This may be technically possible but it may also be time consuming to
implement, and and in the interest of using Fundriasing Tech time in
optimal ways it may be that preserving donor anonymity from the IRS is a
lower priority if the Foundation can meet its fundraising goals without
doing this. I t
On 31 July 2014 16:17, David Gerard wrote:
> On 31 July 2014 15:00, Chris Keating wrote:
>
> > In that case how would the Foundation tell if someone made a number of
> > donations of under $1k that were declarable in aggregate?
>
>
> They couldn't, obviously.
>
> I find myself unsurprised that,
On 31 July 2014 15:00, Chris Keating wrote:
> In that case how would the Foundation tell if someone made a number of
> donations of under $1k that were declarable in aggregate?
They couldn't, obviously.
I find myself unsurprised that, after finally getting the validation
they've been after for
In that case how would the Foundation tell if someone made a number of
donations of under $1k that were declarable in aggregate?
Hi Lisa,
I admit I am not an expert in U.S. tax law, so I could be entirely
misinterpreting it. But my read of the IRS instructions are that donors who
donate more than
Hi Lisa,
I admit I am not an expert in U.S. tax law, so I could be entirely
misinterpreting it. But my read of the IRS instructions are that donors
who donate more than $5000 in one year must be reported, *except* that
any single donation of less than $1000 may be discounted when
calculating
Hi Lisa,
Thank you for the explanation. Can you post that in the blog entry and on
the donation page? I understand how calculating annual limits might be more
trouble than it's worth from WMF's point of view.
Thanks,
Pine
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Lisa Gruwell
wrote:
> Hi Pine-
>
> The t
Hi Pine-
The threshold is an aggregate limit in a calendar year. If we were to
limit the donation amount to under $5000, a person could give several
donations that totaled over $5000 in a single year (which happens) and then
we would not be compliance. Instead of trying to create a spike for eve
Heh. If this discussion gets too technical we can move it off-list. At the
moment if Fundraising just wants to say "we'll work on this for future
improvenents to the Bitcoin donation system" and posting that statement in
the blog entry and the donation screen would be ok IMO.
I am rarely satisfied
Sure -- I think it's a perfectly legitimate question to ask, and reasonable
discussion to have. It just appeared to me that you were expecting a
detailed explanation from the chief revenue officer, which didn't seem like
a reasonable expectation. Maybe I was wrong though. If others want to use
this
In the crowdsourced world, I like to think that we evaluate ideas and
programs based on their merits rather than who makes a decision. I grant
that some heirarchy is good and necessary, and in this case the heirarchy
made a reasoned decision to include Bitcoin in the donation options, and
did so in
Pine, I think Lisa already answered your question -- it's complicated. It's
possible (based on my limited knowledge, anyway) that what you suggest is
possible; but she never said it was impossible. She said it was the safest
approach, given a complicated scenario. This is her professional expertise
Hi Lisa,
Hm, that is different from my understanding of the IRC. You are required to
offer a receipt, not to actually send one if the donor declines, right?
Then you could have a checkbox to disable personal info and the receipt.
You could also enable anonymous donations under $5000 or whatever th
As Andrew said, it is complicated. We decided that asking for the
information was the safest approach and best enables to comply with U.S.
laws as well as laws in other countries. For example, we are required to
send a receipt for tax purposes to U.S. donors who give over a certain
amount and we
Nonprofits in the US are only required to report major donors AFAIK.
Bitcoins aren't assets with more complicated transfer rules like real
estate or stock shares. Simple property donations like a can of food for a
food bank don't require identification info.
Pine
On Jul 30, 2014 1:01 PM, "Andrew G
Hi Pine,
The IRS link includes the note that:
"A payment made using virtual currency is subject to information
reporting to the same extent as any other payment made in property."
- no expert, but I suspect this is the explanation. Because the IRS
treat bitcoin as "property" (like, eg, shares) r
On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 12:20 PM, Pine W wrote:
> There is a post on the blog saying that bitcoin is accepted but there are
> several questions about why WMF is asking for contact info. Is that an IRS
> requirement? Might want to post the reason in the blog entry. AFAIK with
> the nonprofits I do
There is a post on the blog saying that bitcoin is accepted but there are
several questions about why WMF is asking for contact info. Is that an IRS
requirement? Might want to post the reason in the blog entry. AFAIK with
the nonprofits I donate to none require personal info for small
contributions
17 matches
Mail list logo
