[atlarge-discuss] RE : [atlarge-discuss] Membership fees & corporate status

["Jeff Holt" <jefftttt@txucom.net>]

@Large,

 

Should this organization decide to do so, incorporating in the USA under
Internal Revenue Code § 501©(3) as a not-for-profit, educational
organization would give a preferred status and make donations (in the US
at least) tax deductible.  How this might effect taxing in other nations
might be worth investigating, but with a substantial number of members
capable of financially contributing in the US, it is something to
consider.

 

Sincerely,

 

TTTT

Jefftttt@txucom.net

www.tejas-info-services.com

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Dassa [mailto:dassa@dhs.org] 
Sent: Saturday, June 07, 2003 6:21 PM
To: 'Atlarge Discuss List'
Subject: RE: [atlarge-discuss] RE : [atlarge-discuss] Membership fees

 

|> -----Original Message-----

|> From: Richard Henderson [mailto:richardhenderson@ntlworld.com]

|> Sent: Sunday, June 08, 2003 4:07 AM

|> To: 'Atlarge Discuss List'

|> Subject: Re: [atlarge-discuss] RE : [atlarge-discuss] Membership fees

|>

<SNIP>

|> ----- Original Message -----

|> From: Daniel CHIRITA <daniel@chirita.org>

|>

|> >Can you explain please ? Do you want membership levels,

|> with different

|> >advantages according to their financial contribution ? If

|> it is that, I

|> >do not agree, we must keep our open statute. We can accept

|> gifts but

|> >that should give place to no advantage in return !

|> >

|> >Daniel CHIRITA

|>

|> What I can't get my head round is that people all over the

|> world - ordinary internet users - should be expected to pay

|> for the right to participate in our campaigns for democratic

|> governance of the net by ordinary users. Nor can I see why

|> people should have to *pay* for the right to vote for the

|> advancement of this cause.

<SNIP>

 

Nothing in this world is free as the saying goes.  There are costs to be

covered and the need for funding is there.  I disagree with relying on

donations and good will as past experience has shown a small number end

up covering the costs for the majority and the majority takes advantage

when possible and doesn't contribute anything constructive outside of

their own narrow focus.

 

I believe a non-financial group is a must for the organisation but I

disagree with giving them exactly the same rights as those who

financially support it.  For instance, I would limit office bearers and

voting on organisational structure only to financial members but would

have open voting on the issues the organisation would involve itself.

This would meet our need to allow all to participate but provide some

protection for the organisational structure.  In the interest of not

creating a power groups, I'd leave the membership at the two classes and

try to keep it simple.  Sponsors are a different matter to membership.

 

Darryl (Dassa) Lynch

 

 

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de

For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de