Note to Weston White

[mutter]

An INC is a non profit org?

Lots of incs are non-profits, mutter. Why wouldn't they be?

Do a search on the guidestar.org database and you'll find that 632,092 out of 1.8 million charities in the US have "Inc." in their name.

The Children's Museum of Indianapolis, Inc.
Girls, Inc.
The Junior League of Denver, Inc.

And so on.

I'm guessing you're not all that familiar with non-profit law.

Not at all. It just seemed strange that a non profit would need a business license. I guess thats for standard protection from law suites

[webhick]

Not at all. It just seemed strange that a non profit would need a business license. I guess thats for standard protection from law suites

It's more than that...you kind of need it if you want your organization to be seen as legitimate enough to get funding, get non-profit status with the IRS, participate in many of the programs available to non-profits, and (at least in my state) solicit for donations.

[Famspear]

An INC is a non profit org?

Lots of incs are non-profits, mutter. Why wouldn't they be?

Do a search on the guidestar.org database and you'll find that 632,092 out of 1.8 million charities in the US have "Inc." in their name.

The Children's Museum of Indianapolis, Inc.
Girls, Inc.
The Junior League of Denver, Inc.

And so on.

I'm guessing you're not all that familiar with non-profit law.

Not at all. It just seemed strange that a non profit would need a business license. I guess thats for standard protection from law suites

Yes, and a non-profit corporation is simply a corporation created under the non-profit incorporation statute of a particular state. A "regular" corporation is set up under the "regular" incorporation statute of that state. Generally, one of the important requirements to be a non-profit corporation is that the profits not "inure to the benefit of any private shareholder." Notice that this does not say that there can be no "profits" -- but only that whatever profits there are cannot benefit "shareholders." Essentially, non-profit corporations do not have shareholders (do not have "owners").

Similarly, a non-profit corporation could be engaged in a "business." And it could have profits from that business. And it could be required, like any other entity, to have a business permit or license if the law of that jurisdiction requires such things for that kind of business.

Another thing to remember about non-profit organizations is that some are non-profit CORPORATIONS and others are not.

Still another thing to remember is that the mere fact that an entity is a non-profit corporation (or another kind of non-profit organization) does not mean that the entity is also a CHARITY, or that the entity is exempt from federal income tax. There are plenty of non-profit organizations (whether non-profit corporations or "other") that must pay federal income tax.

And still another thing to remember is that even if the organization is exempt from federal income tax as a "charity," it is not necessarily exempt from OTHER federal taxes, such as federal payroll taxes.

And still another thing to remember is that the non-profit corporation (or other non-profit organization) may or may not be exempt from various state or local taxes.

I think there are other things to remember, but I can't remember what they are.....

[Judge Roy Bean]

....

I think there are other things to remember, but I can't remember what they are.....

Another important purpose for going through the grief (there are plenty of ways for a corporation to pay minimal income taxes), is to allow donors to deduct their contributions. IMHO that's not as big a deal as one might think; in my experience real philanthropy is more about results than tax deductibility).

[LPC]

I think there are other things to remember, but I can't remember what they are.....

Another important purpose for going through the grief (there are plenty of ways for a corporation to pay minimal income taxes), is to allow donors to deduct their contributions.

Yes, there is a difference between organizations that are exempt from federal income tax under section 501(c)(3) and organization that can receive tax deductible contributions under section 170.

(And even if you are exempt from tax under section 501(c)(3), you would still be liable for income tax at regular corporate rates on "unrelated business taxable income.")

Although, generally speaking, once you qualify as a charitable organization defined by section 170(c), you also qualify for an estate tax charitable deduction under section 2055 or a gift tax charitable deduction under section 2522.

And the amount that is deductible under section 170 may depend on whether the charity is a "private foundation" described by section 509 or a "public charity." And, even if it is a private foundation, the donor might still get a larger income tax deduction if it is a private *operating* foundation.

And there are different reporting requirements for different kinds of organizations. A tax-exempt 501(c)(3) organization normally files a Form 990, but private foundations must file Form 990-PF, which is more complicated and more invasive, while churches are not required to file any returns at all (other than payroll tax returns). (I recently read a private letter ruling that explained the difference between a tax-exempt religious organization and a "church.")

[LPC]

PS you guys have become ridiculous with this WW thing.

I agree.

Here is my observation half of you on her only post when you can jump on someone and call them names. this helps how?

Possibly true.

The posts I most enjoy writing are the ones in which I believe that I can accurately and decisively demonstrate misinformation or bad reasoning, and without being insulting. What you might call a "teaching moment."

And sometimes I have to do some extra research and I learn something new, and that's a bonus.

But I get frustrated by people who are all attitude and no consciousness, such as WW, and then I sometimes descend into insults (but I still try to make them artistic).

[Joey Smith]

But we're all official Illuminati members, blood oath and everything.

[The Operative]

But we're all official Illuminati members, blood oath and everything.

I think I was out sick that day.

[LPC]

But we're all official Illuminati members, blood oath and everything.

I think I was out sick that day.

I took the correspondence course.

[Doktor Avalanche]

And I was bitten by one - I only come out at night.

[ASITStands]

But we're all official Illuminati members, blood oath and everything.

I think I was out sick that day.

I was too. Oh, wait! I wasn't invited to the swearing ceremony.

[mutter]

I know more about non profits now thanks. To me all information is usefull, maybe some day it will be.
i read part of that Article Demo. Pretty good. Basically the 16th came about cos of too much gov debt. But even with it we are still in debt to the tune of 11 TRILLION! maybe we need to rethink what our governments are spending currency on.

[Imalawman]

I know more about non profits now thanks. To me all information is usefull, maybe some day it will be.
i read part of that Article Demo. Pretty good. Basically the 16th came about cos of too much gov debt. But even with it we are still in debt to the tune of 11 TRILLION! maybe we need to rethink what our governments are spending currency on.

No doubt. As has been stated on here before - we just state the law. Doesn't mean we like government or what its doing.

[Gregg]

I know more about non profits now thanks. To me all information is usefull, maybe some day it will be.
i read part of that Article Demo. Pretty good. Basically the 16th came about cos of too much gov debt. But even with it we are still in debt to the tune of 11 TRILLION! maybe we need to rethink what our governments are spending currency on.

Really? Think for just a monute how the government's balance sheet and cash flow chart loooks, and the numbers for both debt and deficit are a lot more reasonable than most make them out to be. For instance, if GDP is $12 trillion give or take, $11 trillion isn't much cosnidering the assets. Do you think most people owe less than a year's gross income in total debt? The problem is, after about $100 million or so, you just get into numbers beyond the comprehension of a lot of people (most of them reporters I think) and it makes a good headline.

[ASITStands]

I know more about non profits now thanks. To me all information is usefull, maybe some day it will be.
i read part of that Article Demo. Pretty good. Basically the 16th came about cos of too much gov debt. But even with it we are still in debt to the tune of 11 TRILLION! maybe we need to rethink what our governments are spending currency on.

From a political viewpoint, spending has always been a bigger problem than taxing.

No one likes the income tax, and many of us hate how Congress spends the money.

I think we oughta, "Fire them all!" and start all over. "Get back to our founding principles!" The problem is too many are addicted to those things on which we spend the money.

The problem has become way too big. I'm seriously concerned for my grandchildren.

[.]

if GDP is $12 trillion give or take

Actually, about $14 trillion, give or take, not that it matters much.

$11 trillion isn't much cosnidering the assets

It isn't $11 trillion, it's $50-60-70 trillion in total liabilities, but, unfortunately, we don't use accrual accounting for most federal government purposes. And any number greater than about $50 trillion exceeds the current net worth of all citizens combined.

If we used accrual accounting, there are actually some tens of billions of dollars of capital expenses each year that wouldn't count towards the current year's deficit, but then the government would also have to account for the many tens of trillions of expenses that are shoved under the future budget rug and ignored until they become a problem.

This is devolving into an R&R topic. Or whatever we call it now.

[Gregg]

It isn't $11 trillion, it's $50-60-70 trillion in total liabilities, but, unfortunately, we don't use accrual accounting for most federal government purposes. And any number greater than about $50 trillion exceeds the current net worth of all citizens combined.

If we used accrual accounting, there are actually some tens of billions of dollars of capital expenses each year that wouldn't count towards the current year's deficit, but then the government would also have to account for the many tens of trillions of expenses that are shoved under the future budget rug and ignored until they become a problem.

agreed, and I've been away quite a while so I'm not up on the day to day figures...BTW, how much of the liabilites are for Social Security? I honestly see the day that SS benefits are taxable at about 50% or more....or I can't see how to avoid it anyhow.

[Pottapaug1938]

"Get back to our founding principles!" Actually, all too many Americans couldn't correctly describe those founding principles correctly if you offered them a lifetime exemption from taxes for getting them right. There was one of those Astroturf-roots "tea parties" in Boston, last month; and one of the ranters, a 55-year-old woman from western Massachusetts, firmly asserted that "we didn't come over here to be taxed."

A 1000 Quatloos savings bond goes to the person who can best explain just how screwed up this woman is.

[Famspear]

"Get back to our founding principles!" Actually, all too many Americans couldn't correctly describe those founding principles correctly if you offered them a lifetime exemption from taxes for getting them right. There was one of those Astroturf-roots "tea parties" in Boston, last month; and one of the ranters, a 55-year-old woman from western Massachusetts, firmly asserted that "we didn't come over here to be taxed."

A 1000 Quatloos savings bond goes to the person who can best explain just how screwed up this woman is.

She's correct. Very few people, if anybody, ever came over here for the purpose of "being taxed." That's just rhetoric. And "no tax" was not a founding principle of the United States of America.

Anybody who wants to complain that taxes are too high or too low or too complicated or too simple or too unfair can have at it. Complain, complain, complain. And of course, people do complain. Complaining about taxes is an All-American thing to do. Taxation is, however, part of life in a large, complex, modern society.

Where people go off the rails is where they oppose a tax by illegal, immoral, or illogical means -- for example, by participating in (or promoting) scams, such as the tax protester-tax denier scams routinely debunked on this web site.

The proper question is not whether will will continue to have taxes. We will continue to have taxes. That is inevitable.

The proper question is not whether the current federal income tax system is legally valid under the U.S. Constitution. The current federal income tax system is legally valid under the U.S. Constitution. That has already been decided.

Proper questions are: Do we want to change the current federal, state and local tax systems? What changes do we want to make? Why should we make those changes? What policies should be considered in deciding how to change the tax systems?

[LPC]

$11 trillion isn't much cosnidering the assets

It isn't $11 trillion, it's $50-60-70 trillion in total liabilities, but, unfortunately, we don't use accrual accounting for most federal government purposes.

Are you suggesting that we should accrue future Social Security benefits as a liability, but not accrue future Social Security taxes as an asset?

That wouldn't make much sense.