3 ms·

Linking to patio11's now 5 year old post [0] Has anyone solved this yet? Why is it not stupid simple to get a "support invoice" from an open source project to

Linking to patio11's now 5 year old post [0] Has anyone solved this yet? Why is it not stupid simple to get a "support invoice" from an open source project to make it expense-able? [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10863939 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10863939

benatkin 6y ago
> both countries are very lenient with regards to necessary business expenses (必須経費 over here). This seems to be the issue. If you're really paying for the software and not the support, it isn't a neccessary business expense because you can have it for free. Same for the support. If others can get support for free — and it's easy to observe it happening — chances are you can get it for free. Someone down the line might notice it's a donation and not a necessary business expense. And if you really need extra support, we're back to the old paradigm where open source can help you land a project but you still need to do the work and it's in addition to the work you do on the project, and it's not easy work. For example, a week-long training course, or custom code.
- jedberg 6y ago
  There are a ton of examples of programs that are free or reduced cost for individuals and more money for corporations. Like all the Jetbrains products. The IRS doesn't get on people for paying for a corporate license for Jetbrains because it would be against the license. Open source support could be the same way. Free for individuals, but costs money for corporate/commercial uses. I don't think the IRS would even blink twice at that.
  - cstejerean 6y ago
    But the open source community would because such a license would not qualify as open source. See the recent debacle sign the Elastic licensing change.
    - jedberg 6y ago
      That sounds like an issue that the open source community 1) needs to get over and 2) probably doesn't have a consistent view on. Also, RedHat built a billion dollar business on this idea, so it's not like it's new. And if I recall, most people were on Elastic's side with the license change.
- michael_j_ward 6y ago
  How about I pay for the right to add a `high-priority-MYNAME` tag to an issue, and the maintainers promise to take that into consideration but with no guarantee to make it a priority.
- HeyLaughingBoy 6y ago
  Just because there is a free alternative doesn't mean that the paid option isn't a necessary business expense. If I run a taxi service, most people would understand that having a car is necessary. However, if I chose to buy a car, even though my brother will give me a brand new one for free that doesn't mean that my purchase ceases to be a "necessary business expense."
justincormack 6y ago
I think you can now pay for github sponsors via your normal subscription, which gives you an invoice.

benatkin 6y ago

> both countries are very lenient with regards to necessary business expenses (必須経費 over here). This seems to be the issue. If you're really paying for the software and not the support, it isn't a neccessary business expense because you can have it for free. Same for the support. If others can get support for free — and it's easy to observe it happening — chances are you can get it for free. Someone down the line might notice it's a donation and not a necessary business expense. And if you really need extra support, we're back to the old paradigm where open source can help you land a project but you still need to do the work and it's in addition to the work you do on the project, and it's not easy work. For example, a week-long training course, or custom code.

jedberg 6y ago
There are a ton of examples of programs that are free or reduced cost for individuals and more money for corporations. Like all the Jetbrains products. The IRS doesn't get on people for paying for a corporate license for Jetbrains because it would be against the license. Open source support could be the same way. Free for individuals, but costs money for corporate/commercial uses. I don't think the IRS would even blink twice at that.
- cstejerean 6y ago
  But the open source community would because such a license would not qualify as open source. See the recent debacle sign the Elastic licensing change.
  - jedberg 6y ago
    That sounds like an issue that the open source community 1) needs to get over and 2) probably doesn't have a consistent view on. Also, RedHat built a billion dollar business on this idea, so it's not like it's new. And if I recall, most people were on Elastic's side with the license change.
michael_j_ward 6y ago
How about I pay for the right to add a `high-priority-MYNAME` tag to an issue, and the maintainers promise to take that into consideration but with no guarantee to make it a priority.
HeyLaughingBoy 6y ago
Just because there is a free alternative doesn't mean that the paid option isn't a necessary business expense. If I run a taxi service, most people would understand that having a car is necessary. However, if I chose to buy a car, even though my brother will give me a brand new one for free that doesn't mean that my purchase ceases to be a "necessary business expense."

justincormack 6y ago

I think you can now pay for github sponsors via your normal subscription, which gives you an invoice.