On Thu, 21 Feb 2008, Geoffrey Broadwell wrote:

Someone earlier in this thread mentioned that this can't be done
directly because of rules surrounding TPF's non-profit status.  Someone
else pointed out the problems with TPF officers benefitting directly
from the donations, even though some of the current and former TPF
officers would be great candidates for support.

Which made me think ... wasn't this why Mozilla created a corporation?

I doubt that's why. If TPF owned The Perl Corporation (TPC), there'd still be serious conflict of interest issues were TPC to be employing TPF board members or other officers.

If anything, this would look even _worse_ than giving them grant money from TPF!

The main reason a nonprofit would create a for-profit subsidiary is in order to engage in business activities outside of that nonprofits tax-exempt purpose. That purpose is generally defined by the nonprofit's mission. TPF's missions is:

 The Perl Foundation is dedicated to the advancement of the Perl
 programming language through open discussion, collaboration, design, and

I would guess that MoFo founded MoCo primarily because it wanted to pursue income sources that weren't compatible with MoFo's nonprofit status. I'm guessing that this was primarily the Google deal, and it was determined that the income from Google would be business income, and that it would be so much that if it came directly to MoFo it would compromise MoFo's status as a 501c3 nonprofit.

I'd guess that the reasoning behind this is that in the Google deal, Google gets a benefit from the money it pays. It's not a donation. That means it's business income.

TPF is not in a similar position at this time. There is no massive source of income available that would not be a donation, to the best of my knowledge. If there were such a source, forming a subsidiary for-profit corporation would be worthwhile.


VegGuide.Org                        www.BookIRead.com
Your guide to all that's veg.       My book blog

Reply via email to