next message in archive
next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects
Index of Subjects Hi Doug! > On Tue, 4 May 1999, Douglas Rigby wrote: > > > According to Revenue Canada our Charitable tax status became > > effective as of Jan 1/99. So yes you can tell IPs that we > > have charitable status. What you cannot tell them is what proportion > > of their "donation" will be eligible for a tax receipt. > > > > Two things need to happen: > > > > I need verification from Dennis our accountant on the concept of "service" > > and "donation" elements. > > > > Second and equally important I need the Board to decide and the > > amount of "service" in each of the membership and IP categories. > > > > My suggestions to the Board was a service element of $200 for IPs. > > This may be too high. What was the result of your informal > > discussion among IPs. This is a very interesting development the implications of which I wasn't at all aware of (until David Potter drew them to my attention). Clearly in the determination of the 'service' element we want to come to a determination of a figure that is somewhere in a reasonable ball-park. Our costs to support an IP clearly depend on the way and degree to which we amortize our fixed and other costs. A higher figure (like $200) gives greater value to the service which the CCN provides. On the other hand, a lower figure (such as $100) will give a significantly greater incentive to IPs to donate (and thereby relize a financial benefit). I would argue for a lower rather than a higher figure since I think this might result in significantly better prospects for the CCN to realize some revenue. > > As we discussed last week whatever the "service" amount agreed to > > CCN can, does and will subsidize any and all IPs by the difference > > between the service amount and their donation. Tax receipts will be > > issued for $10 or more amounts above this "service" amount. > > > > What we want to balance off in setting these "service" rate for > > various memberships is to try to keep our total service revenue > > below $50,000 so we do not have to submit 15% of this to the > > government (even though we can claw back 7.5%) Gosh, I wouldn't worry about this at all. It's only in the 50,000 - 54,000 bracket that our net would be affected by the 7.5% HST we would have to pay. Above $54,000 gross, our net rises above $50,000 so that we are better off in the end in any event. > > What Revenue Canada is looking for is a "fair" assessment of > > IP and other services as the "service" amount. > > > > Regards, Doug Cheers! Chris _._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._. Christopher Majka <aa051@chebucto.ns.ca> Editor-in-Chief: Chebucto Community Net - Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada URL = http://www.chebucto.ns.ca/Home.html "We have ... in this country ... far too many captive editors who cannot even be heard to rattle their chains." -- Carl E. Lindstrom _._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._.
next message in archive
next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects