Quanta is regarded by the taxman as a "self trading company", that is to say it trades solely for theAre Quanta actually allowed to sell to non-members in that case? Assuming sales to non-members are allowed, tax would presumably have to be paid. And you'd have to keep records.
benefit of its members, and thus it is not liable for tax on its earnings from sales to them.
It wouldn't matter. A solution such as the one I propose would have someone else making the actual sale :-)
<snip>
Quanta is registered as a 'Friendly Society' and as such is exempt from VAT and Corporation Tax provided all trade is internal.
Should Quanta be found to be trading with the general public then corporation tax becomes due on ALL profit.
That is why no charges are made for entry to workshops. Keeping tax records is already done and an Inland Revenue return is made every year.
All this is understood and has been exhausted as a subject. I agree the British Revenue code is foreign to me but how different can that be from not-for-profits everywhere (or societies or clubs or whatever they may be)
If the Jan Jones book were sold through a third party, then the third party would have to hold the agreement, not Quanta.
The current agreement is with Quanta for books printed and sold by Quanta.
You could say, that the agreement was made with Quanta on the understanding that Quanta sold to it's members, avoiding that, whichever way you choose, would in my understanding be inadmissible.
That I understand, but given that Quanta has the only means of communication with Mrs. Jones, it would be Quanta's job to pose the question... as we mere mortals cannot.
There's no agreement per se with entities such as Cafepress, other than they provide the service and get a cut of the profits. Ie if Quanta would convince Mrs. Jones to agree to such an arrangement, Mrs. Jones would get all the profits, not Quanta. I understand that Quanta has survived following the rules to a T (not my cup of tea but nonetheless respectable) and potential complications out of a direct involvement of Quanta in such a setup would be problematic, however SURELY Quanta could accomodate the users by intermediating between some entity (or at least convincing Mrs Jones to go at it alone.. which as I said is not such big a hassle -ie the procedure is pretty straightforward-).
Now of course QUANTA can chose not to do any of the above (which I suspect will be the end result anyway) but I don't see any gain in that for the QL community (Quanta members and not) at large by such inaction.
If it were up to me, I would bend the rules a bit (as noone would be actually breaking a law there's no harm in that! - but that's just my opinion -)
I am very sorry for all of that but Quanta itself is not without fault. A little while ago I mentioned in this list that I repeatedly contacted Quanta when I re-attached my self to the QL community back in 1997 to become a member, but nobody bothered to answer my letters (which I know where received because I tracked them through the Greek Post Office -as I was in Greece at the time-). In any case, if you don't want a new member ONCE, I'd rather not be your member 1000 times! It's simple as that. I am sure I am not the only case and definitely not the last. But I will NEVER apply for membership again with Quanta even if QUANTA pays me... not after that treatement regardless of reason.I am sorry if I am a wet blanket but I have felt for a long time thatthere is a serious lack in the perception of what Quanta is and what Quanta is not.
Dilwyn made the point that Quanta membership was based on a subscription to the magazine.
Nothing could be further from the truth. The subscription is for membership to Quanta, period.
Having paid, YOU are Quanta. This does confer certain rights, such as a magazine and attendance at AGM's
It also involves accepting some responsibilities, and this is where the members tend to be lacking.
If members fail to support Quanta it starts to fall, then it is blamed, but who should you blame? Quanta is YOU. It is not just a committee.
If you feel the committee is at fault, then that too is your fault, it is your committee.
Phoebus _______________________________________________ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
