John Goerzen wrote:
A very limited one just to advise on taxes. I want something more proactive.On Sun, Jul 16, 2006 at 11:11:32AM -0700, Bruce Perens wrote: Oh goodness no. You have the book-keeper do absolutely everything that a book-keeper can do, because it's less expensive that way. But if we had been proactively under the guidance of a professional CPA, we never would have become behind on tax filings. OK, hindsight is easy, but that's what we need to have for the future.You don't hire an expensive CPA to do basic bookkeeping and daily mail processing, which it sounds like you've been trying to suggest we do. Nobody was doing that.I don't recall an officer ever doing the sort of thing a CPA would (file taxes and the like). I would have a CPA essentially operate as CFO of the organization and report to the Treasurer. All routine work would still be done by the book-keeper, but what we are lacking today is the guidance of a financial professional. Somehow it was easier to find volunteer counsel than volunteer finance.Why would you have SPI hire a CPA to do bookkeeper's work? Thanks Bruce |
_______________________________________________ Spi-general mailing list [email protected] http://lists.spi-inc.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/spi-general
