Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: 9YearLurker

My preference is for the law to deny “non profit” status to any outfit that charges fees for what it does. That will leave “non profit” as anything that is ONLY supported by donations or dues of its members (like any membership outfit).

That would remove the fiction that the outrageously expensive Ivy League colleges are “non profit”. They’d be taxed just as the honestly titled “for profit” schools are. It would also remove hospitals that are not charity hospitals (like St Judes) from the “non-profit” list. It would remove the arts venues that charge the handsome ticket prices they do to see their performances. Why should they be treated any differenly than a “paid” concert by a contemporary artist at Madison Square Garden.

I say - you charge fees for services, you’re not “non profit”.


18 posted on 06/13/2018 8:51:14 AM PDT by Wuli
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]


To: Wuli
My preference is for the law to deny “non profit” status to any outfit that charges fees for what it does. That will leave “non profit” as anything that is ONLY supported by donations or dues of its members (like any membership outfit).

That's actually a great idea. My preference would be to remove non-profits (if FedGov wasn't taxing people, you wouldn't need that status), but changing the definition to yours is a great step for now!
23 posted on 06/13/2018 11:11:28 AM PDT by Svartalfiar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson