On Sat, Jan 05, 2013 at 02:25:03PM -0600, Patrick McNamara wrote: > Figure on three years to get 501(c)(3) status from the IRS. > Compensating board members of a non-profit for anything other than > documentable expenses incurred while performing the duties of a > board member, while not illegal, is unusual and can be considered an > audit red flag. There are also tax implications for the board > member as well as the corporation regardless of whether the > compensation is in the form of goods or money. > > On 01/05/2013 01:49 PM, Troy Benjegerdes wrote: > >Before I join a non-profit board, the first question I ask is > >"What is the compensation for board members to do all that hard > >boring work" > ...the knowledge that you are volunteering your time, expertise, and > effort to an organization whose goals you support and who you > believe will make the world a better place by being in existence. > Same reason people contribute to open source projects.
I'd argue that most *successful* contributors to open source projects are one of the following: *) independently wealthy (or able to have internet/food/shelter at such a low cost it doesn't matter) *) doing open-source as a loss-leader to advertise their own (or their organizations) abilities as a consultant/researcher/scientists. Case in point: Who's paying Timothy's bills, and why has he been so motivated to keep pushing OpenShader along? I think at this point I like the B-corp model much better. How about a B-corp headquartered in a offshore tax-haven so we get the non-profit advantages without silly auditing nonsense? _______________________________________________ Open-graphics mailing list [email protected] http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
