Len Imbrogno.....Seriously now

[Mike Mayhew]

Cut and pasted from George Washington University's School of Business :

........... This definition does not preclude a non-profit corporation from making a profit, which may seem inconsistent with the name non-profit corporation. In fact, non-profit corporations should be governed as if they are a business, and profit-generation should be one of the goals of the non-profit corporation. The owner/CEO must understand that the profits cannot be used to the benefit of its members and must, therefore, understand and adhere to the standards and guidelines that are set and governed by the state in which the non-profit corporation is incorporated..............

Thats how they teach it, perhaps other schools teach differently.

OK, we have really degraded Jim's thread now.
Maybe some folks enjoy learning more about 501c's than they thought they would. [:-laughing-:]

Mike ( madness & ) Mayhem

[Mike Mayhew]

Again cut and pasted off of a link from the George Washington School Of Business :

................However, a nonprofit corporation is not prohibited from making a profit, but there are limitations on what it can do with its profits. There also are limitations on how it can make money. For example, if a nonprofit corporation engages in profit-making activities unrelated to its recognized nonprofit purpose, it must set up a separate corporation to engage in that activity or risk losing its nonprofit, or tax exempt, status................

The second line has me wondering :
>> For example, if a nonprofit corporation engages in profit-making activities unrelated to its recognized nonprofit purpose, it must set up a separate corporation to engage in that activity or risk losing its nonprofit, or tax exempt, status................<<

Will this make it harder to invest the 100 Mil. than I thought ? Or will they just set up more Corp's ?

There have been a few fairly official sounding posts on the 501c conversation here. Unless the person posting is a CPA, or has an MBA, it would be great if you could back up your posts with cut and paste's off of official links, so we know the information is correct. As I've started doing.

It's been fun, but I got to go to work and make some profit now. WHOOPS, sorry, net earnings. lol

Later



Mike ( madness & ) Mayhem

[Dwight Southerland]

Well, Mike, all your comments are taken to heart, but the range of the functions of 501c organizations is so broad that to make some kind of argument that we deserve or should get some compensation based on the practices of some and the opinions of others is a very, very thin stretch. No one would consider arguing that the individual members of the Democratic Party should receive a portion of the donations given and campaign funds raised (even though they HEAP the product on all of us whether we want it or not), yet poloitical parties are 501c chartered. No one would go to the Red Cross and expect a portion of donations based on the fact that you are a member and donate blood. If you still think you "deserve" a cut, take it to the ACLU, they are another 501c. I'm quite sure they don't want to give you any of the revenue they have accumulated from the mass quantity of tax-payer funded court cases they have screwed the American public with.

[Poverty Bay]

Mike:

Further to the observation that "if a nonprofit corporation engages in profit-making activities unrelated to its recognized nonprofit purpose, it must set up a separate corporation to engage in that activity or risk losing its nonprofit, or tax exempt status", one has to wonder if this wasn't a factor in NHRA's decision to deal off NHRA Pro. The objectives of the non-profit NHRA corporation, as have been stated before, focus on safety, education, etc.. However, in recent years, their activities and revenues have primarily been focused upon what could be characterized as the entertainment business of pro racing. It must have been increasingly difficult for NHRA to claim that their big-league entertainment operation somehow met its non-profit objectives. Hence, it needed to either deal the pro racing operation off to others or create its own for-profit corporation to keep it separate from the grass-roots operation from whence it came. That they chose the former course of action is perhaps just another sign that NHRA really does intend to return to its roots. Let's hope so.

[Mike Mayhew]

Checked one more time before I walked out the door.

GOOD Point Poverty !
Perhaps the Powerade side was indeed getting hard to explain.


Mike ( madness & ) Mayhem

[Mike Mayhew]

Dwight, I'm sorry I don't have time to cut and paste off of the Offilcial IRS website what I'm about to say, but I will later if you'd like.
But threre are several different types of 501c's. 501's for political parties have many different rules and codes than the 501 we're talking about.

But once again, my original thought about this is being twisted.
I will say again......I AM NOT ASKING FOR ANY OF THE 100 MILION DOLLARS !!!!!!!!

I am pointing out that it was RACERS that built the NHRA in to what it is today. Racers before me, but I've spent a ton since I've been racing.

The undisputable fact at the present time is :
There will be 4-10 million dollars off of interest and investement EXTRA revenue coming in from now to infinity. ( unles they are REALLY bad investers )

The racers deserve as I mentioned............a better racing environment, if economically feasable to do so.
From all the e-mails I'm gettin, no one can figure out why ANY racer would be against this. I can't figure it out either.

Ok I AM going to work now.

Mike ( madness & ) Mayhem

[LNorton]

I AM NOT ASKING FOR ANY OF THE 100 MILION DOLLARS !!!!!!!!

Right....

I wasnt using a play on words, but you have to get that word PROFIT out of your head. When NHRA has Net Earnings, those can be invested to create a larger fund for the organization, but cannot be pocketed by a single individual.


Lee Norton
I/PS '02 Firebird 231 V6

[Dwight Southerland]

I am pointing out that it was RACERS that built the NHRA in to what it is today. Racers before me, but I've spent a ton since I've been racing.

That's still a stretch. I suppose, then, it was racers that built the AHRA, the UDRA and many other now-defunct racing organizaition into what they are today. Maybe then the racers whould have to pay for those failures???

I started street racing in 1966 and then participated in NHRA drag racing starting in 1967. I was always glad NHRA was there. NHRA made drag racing honorable. Racers have worked a lot to tear down the honor NHRA has attempted to establish through cheating, belly-aching, whining, and attacking NHRA management for every mis-step they have made. There have been movements to subdivert the NHRA for as long as I can remember. No, I don't think "we" deserve the credit. There have been, and are, individuals who have contributed to the advancement of NHRA drag racing. We could all name some. I suppose the question to each one of us is, are we one of them?? Paying your entry fees and membership fees don't necessarily put you in that category. My 40 years experience being involved in this sport would not be the rich memories I have without the opportunities NHRA has afforded.

[Adger Smith]

Dwight,
"Bravo" Well said. It is interesting how quite a few of us have similar NHRA roots, history & cherished memories.

Adger Smith

[Ed Fernandez]

I wonder if the new owners are going to make improvements to the track they have purchsed?
Just wondering since I probably wont travel to any of them.

Ed F.
15 T/SA
Powered by
Social Security