21–30 of 235 posts
Did the same accountant that advised them in the first place bag the 4k for cleaning up the mess?
That's really sad to hear. With how complex laws are, it's scary that going to a professional may not be sufficient. But when you're totally unfamiliar with what the requirements are what can you do? Do large law/accountancy firms give a guarantee for their advice in the case that it was incorrect?
Say what you will but this is simply fraud. If they were selling stuff, they should've collected and paid the VAT for Dmitry. You are NOT a non-profit if you sell stuff. There is absolutely no complexity about this. Didn't they see anything wrong with selling stuff without collecting the VAT from every transaction? And the best part: they are now separating the sales from the foundation so they can avoid paying taxes…
Depends on the legal system. From what I remember (once worked in a foundation myself) the general approach in EU is that donations are "tax-free" but if you "sell" anything, you should calc profit/loss and pay a corporate tax.
Paying for Dmitry is a statutory expense, so don't understand why that would raise an eyebrow.
What is the relationship between Krita Foundation (Krita) and Dmitry?
Is Dmitry an employee to Krita living in Russia? How can there be any VAT involved?
Is Dmitry a freelancer who sends invoices to Krita? Do those invoices include VAT? If they do, why does Krita need to pay VAT to Dutch authorities? Does he have a VatID on the invoice?
Do they just send money to Dmitry?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Splitting a company in two so you can avoid paying taxes is not an attempt to deceive? Is it horrible when Apple uses Ireland to avoid taxes, but OK if KDE does it?
Well, that's what the tax inspector suggested we do...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I thought fraud involves intent to deceive. Seems like they made a mistake, and they aren't trying to avoid the bill.
Splitting a company in two so you can avoid paying taxes is not an attempt to deceive? Is it horrible when Apple uses Ireland to avoid taxes, but OK if KDE does it?
The one is using the law, the other is misusing loopholes.
That's really sad to hear. With how complex laws are, it's scary that going to a professional may not be sufficient. But when you're totally unfamiliar with what the requirements are what can you do? Do large law/accountancy firms give a guarantee for their advice in the case that it was incorrect?
Even then it's always a grey area where it's advice that may or may not be what you should do and it depends on your decision, blah blah blah.
Just a quick reminder, if everyone here donates just 3-5$, the expenses will be paid in no time :) Krita is a great software, and even though I'm not an artist it's worth supporting.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I thought fraud involves intent to deceive. Seems like they made a mistake, and they aren't trying to avoid the bill.
Splitting a company in two so you can avoid paying taxes is not an attempt to deceive? Is it horrible when Apple uses Ireland to avoid taxes, but OK if KDE does it?
I would like to leanr from the article, but it is low on facts (I may have overlooked them while reading). What is the relationship between Krita Foundation (Krita) and Dmitry? Is Dmitry an employee to Krita living in Russia? How can there be any VAT involved? Is Dmitry a freelancer who sends invoices to Krita? Do those invoices include VAT? If they do, why does Krita need to pay VAT to Dutch authorities? Does he hav…
But since the Krita Foundation is in the Netherlands, the tax authorities feel that the VAT is transfered to the Foundation. Like I said below... If 100% of our income had been from donations, no VAT would have been transfered. If 100% had been from sales, it would have been transfered, and then we would have claimed it back. Since it's a mixed bag, 100% is transfered, and we could only claim 15% or so back.
I still don't understand the logic behind that, though...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Say what you will but this is simply fraud. If they were selling stuff, they should've collected and paid the VAT for Dmitry. You are NOT a non-profit if you sell stuff. There is absolutely no complexity about this. Didn't they see anything wrong with selling stuff without collecting the VAT from every transaction? And the best part: they are now separating the sales from the foundation so they can avoid paying taxes…
Well, actually there is complexity. We did pay the VAT over everything we sold, of course. That was simple. What we didn't do was pay VAT in the Netherlands over the money we sent Dmitry for his work in Russia. If the Foundation had been a company, we would have had to pay that VAT in the Netherlands, but would have claimed it back -- net result, 0. If the foundation had never sold anything, so not been company-like,…