Re: charity disappointmnet (was Re: [Fsfe-uk] What the treasurer did... (early Feb 2003))

[Jason Clifford]

On 6 Feb 2003, Nic Ferrier wrote:

> I'm not a member yet (I've been too busy to send in my form) but the
> news about charitable status is very disappointing.
> 
> I would have thought that the AFFS was a perfect candidate for
> charitable status, it exists purely to promote the benefits of free
> software; doesn't it?
> 
> Part of promoting free software benefits might be to point out where
> legislation could help but is that the only reason the AFFS exists?

Charity law specifically excludes any organisation which has a political 
goal as one of it's main aims. That means that if one of your aims is to 
get the law changed you wont be able to register as a charity - if you are 
already a charity and you then start such a campaign you usually get away 
with it so long as you are not too blatent.

Not being a charity means that the AFFS wont be saddled with the extra 
admin overhead (cost). That's a good thing.

On the down side it means donations wont be tax free (and thus AFFS wont 
get an extra 20-30% in returned taxes from regular donors). I don't that's 
such a big deal unless and until there is a lot of money involved at which 
point a separate organisation could be created to deal with the tax issue.

Jason Clifford
yes I've been involved in establishing and running a charity before.
-- 
UKFSN.ORG               Finance Free Software while you surf the 'net
http://www.ukfsn.org/                   Sign Up Now