4 ms·
> it was another year they unfortunately operated in the red funding wise. As Arnt point's point's out, this was not unfortunate. It was intentional, necessar
by advisedwang 2y ago
> it was another year they unfortunately operated in the red funding wise.
As Arnt point's point's out, this was not unfortunate. It was intentional, necessary and calculated. See the report itself (https://ev.kde.org/reports/ev-2023/#welcome-to-kdes-annual-report-2023 https://ev.kde.org/reports/ev-2023/#welcome-to-kdes-annual-r...)
- aidenn0 2y agoThere are over a dozen articles on the page you linked; which one discusses this? [edit] found it under Financial Working Group This says they need to spend down their reserves because they are a non-profit? Is there some particular rule in the jurisdiction they are incorporated in where non-profits can't maintain large reserves? A lot of non-profits in the US are funded primarily from investment proceeds from endowments.
- olddustytrail 2y agoYes, as mentioned downthread: "A German e.V. can't keep arbitrarily large reserves indefinitely. It needs to use its money for its stated purpose, or else it may lose its tax status."
- Arnt 2y agoThat kind of nonprofit can't maintain reserves without justification. It received tax-deductible donations for a purpose and has to spend its money for that purpose. It has a lot of flexibility wrt what level of reserves are sensible in its case or when to spend received donations, but the taxman will ask when that money is going to be spent.
- bmer 2y agoI am surprised to see phoronix getting that so wrong…