garfield Posted September 13, 2014 Share Posted September 13, 2014 Careful, Gar. It sounds like, given the level of mentality which we are apparently dealing with here, your words might be taken as a veiled death threat. Oh, jeesh. OK, although an apt description I'll take your advice. (Maybe you should edit yours, too, please). Oh, and by "Loon" I mean as in a bird that uses its long neck to stand above others loudly squawking in order to draw attention or threaten rivals. Like this: Not like this: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GUARDLING Posted September 13, 2014 Share Posted September 13, 2014 (edited) Oh, jeesh. OK, although an apt description I'll take your advice. (Maybe you should edit yours, too, please). Oh, and by "Loon" I mean as in a bird that uses its long neck to stand above others loudly squawking in order to draw attention or threaten rivals. Like this: Not like this: unfortunately your second choice does describe some pretty accurately. This persons questions to dan have nothing to do with wanting to know anything. It's just to start trouble, and these types call themselves Drum Corps purists or saviors of some kind. I'm very sure they were hot messes when they marched also. Edited September 13, 2014 by GUARDLING Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IllianaLancerContra Posted September 13, 2014 Share Posted September 13, 2014 Oh, jeesh. OK, although an apt description I'll take your advice. (Maybe you should edit yours, too, please). Oh, and by "Loon" I mean as in a bird that uses its long neck to stand above others loudly squawking in order to draw attention or threaten rivals. Like this: Not like this: I like loons. In years past I have sat on the porch of a cabin in Mn while eating waffles (I like waffles) and watching the loons diving with their young. Maybe a corps could turn this thread into a show - call it 'Loonie Tunz' and feature sampled loon calls at the appropriate moments. ps - in before the close 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garfield Posted September 13, 2014 Share Posted September 13, 2014 Well I found this document and it's well worth the read. http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/tax-exempt_nonprofits_must_meet_inspection_and_disclosure_requirements.pdf Quite honestly anytime (IF) the IRS gets involved I would be concerned. Whether you want to poo poo and dismiss this post I dare say IF the IRS gets involved you won't be dismissing them. You can rant and rave all you want and at the end of the day it will probably be some guy in an office somewhere that has NO IDEA what DCI is but see's a multi-million dollar 501c3. Let THAT digest for a second about the real world. I just hope that there is no there-there but sometimes, when the IRS gets involved, there doesn't need to be AND THAT is what concerns me. Yawn. I suspect you read the code you referenced? It deals with access to the entity's filings. DCI states in their filing that they will make available the 990s to the directors via .pdf and the fact that we're seeing them on Guidestar is proof that they are made public. There's no there, there. Further it talks about "quid-pro-quo" and the true value of donations made to the org. I can speak from personal experience that DCI complies from this notification. Interestingly, the IRS would be more interested in my personal donation deductions that whether DCI fulfilled the required statement of value. After all, I'm the donor making the contribution and taking the tax deduction. Again, the code reference you provided is not related to Mr. Blair, even if its reading does make most people quake a bit. Surely, nobody wants to run afoul of the IRS authorities, but there's no reason to suggest that the random "satire" posted by a single person with a long history of apparent vendetta and vocal personal opposition is sufficient to raise the even mild curiosity by the IRS. Here are the facts of the 990s, despite Mr. Blair's contentions: - DCI spends along the lines of 85% of its revenue on its program mission. - The only unrelated business taxable income that DCI produces is the DCI Magazine ("Unrelated"? Umm). - The DCI executives are not paid unreasonably high salaries (even as many suggest they are unreasonably LOW). - The organization is advised and moderated by a board made up of the activity's participant corps who vote, agree, and command their executive to fulfill its wishes. - The contractors and advisors that DCI uses are experienced insiders of the activity. While the efficacy of using any particular provider might be discussion-worthy inside DCI, it is not the case from the public documents that the costs incurred in the hiring them represent an undue favoritism or attempt to enrich individuals at the expense of the organization. - DCI files a 990 schedule-O in which they state: "Every officer, director, and all employees are required to fill out an annual conflict of interest questionnaire that is monitored and revierwed (sic) by the audit committee." Even a cursory view of the 990s by a curious IRS examiner will (IMO) verify that there is no "there" there. Nothing to see here. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peel Paint Posted September 13, 2014 Share Posted September 13, 2014 Well I found this document and it's well worth the read. http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/tax-exempt_nonprofits_must_meet_inspection_and_disclosure_requirements.pdf Quite honestly anytime (IF) the IRS gets involved I would be concerned. Whether you want to poo poo and dismiss this post I dare say IF the IRS gets involved you won't be dismissing them. You can rant and rave all you want and at the end of the day it will probably be some guy in an office somewhere that has NO IDEA what DCI is but see's a multi-million dollar 501c3. Let THAT digest for a second about the real world. I just hope that there is no there-there but sometimes, when the IRS gets involved, there doesn't need to be AND THAT is what concerns me. While I never want to say never-never-never is there any reason to be concerned about an IRS investigation, because anytime a government bureaucracy is involved there is always some degree of randomness that can make events take unexpected turns, I really think your worries about this are overblown. First of all the IRS has only limited resources available for investigating 501©3s or anything else these days. They pick their fights where they think a. there really is a possible fire beneath the smoke and b. they're going to get some revenue out of it. Neither of these things are true in this case. IRS people really are pretty smart about reading the situation, and they're likely to read and immediately file Mr. Blair's handwritten complaint in the Wingnut Aluminum Hat file. In the very unlikely event they do inquire about it to DCI, Mr. Acheson will have no problem dispensing with Blair's charges in a one-page letter. Truly... it's extremely unlikely any serious investigation of DCI will come of this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdaddy Posted September 13, 2014 Share Posted September 13, 2014 Could this be 'She who must not be named' working in-cog-neeto? I definitely got a Catherine vibe from that facebook post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mello Dude Posted September 13, 2014 Share Posted September 13, 2014 Yawn. I suspect you read the code you referenced? It deals with access to the entity's filings. DCI states in their filing that they will make available the 990s to the directors via .pdf and the fact that we're seeing them on Guidestar is proof that they are made public. There's no there, there. Further it talks about "quid-pro-quo" and the true value of donations made to the org. I can speak from personal experience that DCI complies from this notification. Interestingly, the IRS would be more interested in my personal donation deductions that whether DCI fulfilled the required statement of value. After all, I'm the donor making the contribution and taking the tax deduction. Again, the code reference you provided is not related to Mr. Blair, even if its reading does make most people quake a bit. Surely, nobody wants to run afoul of the IRS authorities, but there's no reason to suggest that the random "satire" posted by a single person with a long history of apparent vendetta and vocal personal opposition is sufficient to raise the even mild curiosity by the IRS. Here are the facts of the 990s, despite Mr. Blair's contentions: - DCI spends along the lines of 85% of its revenue on its program mission. - The only unrelated business taxable income that DCI produces is the DCI Magazine ("Unrelated"? Umm). - The DCI executives are not paid unreasonably high salaries (even as many suggest they are unreasonably LOW). - The organization is advised and moderated by a board made up of the activity's participant corps who vote, agree, and command their executive to fulfill its wishes. - The contractors and advisors that DCI uses are experienced insiders of the activity. While the efficacy of using any particular provider might be discussion-worthy inside DCI, it is not the case from the public documents that the costs incurred in the hiring them represent an undue favoritism or attempt to enrich individuals at the expense of the organization. - DCI files a 990 schedule-O in which they state: "Every officer, director, and all employees are required to fill out an annual conflict of interest questionnaire that is monitored and revierwed (sic) by the audit committee." Even a cursory view of the 990s by a curious IRS examiner will (IMO) verify that there is no "there" there. Nothing to see here. Bigger wider yawn. Having actually dealt with the IRS I sincerely hope you are right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
84BDsop Posted September 13, 2014 Share Posted September 13, 2014 I definitely got a Catherine vibe from that facebook post. No....John Blair is a former DCI judge (always fun to listen to his tapes) and is male....definitely NOT CB (who often seems not even a human being, much less a female) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IllianaLancerContra Posted September 13, 2014 Share Posted September 13, 2014 I definitely got a Catherine vibe from that facebook post. Quick call the exterminator!!! You mentioned the name!!! This thread needs to be fumigated!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
corpsband Posted September 13, 2014 Share Posted September 13, 2014 Quick call the exterminator!!! You mentioned the name!!! This thread needs to be fumigated!!!! Agree -- close this thread before the solar flare destroys the DCP servers! Mentioning SHMNBN is very bad juju ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.