to provide directors and officers and day to day administration of the SPV. Appleby, through its various service companies and subsidiaries, can simplify this process by providing the trustee, administrator and independent directors.

Independent directors are essential to assist with “off-balance-sheet” treatment and to avoid the risk that the directors may not be able to discharge their fiduciary duties to act in the best interests of the SPV.

aircraft finance Legal Framework

There are broadly three basic structures (or a combination of) seen in aircraft finance transactions:

  • A borrower incurs a loan from a financial institution secured by, at a minimum, a mortgage over the aircraft;
  • The ownership and lease of the aircraft (involving either an operating lease or a finance lease);
  • A capital markets transaction whereby an entity issues bonds or notes secured by, at a minimum, a mortgage on the aircraft.

In a common scenario, by way of general example, an airline will contract with an aircraft manufacturer to purchase the aircraft. Prior to delivery of the aircraft the airline will assign that purchase agreement to the SPV pursuant to which the SPV will purchase the aircraft and register it on delivery in the registry of choice, as may be commercially agreed with financiers or investors.

For bankruptcy remoteness purposes, the SPV will enter into the relevant contractual arrangements with the original owner of the aircraft (“Originator”) to ensure that a “true sale” of the aircraft from the Originator has been effected (by which we mean that the asset has been removed from the insolvency estate of the Originator).

The SPV might obtain the monies to purchase the aircraft from the Originator by issuing asset-backed commercial paper in the form of debt notes to chosen investors. By use of this particular financing structure, any incidental borrowing costs are reduced with the issuance of notes and the airline does not need to be concerned with incorporating the aircraft (and related debt) into its balance sheet.

Once it owns the aircraft, the SPV will enter into a lease arrangement with the airline or lessee depending on the broader commercial structure of the deal. The lease documentation will provide for payment of lease rentals and covenants in favour of the lessor in default of which the SPV shall have available a number of remedies including repossession.

There will most often be security documents as part of the financing package which secure the obligations of the SPV which might include an aircraft mortgage, a debenture, a security assignment (usually assigning rights under particular contracts which are the focus of the transaction e.g. insurances, rights of the aircraft owner under the lease arrangement in any operating lease transaction, or the purchase agreement in a PDP financing etc). There is often also an equitable mortgage over the shares of the SPV granted by the trustee which enables financiers, as mortgagees, to assume control of the SPV in the event of default in a financing or leasing arrangement.

An aircraft mortgage will enable a financier, as mortgagee, to assume control of the aircraft and by taking the necessary steps on enforcement to ultimately transfer registered ownership of the aircraft into its own name.

There will also often be an IDERA and deregistration power of attorney enabling the financier, in an event of default, to deregister the aircraft from its existing registry and take ownership.

Cape Town Convention

The Convention on International Interests in Mobile Equipment and the associated Protocol to the Convention on International Interests in Mobile Equipment on Matters Specific to Aircraft Equipment (collectively, the “Cape Town Convention”) came into effect in Cayman on 1 November 2015, in line with its entry into force in the United Kingdom on the same date. The Cape Town Convention provides for an internationally recognised system of “international interests” to be created and registered, and standard remedies in a default scenario giving creditors certainty as to the likelihood of being able to recover the aircraft.  The effect of the Convention further enhances the desirability of using a Cayman Islands entity for aviation finance as financiers and lessors can now rely on the certainty of the International Registry and international enforcement.

Economic substance

The International Tax Co-operation (Economic Substance) Act (as amended) was originally introduced in the Cayman Islands in 2019 and is supported by the International Tax Co-operation (Economic Substance) Regulations, 2020 as amended (together, the “ES Act”). There has also been published ES Guidance on Economic Substance for Geographically Mobile Activities (“ES Guidance”), most recently the third version was published on 13 July 2020.

The ES Act imposes requirements on certain types of entities including an SPV typically found in an aircraft finance structure. With respect to an in-scope entity that carries on certain designated activities which may capture certain types of financing and leasing, subject to certain exceptions, these requirements include a requirement to satisfy an economic substance test in respect of those activities. It will be key to ensure Cayman Islands legal advice is obtained at the outset in structuring any aircraft financing deals utilizing any Cayman Islands incorporated SPVs to ensure that the relevant analysis is undertaken to confirm whether the proposed transaction is in scope for the purposes of the ES Act.

Conclusion

As a creditor friendly jurisdiction, the sophistication of the financing and leasing structures available in the Cayman Islands coupled with the expertise of the service providers, lends itself to transactions capable of being structured to meet the requirements of leading aircraft lending institutions free of unnecessary risks as well as meeting the unique requirements of airlines in their home jurisdictions.

Share
More publications
Appleby-Website-Insolvency-and-Restructuring
9 Jul 2026

A Warning to Litigants Seeking Funding: English High Court Clarifies the Limits of Litigation Privilege

Important for Cayman litigants, funders and attorneys given the growing use of third-party funding in disputes.

Appleby-Website-Fraud-and-Asset-Tracing
8 Jul 2026

A Cautionary Tale in Interim Injunctive Relief: Lessons from Dixon v Seymour

In a recent judgment of Chief Justice Ramsay-Hale, the Cayman Grand Court provided guidance on the necessary components of an application for interim injunctive relief. The ruling illustrates how an ex parte application may fail to satisfy the American Cyanamid test when unsupported by proper evidence.

Appleby-Website-Regulatory-Practice
7 Jul 2026

CIMA’s 2026 Reinsurance Thematic Review: Focus Points for Boards

The Cayman Islands Monetary Authority (CIMA) has published its 2026 Thematic Review of Reinsurance Companies (Thematic Review). This reflects fieldwork conducted by CIMA between mid-2025 and Q1 2026 at selected Class B(iii) and Class D licensed reinsurers. The focus being on compliance with the Insurance Act (as revised) and other applicable legislation, regulations, rules and statements of guidance as issued by CIMA centering around stress-testing, cash flow testing frameworks, capital and collateral adequacy management, and corporate governance. Corporate governance weaknesses account for 68% of all findings with the remaining 32% spread across stress-testing, cash flow testing capital and collateral adequacy. Notwithstanding these findings, CIMA has noted several good practices across all areas including, importantly, comprehensive risk management frameworks covering key risk areas and strong capital and collateral adequacy monitoring processes. With Cayman’s reinsurance sector having grown to an institutional scale, and over 110 licensed reinsurers writing in the order of US$30 billion in annual premiums against over US$100 billion in assets, this latest Thematic Review demonstrates development in CIMA’s supervisory expectations of Cayman’s licensed reinsurers. It represents a reflection of the jurisdiction’s increasingly sophisticated and maturing reinsurance market and reinforces that CIMA’s expectations align closely with the standards that onshore counterparty cedants, rating agencies and US state regulators already expect. We take this opportunity to review certain of the key findings alongside CIMA’s cross-sectoral 2026 Thematic Review on Outsourcing, note some of the good practices highlighted by CIMA and make some associated recommendations for Cayman reinsurers.

Appleby-Website-Regulatory-Practice
25 Jun 2026

CIMA Enforcement Action in Focus: Reminders and Recommendations

The Cayman Islands Monetary Authority (CIMA) has recently published a number of Enforcement Notices that provide helpful context for regulated entities, including Licensees and Registered Persons under the Securities Investment Business Act (Revised) (SIBA), seeking to understand and meet their ongoing regulatory obligations in the Cayman Islands. In early June 2026, CIMA exercised its enforcement powers under SIBA Section 17 to cancel the registrations of several SIBA Registered Persons on the basis that it had reasonable grounds to believe that such Registered Persons had failed to meet certain key regulatory obligations. The Appleby Team takes this opportunity to review the relevant findings and CIMA enforcement action; and to highlight certain key obligations that attach to regulated entities in the Cayman Islands.

Appleby-Website-Regulatory-Practice
23 Jun 2026

Important Cayman Islands Industry Advisory: Common Reporting Standard 2.0 and Economic Substance Updates

Further to the introduction of the Tax Information Authority (International Tax Compliance) (Common Reporting Standard) (Amendment) Regulations, 2025 (the CRS Amendment Regulations or CRS 2.0), the Cayman Islands Department for International Tax Cooperation (DITC) has issued an Industry Advisory flagging certain key updates in respect of Common Reporting Standard (CRS) and Economic Substance (ES) reporting in the Cayman Islands. Cayman Financial Institutions will be required file 2025 CRS Returns and Declarations by 31 July 2026, ahead of the online DITC Portal’s closure to facilitate its transition to XML Schema v3.0. ES courtesy reminders (which have historically been sent by email to designated Responsible Persons in advance of annual ES reporting deadlines) will no longer be issued such that Relevant Entities will need to independently track such deadlines themselves. Updated Individual and Entity CRS Self-Certification forms, aligned with CRS 2.0, are now available online via the DITC website.

JPLs, Directors and Arbitration: Grand Court Clarifies the Scope of Provisional Liquidators' Powers
18 Jun 2026

JPLs, Directors and Arbitration: Grand Court Clarifies the Scope of Provisional Liquidators' Powers

In Peakwave Investment Management Ltd v Energy Evolution GP Ltd [2026] CIGC (FSD) 22, the Grand Court clarified the scope of joint provisional liquidators' powers following their appointment. In particular, the Court confirmed that the appointment of provisional liquidators does not automatically displace existing directors.

Appleby-Website-Cayman2
17 Jun 2026

Property, Fairness and the Constitution: The Grand Court Marks the Boundaries of Freedom of Information

The Grand Court of the Cayman Islands has overturned a decision of the Ombudsman in a successful judicial review brought by Caribbean Utilities Company, Ltd. (CUC), represented by Appleby.

JPLs, Directors and Arbitration: Grand Court Clarifies the Scope of Provisional Liquidators' Powers
28 Apr 2026

The Interplay Between Supervision Applications and Winding Up on the Just and Equitable Ground: Re Atlas Capital Markets LLC

In its recent judgment in Re Atlas Capital Markets LLC [2026] CIGC (FSD) 19, the Grand Court considered itself bound to make a supervision order pursuant to s.131(b) of the Companies Act, notwithstanding that the company was the subject of a pending just and equitable winding up (J&E) petition when its voluntary liquidation was commenced; and rejected an attack on the joint voluntary liquidators’ (JVLs) independence, which was principally based on a misreading of the JVLs’ evidence and lacked any objective foundation. The authors, who successfully represented the JVLs in obtaining the supervision order, discuss this important judgment further below – which is believed to be the first decision on the interplay between supervision applications and J&E proceedings under the Companies Act – and offer their views on the guidance that shareholders petitioning on the just and equitable ground may derive from it in future cases.  The challenge to the JVLs’ independence was rejected on the well-established principles which Doyle J discussed in Re Global Fidelity Bank [2021] 2 CILR 361, and is not discussed in further detail below.

Appleby-Website-Insurance-and-Reinsurance
23 Apr 2026

ReConnect 2026: Practical takeaways for Reinsurers, Cedants and Investors doing business in the Cayman Islands

The Cayman International Reinsurance Commercial Association (CIRCA) held its annual conference, [Re]Connect, last week at the Ritz-Carlton, Grand Cayman. This year’s [Re]Connect has once again demonstrated Cayman’s growing influence in global reinsurance and the strength of the jurisdiction’s regulatory, professional and commercial ecosystem. The event brought together 675 registered delegates, including reinsurers, cedants, major US law firms, audit firms, tax practices, asset managers, overseas regulators, industry leaders and rating agencies – as well as Appleby Cayman’s [Re]Insurance Team, with Miriam Smyth, Regulatory Counsel, speaking on a panel of experts on structuring, licensing and operating a Cayman insurer.

JPLs, Directors and Arbitration: Grand Court Clarifies the Scope of Provisional Liquidators' Powers
23 Apr 2026

FamilyMart and Beyond: The Continuing Influence of the Privy Council’s Landmark Decision on Shareholder Litigation

The Privy Council's decision in FamilyMart China Holding Co Ltd v Ting Chuan (Cayman Islands) Holding Corp [2023] UKPC 33 is a landmark ruling that distinguishes the arbitrability of underlying shareholder disputes from the court's exclusive jurisdiction over just and equitable winding-up of a Cayman company.