On 1/2/06, Anthony DiPierro wikilegal@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