| 1 |
On Wed, 2019-07-03 at 09:34 -0500, Matthew Thode wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 19-07-03 09:08:14, Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 3 |
> > On Wed, Jul 3, 2019 at 8:56 AM Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
| 4 |
> > > Are you aware if the fee is going to be the same if we |
| 5 |
> > > go for proper non-profit? |
| 6 |
> > |
| 7 |
> > Do you mean 501c3 by "proper non-profit?" Or some other tax-exempt status? |
| 8 |
> > |
| 9 |
> > I think most around here have abandoned all hope of ever running our |
| 10 |
> > own 501c3. A number don't even think we should try, and a 501c3 is |
| 11 |
> > hard enough to get approved if you have a professional board all |
| 12 |
> > towing the party line. If you get people making public statements |
| 13 |
> > like we ought to be a trade association (which is non-exempt) it would |
| 14 |
> > be even harder. |
| 15 |
> > |
| 16 |
> > However, I imagine most CPAs would charge more for a tax-exempt org as |
| 17 |
> > there is MUCH more scrutiny on their operations. I'd also argue that |
| 18 |
> > we would need to be spending more on compliance in general or |
| 19 |
> > consulting ad-hoc with professionals to not run afoul of the law. |
| 20 |
> > |
| 21 |
> > If you meant a non-profit that isn't tax-exempt then I don't see why |
| 22 |
> > their fees would be any different, but there really isn't any big tax |
| 23 |
> > benefit to Gentoo to having one status or another as far as I can |
| 24 |
> > tell. The IRS taxes non-profits the same as for-profit companies if |
| 25 |
> > they aren't tax-exempt. It is the exempt status that comes with all |
| 26 |
> > the rules and scrutiny. |
| 27 |
> > |
| 28 |
> > Usually in the US when people say "non-profit" they tend to mean a |
| 29 |
> > tax-exempt status like 501c3, but these are of course not the only |
| 30 |
> > sorts of non-profit companies. The US National Football League (the |
| 31 |
> > kind where you usually don't hit the ball with your foot) is |
| 32 |
> > non-profit, but definitely not tax-exempt, and I can only imagine what |
| 33 |
> > their revenues are like. |
| 34 |
> > |
| 35 |
> |
| 36 |
> The fees remain the same for a c3 (1500 per year). We've talked to the |
| 37 |
> Accounting firm about our options in attaining c3 status. There are a |
| 38 |
> couple of ways we could go about it. Filing fee remains the same (~1k |
| 39 |
> iirc) for all options. |
| 40 |
> |
| 41 |
> 1. fix all back taxes (10 years) then refile, this would cost 9k more |
| 42 |
> for the back taxes alone (4 years was recently approved). |
| 43 |
> |
| 44 |
|
| 45 |
Plus $15000 in CPA fees, correct? Or do we assume a different fee for |
| 46 |
that part? |
| 47 |
|
| 48 |
-- |
| 49 |
Best regards, |
| 50 |
Michał Górny |
Archives