[OSGeo-Conf] Tax Implications of FOSS4G

[Robert Cheetham]

I am not a tax expert, but Azavea has worked with many non-profits and
foundations over the years, including arrangements in which the non-profit
is serving as a fiscal agent on a given project.  If OSGeo is not a
non-profit, there is no way for another non-profit to extend its status to
prevent payment of taxes by OSGeo.  I don't think Eclipse's status would be
any different from Stumptown Syndicate or any other non-profit in this
respect.

The "extension of non-profit status" for the purposes of the event (the
reference in the SharedGeo contract) would mean that the event could be
operated without paying sales tax and any donations made to the event would
be treated as donations to a non-profit organization (which would mean that
they might be tax-deductible for the donor).  However, once the proceeds
are transferred from the event organizer (the non-profit) to a for-profit
entity (OSGeo), that for-profit entity would be liable for the tax
liability related to this income, and it would be treated in the same
manner as any other income it might receive.

Best,

Robert



------------------
Robert Cheetham

Azavea  |  340 N 12th St, Ste 402, Philadelphia, PA
cheetham at azavea.com  | T 215.701.7713  | F 215.925.2663
Web azavea.com <http://www.azavea.com/>  |  Blog azavea.com/blogs  |
Twitter @ <http://goog_858212415>rcheetham <http://twitter.com/rcheetham> and
@azavea <http://twitter.com/azavea>

*Azavea is a B Corporation <http://www.bcorporation.net/what-are-b-corps> -
we apply geospatial technology to create better communities *
*while advancing the state-of-the-art through research. Join us in creating
a better world.*



On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 10:09 AM, Dave McIlhagga
<dmcilhagga at dmsolutions.ca>wrote:

> One would need a US Tax expert to weigh in to know the definitive answer
> -- but intuitively, it would seem impossible for a taxable organization to
> take in revenue that results in profit for the organization as a whole.
>
> If there's another way - I'd suggest that's something OSGeo would need to
> get it's own tax advice on, and establish as a basis for future events.
> Otherwise, we're all just dealing with hearsay.
>
> Dave
>
>
>
> On 2013-07-12, at 10:03 AM, Jeroen Ticheler <jeroen.ticheler at geocat.net>
> wrote:
>
> Hi Kate,
> Thanks! But what is the meaning of "extending the tax exempt status" of
> e.g. the Eclipse Foundation? From your comment below this "umbrella
> capability" becomes an empty shell if OSGeo in the end still requires the
> tax payment on income.
> Thanks,
> Jeroen
>
> On 12 jul. 2013, at 15:56, Kate Chapman <kate at maploser.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Jeroen,
>
> Once a payment is made to OSGEO it would be income for the organization.
> If perhaps OSGEO were to not get approved for tax exempt status in the US
> they would then owe tax on it as income.
>
> Kate
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Conference_dev mailing list
> Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Conference_dev mailing list
> Conference_dev at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/conference_dev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/conference_dev/attachments/20130712/ab1ee917/attachment.html>