response 1 of 45:

Jul 24 15:48 UTC 1998

I think Mark was researching that.

We aren't interested in avoiding any situations, and we will pay any
taxes we owe.

response 3 of 45:

Jul 24 18:09 UTC 1998

Bruce has said many times that he is alarmed by the move to tax-exempt 
status on the part of Grex.  I'm sure this is another expression of his 
concern, and that it's based on what he perceives as a parallel 
situation for Arbornet.

Arbornet had a big can of worms opened when we found the city would not 
give us a tax exemption; that's how we started finding out about all of 
the other issues related to 501(c)(3) status.  It was the beginning for 
us of the situation which continues to the present, with a whole lot of 
confusion on the part of almost everyone about what the 501(c)(3) means, 
and extreme animosity over the issue, and the near-collapse of Arbornet, 
a situation that exists as I write.

I don't think anyone on Grex is going to be surprised in the same way.  
Bruce seems to think something similar is going to happen to Grex as 
what happened to Arbornet.  It might, I suppose.

response 5 of 45:

Jul 24 21:18 UTC 1998

I called the city Assessor's office about our taxes, and spoke with them for
quite a while.

It is true that being 501(c)3 does not by itself exempt Cyberspace
Communications from paying personal property taxes.  In order to be
exempt, an organization must be

   1. A charitable organization
   2. Relieving the public burden

(I'm not sure whether it's an "and" or an "or" that belongs between those.)
I described what we do, and he said we were a borderline case.  He will send
us an application for exemption, as well as a form for declaring our personal
property.

Personal property tax is calculated by taking the price we payed for an item,
applying a depreciation schedule, multiplying by 50%, and then by the millage.
He said that if we have $3000 worth of equipment, we would owe about $70 in
taxes per year, assuming we are not exempt.

I really don't know how much property we actually have; I just pulled the
number $3000 out of the air when I was asked for it.

The gentleman assured me that we would not be stuck with a huge bill for back
taxes just because we were honest enough to stick our heads up and let them
know we exist.  He said the most they can possibly collect is two years of
back taxes.

response 7 of 45:

Jul 25 04:25 UTC 1998

By definition (IRS) a "charitable organization", which status is recognized
by 501(c)3 exemption, also relieves "the public burden". However local
action may violate the law. It is common for land trusts to be turned down
for property tax exemption just because the township supervisor doesn't
think they deserve it. I went through that once and we had to sue the
township in Michigan Tax Court (we won). 

response 9 of 45:

Jul 25 22:21 UTC 1998

The city already knew we existed.  Remember when they made us move out of our
old location?  

response 11 of 45:

Jul 26 05:12 UTC 1998

Re #10 re #7: I get this "stuff" from being a founder and first president
of a few nonprofits, most recently the Michigan Karst Conservancy Inc, and
from serving on the board or as an officer of a half dozen or so
charitable - 501(c)3 - corporation.  One picks up a lot of "stuff" in
those capacities.

You can find similar "stuff" in a lot of sources. Pub 557 is a good
starting point. The Land Trust Alliance's "Standards and Practices
Guidebook"  extracts a lot. For example, "Federal and state governments
provide qualified nonprofit organizations exemption from income tax and
allow the deductibility of contributions to them. This is a subsidy of the
nonprofit organization offered in return for the organizations's operation
in the public interest."

[I just spent the day in a nonprofit's board meeting. Among other things
we recognized members that join as life members for a net cost to them
of $216 for a $480 life membership, because of the subsidy provide by
federal and state law in support of our public service. You have to know
your "stuff" to run a non-profit based entirely on freely given donations]

response 13 of 45:

Jul 26 17:35 UTC 1998

I see no differences. What  are your different "spins"? You don't seem
to think that anyone can really think or act in a truly charibable fashion
or that society (government) might actually put value on charitable
behavior. Sounds pretty cycnical. 

response 15 of 45:

Jul 28 18:35 UTC 1998

There is truth to what you say - except that the *tax official* might not
know the answer either. This has been proven by asking the same questions
of different tax officials. Also, I can pretty well predict the answer to
most non-profit tax questions, even though I am not a tax lawyer. 
Experience provides predictive capacity. I wouldn't put so much credit
with tax lawyers, considering the number of times I have had to correct
what lawyers have written. Tax lawyers are also "merely expressing an
opinion or surmise", but have the benefit of more experience and study
than most. 

response 17 of 45:

Jul 28 22:45 UTC 1998

re #13: Quite to the contrary. I know of plenty of valid charitable
        activity, which I support. I don't see that I need to subsidize,
        either directly or indirectly, "charitable" organizations that
        contribute little or nothing to the public welfare. Maybe you do?

re #14: Even in tax law, some questions have easy answers, Dave. Try
        referencing a law book.

response 19 of 45:

Jul 30 00:22 UTC 1998

I received the Application for Property Tax Exemption today.  Basically
the questions on it are:

How is your organization financed?
State the nature of your operation and the purposes for which it was
  incorporated.  (Be explicit.)
Under which section of the General Property Tax Act is this exemption
  claimed?

I'd like some help answering these.

response 21 of 45:

Jul 30 10:22 UTC 1998

So, does the act exist somewhere online?

response 23 of 45:

Jul 30 17:38 UTC 1998

That's OK with me. If you can find anything actually incorrect about them,
please let me know.