4 ms·
Despite what others may say, on balance, there really isn't a good reason for this to be on top of HN. Also, it's important to recognize that the fundraisers h
by tsurantino 13y ago
Despite what others may say, on balance, there really isn't a good reason for this to be on top of HN.
Also, it's important to recognize that the fundraisers have lost contact with those in custody of the video. It's likely that we may never see that video and, rather than contributing to original intent of the fundraiser, the donations will instead go to fund Gawker's arbitrarily chosen charity. Crowdfunding's double-edged sword strikes again.
- soperj 13y agoDon't know if anyone knows, but is Gawker allowed to use the donations as a tax write off? Always been curious about that.
- hluska 13y agoForbes had an interesting article about some of the tax implications of crowdfunding - http://www.forbes.com/sites/suwcharmananderson/2012/05/23/kickstarters-sting-in-the-tail-tax/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/suwcharmananderson/2012/05/23/ki... As far as using the donations as a tax write off, I don't think I understand your question. Are you asking if Gawker could take the money they received from crowdfunding, turn around and donate it to a registered charity and then claim a deduction??
- soperj 13y agoThe plan is to donate the money if they can't buy the video(and it looks likely they won't be able to buy the video) so yes that's what I was asking.
- Ensorceled 13y agoOnly if they took the money as income and, possibly, paid taxes on it. I presume they would be very careful to never take custody of the money, even in trust.