Another failure to lead - John Asher editorial

[John DiBartolomeo]

Originally Posted by SStockDart

Every entity listed in the article is "for profit" except NHRA. Can't compare them. I am not attempting to defend NHRA during this coronavirus crap, I'm just saying they have to operate by different rules than the "for profits" therefore should not be compared to them. NHRA follows similar rules as other "not for profit" organizations like NRA. And similar to non profit charities like YMCA, Red Cross, Catholic Ministries, Salvation Army, etc.

This from Jon Asher: not for profits are not held to a different set of standards regarding public relations efforts and the like. Those differences are ONLY in the manner in which their taxes are paid and collected. They are free to run their businesses in any way they deem necessary.. They’re free to do whatever they like in terms of paying their employees, advertising their services or virtually anything else. The only financial restrictions they face are in regards to how much money they can have on hand at the end of the tax year.

[jmcarter]

A dearth of leadership across the entire spectrum has been a problem for several generations. Leadership teams focused on their own interests instead of their products, services, members and customers will never be truly successful.

[Julie Jordan]

Originally Posted by John DiBartolomeo

This from Jon Asher: not for profits are not held to a different set of standards regarding public relations efforts and the like. Those differences are ONLY in the manner in which their taxes are paid and collected. They are free to run their businesses in any way they deem necessary.. They’re free to do whatever they like in terms of paying their employees, advertising their services or virtually anything else. The only financial restrictions they face are in regards to how much money they can have on hand at the end of the tax year.

There are no restrictions on how much money a tax-exempt organization can have at year-end. The main restriction is that profits must be used for the organization's work and that no profits can be distributed to members.

[SStockDart]

Julie is obviously much more knowledgeable, experienced, and prettier than I am. She noted the issue of difference is primarily that any profits by a "not for profit" can be used for their stated organizational objective. In other words the profits can and should be used for motorsports safety (or something to that effect) and can not be used for things like supporting the second amendment or abortion which are unrelated to NHRA's mission.

John and Jon, respectfully, this is contrary to your statements "They're free to run their businesses any way they deem necessary" , and "or virtually anything else".

What got us to this point is my interpretation of the article that NHRA should be doing more, like the "for profit" organizations. NHRA is unable to donate a million dollars to an anti Coronavirus activity, but Walmart can. Therefore, my comment that one can not compare them.

BTW, I never worked for a "not for profit". I retired from a Fortune 500 company.

Best regards,

[Mike Jones]

Originally Posted by Julie Jordan

The main restriction is that profits must be used for the organization's work and that no profits can be distributed to members.

Does the distribution include the win and round money purse structure?
Mike A114

[Quo Pro Joe]

How long can a non-profit survive if there are no profits at all?

[KRatcliff]

Originally Posted by Quo Pro Joe

How long can a non-profit survive if there are no profits at all?

The "non-profit" status of the NHRA is more of a tax dodge than simply not being profitable. You can see from their published filings that in most cases their revenue is greater than their expenses.

[J.R. Haddad]

Seeing as most of their members are racers, I would say they are doing a good job of not distributing any of the profits to their members.::

[Quo Pro Joe]

Originally Posted by KRatcliff

The "non-profit" status of the NHRA is more of a tax dodge than simply not being profitable. You can see from their published filings that in most cases their revenue is greater than their expenses.

IS greater or WAS greater?

[KRatcliff]

Originally Posted by Quo Pro Joe

IS greater or WAS greater?

I have not seen their latest filing, but I wouldn't be surprised to see that their revenue is still greater than their expenses. A non profit organizational status can have net revenues or "profits" and often do as a long term entity. They are not taxed on those net revenues or profits like C or S corporation for example.