Date: Mon, 05 Apr 2004 10:54:19 -0400
From: "Michael Walsh" <MJW at mail.press.jhu.edu>
To: <WSFAlist at keithlynch.net>
Subject: [WSFA] Re: Non-profit?
Reply-To: WSFA members <WSFAlist at keithlynch.net>

> twhite8 at cox.net 04/03/04 05:28PM
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: "Keith F. Lynch" <kfl at KeithLynch.net>
>To: "WSFA members" <WSFAlist at KeithLynch.net>
>Cc: <john at bungalow.org>; <jekindell at aol.com>
>Sent: Saturday, April 03, 2004 4:05 PM
>Subject: [WSFA] Non-profit?
>
>> "Ted White" <twhite8 at cox.net> wrote:
>>
>> > I was told last night that the problem with the WSFA Press was that
>> > it was fine as long as it lost money, but one successful book put
>> > WSFA's non-profit status in jeopardy -- at which point the Press
>> > ceased functioning.
>>
>> My understanding is that non-profit organizations are allowed to make
>> large profits.

Ahem  . . . "surplus".

  They just aren't allowed to hand them to the members.
>> And that even that is somewhat flexible:  WSFA could, in principle,
>> pay its officers salaries.

Or employees.  I happen to work for the largest private employer in =
Maryland, which is a non-profit entity.  And I don't work for free.

  We just can't treat members as stockholders
>> and start paying dividends.
>
>This came up in last night's conversation.  I was told that there are =
many
>types of non-profit organizations, each with its own requirements, and =
that
>WSFA's was as I said above.    I welcome information on this subject from
>those who are better informed.
>

Take into account that this is based on memory . . .

The tax status we had during the WSFA Press period was such having such a =
high percentage of our income coming from non-membership money was a tax =
problem.

At one timne we went through a number of procedural hoops to make members =
of Disclave non-voting members of WSFA.

I believe that our current tax status is different from our tax status =
then.

mjw

>--Ted White
>