3 ms·
I don't understand the difference, either, which is why I like the fact that our contribution looks and works just like an expense. For small orgs, certainly,
by cemerick 17y ago
I don't understand the difference, either, which is why I like the fact that our contribution looks and works just like an expense. For small orgs, certainly, there's only two numbers that matter: revenue and expenses. Figuring out how to set up a third bucket is overhead I'm not interested in now. :-)
- davidw 17y agoThat's why you have an accountant. Like wheels says, there are tax benefits, and if you're not taking advantage of them, you are likely wasting your company's money. Or, thinking of it another way, with the non-profit tax stuff, you could give more money to Clojure or whatever else.
- petercooper 17y agoIt varies significantly by jurisdiction, but merely giving money to another company/organization/person may not count as an "expense" for deduction purposes. In most Western jurisdictions, you would need to be getting something in return - like consultancy, labor, product, a contractual obligation (as with a retainer), etc. I'd be quite unsure whether the "paying for hours spent working on Clojure" line would fly with all tax authorities - but, yeah, that's why people have accountants :-)
- Psyonic 17y agoProbably taken care of by filing at least one bug. Then the consulting line is easier to accept, as long as that bug was fixed. That said: I'm neither a lawyer nor an accountant, so take that with a large dosage of salt