In short, because that's what UK charity best practice, outlined in the SORP, says we have to do when preparing accounts. Every charity in the UK does this because our regulator believes it's the most transparent way of doing things.
Basically, if people go as trustees, it's a governance cost. Otherwise, it's a charitable cost, because we're spreading knowledge - albeit knowledge of best practice, rather than knowledge of Wikipedia. This knowledge is imparted to other chapters, which in turn use that knowledge to become more effective at fulfilling our global mission. On 2 Jun 2014 21:13, "Michael Peel" email@mikepeel.net wrote:
On 2 Jun 2014, at 13:27, Jon Davies jon.davies@wikimedia.org.uk wrote:
So for trustee expenses: not all of the board went as trustees, as two
(at
least) were invited as speakers - reporting that as a trustee cost
wouldn't
be accurate. As to staff – I attended as the Chief Executive, but the
other
two staff were also invited speakers. One of the staff had some costs
paid
by the Foundation.
I'm not sure I understand the logic here. Would the trustees/staff have been invited as speakers if they weren't trustees/staff? If not, then why make the distinction here?
Thanks, Mike _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe