Karl,
Good thoughts. I agree with all.
I suppose the reason for my long writing was to say that 501(3)(?)
status should not be feared, the process is predictable, and I
think you will find the IRS actually will assist in the process.
In any event, requires a good non-profit / tax lawyer to evaluate
and explain the consequences. But getting the status is easy.
Gene
gene(_dot_)gaines(_at_)gainesgroup(_dot_)com
On Wednesday, September 22, 2004, 5:49:25 PM, Karl wrote:
On Wed, 22 Sep 2004, Gene Gaines wrote:
ISOC is non-profit, 501(c)(3) tax-exempt, incorporated in the
District of Columbia.
I suggest it would be a serious mistake for the IETF not to
obtain the same status.
There are many kinds of 501(c) exemptions. They all come with different
kinds of chains that impose limits on what the organization can do and
impose affirmative duties. Simply jumping into one category without
understanding the nature and form of those chains could lead to a kind of
organizational buyer's remorse.
Whether one considers the application process easy (or hard), fast (or
slow), or the IRS to be capricious (or not), it isn't something to be
undertaken lightly or without understanding the ramifications. The IRS is
one of the world's great bureaucracies; I know attorneys whose entire
practice is focused on just small parts of the US tax code and small parts
of that bureacracy.
The choice of Federal excemption also may have impact on the liability (or
rather on the limitation of liability) of unpaid Directors and officers
both on the basis of State laws that recognize certain protections for
certain 501 categories (and not for others) and also under Federal laws
that may provide some protection for volunteer (unpaid) directors under
some circumstances.
Many have, of course, navigated the maze and been happy with the results.
And some entities, after having experienced life as a 501(c)(3) have
discovered the limitations too binding and have changed their status.
The IETF ought to move forward with knowledge and understanding. It ought
not go forward blindly and with say 501(c)(3) or bust without knowing
fully what that means and implies.
The same goes for chosing the state of incorporation and the form under
that state's laws.
(There is, of course, the option of creating several different legally
cognizable entities, each shrink-wrapped with its own choice of
jurisdiction and form. But that could lead to a situation in which there
is not one IETF but several that drift in divergent directions.)
I'm not arguing against the 501(c)(3) status - I have neither an opinion
nor enough knowledge to make an informed choice. I'm merely noting that
the issue is complex and involves hard choices that ought to be made with
knowledge of the tradeoffs.
--karl--
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
--
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf