|
Grex > Coop11 > #10: Grex Granted Tax-Exempt Status |  |
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 127 responses total. |
aruba
|
|
response 16 of 127:
|
Jul 18 22:43 UTC 1998 |
Quite right, no need for massaging anything. I'm curious what Dan means by
"guidelines".
THanks Jan, for all your work. It took someone to stand up and do the
drudgery on this to make it work, and you did it.
|
aruba
|
|
response 17 of 127:
|
Jul 18 22:43 UTC 1998 |
(It also took someone to write a really good application.)
|
hematite
|
|
response 18 of 127:
|
Jul 19 01:40 UTC 1998 |
So, will some one in plain English, tell me whether or not the money from
the auction is refunadble? (It makes no diference in my bids, just curious.)
|
omni
|
|
response 19 of 127:
|
Jul 19 05:04 UTC 1998 |
Thanks for all your hard work, Jan
|
senna
|
|
response 20 of 127:
|
Jul 19 05:54 UTC 1998 |
Didn't we have a problem with this last summer with nt? Normal donations
aren't refundable. I don't think the auction's are, either.
|
aaron
|
|
response 21 of 127:
|
Jul 19 05:54 UTC 1998 |
re #15: I have no problem with what Grex does. The question is, what will
Grex do in the future? If the goal is to stay just like this, well,
let's just say that would not be a good use of the status.
|
mdw
|
|
response 22 of 127:
|
Jul 19 06:44 UTC 1998 |
I think there basically 3 differences 501c3 makes, one small, 2 big.
The small one is we will need to be *slightly* more careful about
chasing down all the obscure tax consequences and following them. This
is mostly a reporting/recording issue, and is almost entirely stuff we
are doing already, and *should* be doing anyways.
The first of the major things is, individual donors who already donate
stuff to grex, will get a few more tax options, if they so choose. I
think this benefit will be primarily psychological, and I don't expect
this to have a major financial impact to the individuals concerned, to
grex, or to the federal government. It's still nice to make those
individuals feel good, because they've done a huge favour for grex.
The second of the major benefits is the one I think could be most useful
to grex: we have now enormously improved our chances of pimping some
serious hardware from a Big Company. We've already made a choice to
specialize in technically obselete "formerly expensive" computer
equipment, and developed in-house expertise to make this equipment
useful on grex. Until now, we've only been able to use hardware that
was so obselete, even the accountants in the company had given up on
recovering any value from the hardware in question, so they were willing
to give it up to anyone who would haul it away. Now, we can get that
equipement at least a year earlier in the depreciation schedule, after
it's been replaced and is functionally worthless to the company, but
still has book value and isn't quite "worthless" to the accountant. We
can essentially give that book value back to the company in the form of
tax credits, and get ahold of newer stuff.
( Of course m-net has long had the same benefit. In fact, they've
gotten some interesting hardware this way, which they basically wasted
because they weren't able to use the in-house expertise they had
effectively. )
|
mta
|
|
response 23 of 127:
|
Jul 19 14:02 UTC 1998 |
resp:21
Apparently the IRS doesn't think so. Why do you think it would be "not a good
use of the status", Aaron?
|
aaron
|
|
response 24 of 127:
|
Jul 19 14:08 UTC 1998 |
Geez. You may think it is wonderful that you can sit on your ass doing
nothing, after somebody hands you the tools which can help you move your
organization far beyond its limited role and make it a truly meaningful
part of the community. Maybe that's what you had in mind from the start.
However, if you do so, you will just have to live with the fact that I will
look down on you for wasting opportunity.
|
mary
|
|
response 25 of 127:
|
Jul 19 14:28 UTC 1998 |
Boy, that's a hard one. ;-)
|
mta
|
|
response 26 of 127:
|
Jul 19 14:38 UTC 1998 |
I don't think Grexes providing the services it provides, free of charge, to
all comers is "sitting on it's ass'. If you do, and you choose to think less
of us for it -- so be it.
Can't please everyone.
|
janc
|
|
response 27 of 127:
|
Jul 19 15:13 UTC 1998 |
I know arbornet has a pretty broad charter, and has for a long time been
interested in doing more than just running M-Net. I don't think Cyberspace
Communications has any interest in doing more than just running Grex. What
we are doing is just fine.
If I bought a chain saw to help cut up a fallen tree in my backyard, would
you come to me and say "you should cut down some more trees - otherwise you
aren't making good use of your chainsaw." Tools are tools. They exist
to serve YOUR needs. YOU do not exist to give your tools proper exercise.
Yes, there are organizations that use their 501(c)(3) status to save the world
in more spectacular ways than Cyberspace Communications does. But there are
also plenty, that do less. So what?
There may well be times in the future when we want to make adjustments
to Grex's mission and direction. But those adjustments should be responses
to the needs of our users. Grex's course should NEVER be determined by its
501(c)(3) status. If we make changes to better meet the needs of our users,
then we should report those changes to the IRS, as the letter above asks us
to. If they revoke our 501(c)(3) status, that's fine - we've lived without
before and we can live without it again. But as long as what we want to
do happens to be tax-exempt, then we should certainly have formal recognition
that status.
We should never be thinking about what Cyberspace Communications has to do
to keep or to deserve its tax-exempt status. We should be thinking about
what we want this organization wants to do in service of its users and the
broader community. We NEVER should have to worry if doing something would
require changes in our status. If we WANT to do it, then we do it and send
a letter to the IRS. They'll tell us if our status has changed. IRS
regulations do not and should not set our agenda.
My personal expectation is that we are unlikely to want to do anything that
would require any changes to our status. Most of the kinds of things that
would be a problem are pretty unattractive in their own right - seriously
reducing free services, endorsing political candidates, stuff like that.
Still, if we want to do that, we can. The IRS letter just recognizes that
what we are doing now is tax-exempt. It doesn't demand that we keep to that
forever.
|
janc
|
|
response 28 of 127:
|
Jul 19 15:51 UTC 1998 |
I warned that the text of the letter I entered is not safe for people who
are easily alarmed or unused to talking to bureaucrats. I think TS didn't
survive the letter:
>well, this immediately throws teh auction.cf into a cocked hat ...
> "only to the extent that their contributions are gifts,
> with no consideration received."
>
>who is responsible for massaging this pending imbroglio?
That clause does not say that we can't have auctions. Here's a quote from
IRS publication 557:
FUND-RAISING EVENTS: If the donor receives somthing of value in return
for the contribution, a common occurence with fund-raising events, part
or all of the contribution may not be deductible. This may apply to fund-
raising activities such as charity balls, bazaars, banquets, auctions,
concerts, athletic events, and solicitations for membership or contributions
when merchandise or benefits are given in return for payment of a
specified minimum contribution.
Note that the IRS is OK with all these things. It recognizes that they are
common among tax-exempt organizations and doesn't object to us doing them.
We do several of these things - membership dues and selling donated objects.
They are legal. The question is how much of the person giving us money can
deduct from their taxes. Before we had tax-exempt status, the answer was
easy: not a cent. (Except that technically we always had tax-exempt status,
only the IRS hadn't officially noticed yet - some braver users have been
deducting their donations for years.) With tax-exempt status the answer
can be a bit more complex, since it involves the value of the goods received.
Most of our donors won't be bothering with this, since their donations are
small or they don't itemize deductions - they won't be deducting anything,
which is certainly fine with the IRS.
Note also that the issue of what you deduct from your taxes isn't, for
the most part, Cyberspace Communications' problem. That's between you and
the IRS. You're welcome to deduct anything you think you can get away with.
We need to figure out what kinds of receipts we should give people. That's
all. The next paragraph from publication 557 talks about this a bit, but
we need to get publication 1391 to get full answers on this:
If a donor received some benefit in return for a contribution to your
organization, the donor can only deduct the portion of the contribution,
if any, that is more than the fair value of any benefit or merchandise
to be given to contributors. You should determin in advance the fair
value of any benefit or merchandise to be given to contributors and tell
them when you publicize the fund-raising event or solicit their
contributions how much is deductable and how much is for benefit or
merchandise.
This topic is discussed in more detail in Publication 1391, "Deductability
of Payments Made to Charities Conducting Fund-Raising Events." You can ask
IRS to send you a copy. [Mark has already asked.]
So yeah, we need to figure out the "fair value" of Grex memberships (off the
top of my head, I'd guess $2 a month - maybe less, but I want to read 1361
before deciding this) and how to handle the auctions (I think we don't set
a value on market goods - donors deduct their estimate of fair value, buyers
deduct their estimate of fair value, but again, 1391 should clarify this).
Lots of tax-exempt organizations do things like the auction. I don't actually
know exactly how to handle it, but rules exist and they can't be all that
hard to follow or there'd be lots fewer of these things going on. It's
not an "imbroglio" that requires "massaging". We just need to figure out
the tax law so we can give our users a little guidiance and support in
filling out their tax forms sometime before next April.
Any user who finds all this too high for them is welcome to just continue
doing as they have done in the past - donate money and don't deduct it from
your taxes. That way the tax-exempt status will have no impact on you at
all.
|
janc
|
|
response 29 of 127:
|
Jul 19 15:53 UTC 1998 |
One other note:
Thanks for getting the 501(c)(3) application done also go to Mark Conger.
He pulled together three-and-a-half years of financial records and
generated all the financial data that the IRS wanted, redoing it several
times to get it all right. We couldn't have done it without him.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 30 of 127:
|
Jul 20 04:53 UTC 1998 |
Good show, Jan.
Dues to a 501(c)3 are deductible, except for that "something of value"
thing. I don't think Grex gives anything that fits into this category.
I have already cited the case of a New York non-profit that restricts
parking at its Manhattan headquarters to members. The value of that does
not have to be declared. That "something of value" is something that
is either provided "rarely" (like, say, an annual dinner), or also sold
(like a slick magazine). So, don't even consider trying to put a "value"
on grex membership. The dues are a simple donation.
|
tsty
|
|
response 31 of 127:
|
Jul 20 10:30 UTC 1998 |
i survived the letter just fine, janc - and you answered teh specific
question, why add mud?
|
aaron
|
|
response 32 of 127:
|
Jul 20 15:50 UTC 1998 |
re #27: I don't care what you do with your chainsaw, until you ask me to
subsidize your activities. You want to stick your hand in my wallet?
Sorry -- I'm going to tell you what I think.
Don't pretend that you went out and bought a chaninsaw, and that I
have no right to tell you how to use it. You went out and got a
tax exemption -- a goverment subsidy of your activities.
|
dang
|
|
response 33 of 127:
|
Jul 20 16:23 UTC 1998 |
This item is now linked to co-op.
|
mta
|
|
response 34 of 127:
|
Jul 20 17:00 UTC 1998 |
resp:32
Aaron, do you feel the need to approve of *every* program the government
sees fit to support? If so, surely there are far bigger fish to fry
than one little system that provides free internet access to the poor
and the world.
|
robh
|
|
response 35 of 127:
|
Jul 20 17:30 UTC 1998 |
Hey, being a frothing-at-the-mouth Libertarian, I think *all*
businesses should be tax-exempt. >8)
Many thanks to all who finally got this done.
|
aruba
|
|
response 36 of 127:
|
Jul 20 18:07 UTC 1998 |
Re #32: Aaron, you certainly have a right to say what you think and to try to
influence Grex policy. But I happen to think what we're doing with Grex now
is a fine use of our status, and the IRS agrees. In fact Jan was *extremely*
careful not to embellish on what we do in the application, and the IRS
approved it quite quickly. I take that to mean we are well within the
boundaries of what they see as worthy of exemption.
|
rcurl
|
|
response 37 of 127:
|
Jul 20 18:13 UTC 1998 |
The government (i.e., us) support non-profits with tax exemption if they
provide some service that *otherwise* the government might be asked to
or have to provide. Non-profits are the way our government reduces its own
size. I thought Aaron normally approved of smaller government.
|
aaron
|
|
response 38 of 127:
|
Jul 20 22:55 UTC 1998 |
re #34: Read what I said, Misti. You took a subsidy, and now you get to live
with my opinion. You have two choices -- learn to live with it, or
give up the subsidy.
re #36: I don't much care what was in the application. If somebody hands you
the brass ring, and your response is, "Yawn".... don't expect me
to be impressed.
re #37: Are you asserting that Grex was granted its exemption on the basis
that it alleviates the burden on government -- one of several
categories of 501(C)(3) organizations? Possible, but very unlikely.
|
aaron
|
|
response 39 of 127:
|
Jul 20 23:01 UTC 1998 |
Incidentally, unless you were granted an express effective date retroactive
to the date of the letter, it would normally follow that only those
donations made after July 13, 1998 would be deductable.
|
mta
|
|
response 40 of 127:
|
Jul 20 23:58 UTC 1998 |
Actually I also have the option of ignoring your opinion. ;)
It is my opinion, and apaprently the IRS agrees, that Grex is doing a good job
of providing a service that benefits this country in its own small way by
providing access to the information "superhighway", albeit in a slow, clunky
bus, that would otherwise be unavailable to a lot of the poorer users we serve.
The better informed our populace is, the better off our country is. Granted,
Grex isn't quite on par with a US Government class, or a programming class, or
a journalism class -- but all these subjects and more are discussed here --
often in a manner far more amusing than the average class would be. If we can
capture the imagination of the occasional young person and tun them to an
interest they would not otherwise have discovered, if we can provide that one
piece of information that a citizen needs to determine who to vote for, if we
can provide a place where someone can develop a skill that makes them more
employable, if we can help a young person to develop a little more social grace
than )s)he otherwise would have, we're providing a service that makes our world
a little better.
OK, we're not talking about Nobel peace prize quality stuff here -- but every
journey requires that first step. Maybe some day a Grexer will earn a NPP
based in part on an interest developed here. Maybe not. Maybe a kid from a
poor family will wander on to Grex from the local library, create an account,
get fascinated by computers and go on to develop web pages for a living instead
of dropping out of school and stealing cars or selling drugs. Maybe not.
Maybe two people from opposite parts of the world will meet here on Grex, fall
in love, marry, and give birth to the next Albert Einstein or Mohatma Ghandi.
Maybe not.
The fact is, we are providing a service free of charge to all comers. Like
most things, the value of this service depends a lot on what you put into it.
But we are making the opportunities available which is no less than the public
schools are doing. We don't pour information into the heads of our users --
but truth be told, the school systems can't do that without a lot of
cooperation from their users either.
|