2 ms·
> Yes. All that means is that the money siphoned off by management was never taxed as revenue. Non-profits are not charities (though some are). It is just a bus
by runlaszlorun 3y ago
> Yes. All that means is that the money siphoned off by management was never taxed as revenue.
Non-profits are not charities (though some are). It is just a business model. The fucking NFL is a non-profit organization.
Honestly, every sentence in there is incorrect.
Are many senior non-profit execs overpaid for underperforming? You’re prob right. But the hyperbole takes away from your point, IMHO.
- throwaway-blaze 3y agoSalaries and benefits are generally deducted from taxable gains at every company in the western world, not even just in the USA.
- jstarfish 3y ago> Honestly, every sentence in there is incorrect. The NFL's non-profit status has been contentious for years. > Section 501(c)(6) of the Internal Revenue Code specifically defines professional football leagues as exempt organizations under that section. These organizations are exempt whether or not they administer a pension fund for football players. (Irs.gov)
- okprod 3y agoTo be clear, the difference between the NFL (when it was a 501(c)(6)) and Mozilla as a 501(c)(3) is the former tax status specifies an entity's purpose as serving members of an association, while 501(c)(3)s have a purpose to serve the public good. Strictly from a nonprofit financial perspective and from reviewing its most recently filed public 990, Mozilla doesn't pay its senior staff an exorbitant amount; it looks to be an entity with $20-$30M in revenue and double that in assets, so seeing its highest paid employees making $200-$300K isn't out of the ordinary. It does look to pay quite a bit to Upwork, which I assume is their rent expense. It can be difficult to tell from a 990 if there is fraud going on however.