RD.net to be re-revamped!

[Hermit]

Mhhhh. Worth checking into some more. Tell you what, why don't you query Dawkins about it via email?

No, seriously, this is worth following up. Here is an extract from this IRS publication about who is exempt from having to obtain an EIN:

Exempt Organizations
Definitions:
Tax Exempt Organization: A tax exempt organization is a non-profit organization
that is exempt from certain taxes because it is described under Section 501 of the
Internal Revenue Code. Certain organizations are required to apply to the Internal
Revenue Service for a determination letter that grants them formal tax exemption,
while other organizations are treated as tax exempt as long as they are organized
and operated under an applicable section of the Code.
IRC Section 501(c)(3) Organization: This is an organization that is organized and
operated exclusively for one or more of the following purposes: charitable, religious,
educational, scientific, literary, testing for public safety, fostering national or
international amateur sports competition (but only if none of its activities involve
providing athletic facilities or equipment), or the prevention of cruelty to animals.
To qualify, the organization must be a corporation, community chest, fund, unincorporated
association, or foundation. A trust is a fund or foundation and will qualify.
However, an individual or a partnership will not qualify.

It is of course possible that the RDFRS still is a charitable organisation, but not one operated exclusively for the purposes listed by the IRS.

[lordpasternack]

Yes. It may still be a nice, well-meaning, purported non-profit organisation - but it seems that it really has lost or relinquished its tax exempt status.

Something tells me that, in all likelihood:

1) Richard Dawkins himself still doesn't even know this, or;

2) Due primarily to the fuckwittery and incompetence of RDFRS staff, they were getting into bother with the IRS - and the Executive Director - Richard's mistress, Ms Cornwell - took steps to relinquish their tax exempt status before push came to shove - and has invented a nice fable that someone as daft as Richard would swallow, for how this was entirely their choice, and a really 'innovative' idea. Or;

3) They've had their status revoked against their will, and Richard knows and is really fucking embarrassed.


The possibility that they might have been on fair terms with the IRS and reached a genuine, unforced, informed consensus to relinquish their tax exempt status seems just, just, unlikely.

In the meantime, my Schadenfreude is getting distinctly schädlicher and freuder…

[Hermit]

Schadenfröher and freudiger.

Although the organisation will undoubtedly set its spin doctors into overdrive if it has had to relinquish its charitable status in the US, I'm still not convinced that something untoward/embarrassing has happened.

[lordpasternack]

Schadenfröher and freudiger.

Danke.

Although the organisation will undoubtedly set its spin doctors into overdrive if it has had to relinquish its charitable status in the US, I'm still not convinced that something untoward/embarrassing has happened.

Well, call me a schadenfreudian cynic, but…

Fucking hell, Seraph - this is the same organisation that reportedly failed to audit the person who was running their online store in three years. The same organisation that then plumbed money into a wild goose chase of a lawsuit, instead of a proper investigation by an external auditor. The same organisation that spectacularly failed to manage pretty much every aspect of forumgate competently. The same organisation where Timonen and Chalkley - who, for whatever talents they do have, were placed into positions they were obviously incompetent for, and poorly managed in - eventually both resigned of their own volition, citing the very Executive Director who had already blatantly mismanaged them, as their principle motivator for resigning.

It doesn't have to be 'hot gossip' for it to be embarrassing. I still put it down, until further notice, to their basic pathological incompetence.

(Oh yeah - that's right: In case you didn't know - Josh actually voluntarily resigned from RDFRS - and this, rather than a flash of insight on the part of RDFRS, was most definitely why RDFRS took over running the store. It was quite a bit after his voluntary resignation, and handing over the books, that the alleged embezzlement was discovered. )

[Hermit]

Principal

Yes, I am aware of the history of the RDFRS, but that history does not justify speaking of speculations as if they were facts until they are buttressed with sufficiently supporting facts.

[Robert_S]

This is so very sad to watch.

I lost a bit of respect for Richard over the course of this thread. And also some fondness for him.

Seems to me like everyone would be best off and Richard would probably be happier if he gave control of the business end of the organization to some experienced pros and went back to the speaking and writing that earned him the kind of name that served so well as a rallying point in the first place.

There's no shame in not being much of an administrator/businessman/bureaucrat type. Many people actually take pride in that.

[Rum]

One may of course simply be required to have a tax ID which identifies you as tax exempt. In other words you are registered but not paying tax.

My own spot of speculation for what it is worth.

[lordpasternack]

Principal

Yes, I am aware of the history of the RDFRS, but that history does not justify speaking of speculations as if they were facts until they are buttressed with sufficiently supporting facts.

I don't believe I spoke of my speculations as if they were facts, though.

And Rum - Seraph/Hermit already covered that one. 501 (c)(3) tax-exempt organisations apparently don't need this tax number thingy.

[lordpasternack]

This is so very sad to watch.

I lost a bit of respect for Richard over the course of this thread. And also some fondness for him.

Seems to me like everyone would be best off and Richard would probably be happier if he gave control of the business end of the organization to some experienced pros and went back to the speaking and writing that earned him the kind of name that served so well as a rallying point in the first place.

There's no shame in not being much of an administrator/businessman/bureaucrat type. Many people actually take pride in that.

Very much my sentiments, too…

And well, he could always just hand it over to some women he really fancies, and has been shagging for the past x months… ha, aha, ahahahahahahaaaah! Oh, wait…

[lordpasternack]

We now interrupt this thread for a brief musical interlude. Please don't touch that dial…

[lordpasternack]

Hmmmm… it says this on their US donations page:

The Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science is exempt from Federal income tax under section 501 (c) (3) of the Internal Revenue Code. Contributions are deductible under section 170 of the Code. We are also qualified to receive tax deductible bequests, devises, transfers or gifts under section 2055, 2106 or 2522 of the Code. You may make a donation online through PayPal above or by sending a check via regular mail. US IRS Tax ID (EIN) #98-0499347

My emphasis.

Fuck knows…

[Rum]

As I suggested?

http://rationalia.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... 5#p1191808

[lordpasternack]

As I suggested?

http://rationalia.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... 5#p1191808

Yeah - I considered that right from the outset, but Hermit suggested that tax-exempt organisations don't actually require that number. I'm not even an American citizen far less versed in tax laws and regulations, so it is rather Greek to me.

[Svartalf]

Well, taxes are hebrew to the Greek, they just act like those didn't exist...
Of course, back in the old times, citizens of Athens actually received an allowance from the profits of the lead and silver mines instead of paying the state a tithe of their earnings and taxes on various things, and if the wealthy went the extra mile, like funding a war galley or the organisation of religious festivities, they actually got honored for that...

[Ayaan]

I once worked for a not-for-profit organization (not quite the same thing as a non-profit, but bound by many of the same rules) and they had to have a tax ID number so the IRS could identify the company for employee tax purposes and for the forms the company had to file to show it was still operating within the guidelines and laws. There are still forms to file with the IRS and other government agencies even if the company doesn't pay taxes. In this case, the company's tax id number served the same function as my social security number - to serve as unique identifier so the government would be better able to keep track of forms, filings, and payments.