| 1 |
On Thu, Sep 6, 2018 at 4:32 PM Michael Orlitzky <mjo@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> On 09/06/2018 11:52 AM, Alec Warner wrote: |
| 4 |
> > |
| 5 |
> > The foundation is already a not-for-profit organization. Did you perhaps |
| 6 |
> > mean a *tax-exempt* not for profit, and if so, why do you think we should |
| 7 |
> > be a tax-exempt nonprofit? |
| 8 |
> > |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> For starters, tax-exempt organizations are exempt from paying taxes =) |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> More seriously, a lot of programs like Amazon Smile require their |
| 13 |
> participating organizations to be 501(c)(3). Right now I send that money |
| 14 |
> to the FSF, and Amazon tells me they've made $11,000 over the past few |
| 15 |
> years via donations. |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
There is a hidden premise here; that the Gentoo Foundation Inc. needs to |
| 19 |
raise more money to fund its activities. I'm not entirely convinced of |
| 20 |
this; our expenses are fairly low and we have adequately raised funds |
| 21 |
irrespective of the Foundation's tax-exempt status in the past. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
This is perhaps part II of the thread though. If there is clear demand for |
| 24 |
the Foundation to spend money, then it becomes a signal that we should |
| 25 |
improve our ability to fund raise and it improves the argument to do all |
| 26 |
the necessary paperwork to be a tax-exempt organization; the idea being we |
| 27 |
can activate additional fundraising channels. The current signal for funds |
| 28 |
is funding requests, which are rare, so the Foundation has not sought more |
| 29 |
money in the past; pretty much all of our fundraising is ad hoc. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
-A |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
> |
| 35 |
> As for how to spend the money: paying people to fix bugs is unexciting, |
| 36 |
> but it's probably the idea with the best return on investment. |
Archives