On 1/2/06, Anthony DiPierro <wikilegal(a)inbox.org> wrote:
"I can't imagine Mediawiki would even
consider something which would
endanger its not-for-profit status so I doubt this is a problem." The
thing is, I doubt very many people are aware of all the intricacies of
US non-profit tax laws. Most people don't know what UBTI even is.
Why would WMF worry about not being not-for-profit if it were getting
all its money from ads? Is there some other benefit apart from being
tax-exempt? If the net financial gain would still be an increase in
income, the paying tax seems irrelevant.
Or have I missed something crucial? (Note that I am British and take
pride in knowing very little of the intricacies of US law.)
--
Sam