[WikiEN-l] Jimmy Wales in the news

[Thatcher131 Wikipedia]

>
> In a message dated 3/6/2008 9:50:04 A.M. Pacific Standard Time,
>
solebaciato at googlemail.com writes:
<solebaciato at googlemail.com>


Frankly,  "the evidence" holds no water, by implication it is slanderous, in

real  fact it amounts to nothing. Jimbo - filed an expense, it was rejected,

he  paid - where is the story? It happens to executives every day of the
 week

everywhere, nothing criminal,nothing  remarkable.>>


----------

Not to take a position one way or the other, but the allegation is that
Jimbo spent large sums on travel, then was so delayed in presenting the
receipts that he had to cancel a later trip in order to find his receipts
and give them to the auditors because it was delaying the audit.  Jimbo
eventually *repaid* $7000 of denied expenses.

That is a significantly different sequence of events than paying for a trip
out of ones own pocket and later being denied reimbursement for some
expenses.  One of the implications is that Jimbo would not have repaid the
Foundation for the unallowed expenses if the auditors had not insisted on
proper documentation.  Another problem is that by recording the repayment as
a donation rather than a reimbursement, Jimbo may have been able to take an
improper tax deduction for those expenses.  (That is, if my church writes me
a $1000 check to go to a faith building seminar and I only spend $800, I
don't get to count the $200 repayment as a separate donation.)

I do believe the Foundation's current assertions that they have improved
financial reporting procedures, and there is no reason to hang Jimbo or the
Foundation out to dry over what are essentially teething pains.  (I do think
Jimbo should think about amending his tax return, though.)

Thatcher