Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Krita Foundation in Trouble

krita.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 235 posts

Re: Krita Foundation in Trouble

#51

Post by wiz21c »

nekopa wrote: post #9
mrkrabo wrote: post #5

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…

I thought fraud involves intent to deceive. Seems like they made a mistake, and they aren't trying to avoid the bill.

In some case (see "abus de bien sociaux" in belgian law), tt's the other way around : if you make a mistake in your management of taxes, then the state considers that it was with the intention to deceive (because you are meant to 1/ know the law 2/ apply it). It's not the state who needs to prove your intention to deceive, but it's you who has to prove that there were no intention.

Re: Krita Foundation in Trouble

#52

Post by vetinari »

DangerousPie wrote: post #48

> The Foundation was created to be able to have Dmitry work full-time on Krita. Because we sell stuff, the tax inspector has determined that we’re a company, and should have paid VAT in the Netherlands over the work Dmitry has been doing in Russia. Even though there is no VAT in Russia on the kind of work Dmitry is doing. As someone who has dealt with VAT in the EU a bit this sounds really odd to me. Even if the insp…

> Even if the inspector determines that VAT needs to be charged on these services, shouldn't it be Dmitry who is paying them, not the foundation?

From the look of it, Dmitry is outside the EU, making the foundation the importer and thus responsible for the VAT.

Re: Krita Foundation in Trouble

#53

Post by DangerousPie »

KayEss wrote: post #37
boudewijnrempt wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dmitry is a freelancer who lives in Moscow, not an employee. For the kind of work Dmitry does, there is no VAT appliccable in Russia. If the Krita Foundation had been Russian, no VAT would have been applicable. There is no VAT ID on his invoices, but he does send invoices. He also keeps ownership over his work, and the Foundation doesn't tell him what to work on... But since the Krita Foundation is in the Netherlands…

They think you should pay VAT on imported services? That sounds very fishy to me. I've never heard of such a thing (and I have been exporting into the EU for many years).

Really? I always need to charge/pay VAT on services. The only exception is if both are VAT-registered businesses in the EU (but in different member states), in which case you can charge 0% VAT.

Re: Krita Foundation in Trouble

#54

Post by Sujan »

DanBC wrote: post #33
rplnt wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are not supporting the software but bad practices resulting in fines and fees. But there's hoping a lesson was learned. It would be a shame if something like this damaged the product.

You say bad practices, but they got advice from a registered qualified professional in a complex area of tax law.

If this were the case, wouldn't that person be liable then?

Re: Krita Foundation in Trouble

#55

Post by DiThi »

rplnt wrote: post #27
dbrgn wrote: post #11

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.

You are not supporting the software but bad practices resulting in fines and fees. But there's hoping a lesson was learned. It would be a shame if something like this damaged the product.

Still better than supporting a new project from scratch that would take many years to reach the state of Krita. Despite this setback, they still deserve donations IMHO.

Re: Krita Foundation in Trouble

#56

Post by jimktrains2 »

princekolt wrote: post #19
mrkrabo wrote: post #5

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…

What defines a non-profit is that none of the income it generates should go to members, directors, or officers; and not that it can't sell stuff. [0] Most if not all non-profits I know sell stuff to pay the bills. [0]: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/non-profit_organizations

Pedantic, but income can and does go to employees through salary. Profit is not split among share holders and must be reinvested or saved.

Re: Krita Foundation in Trouble

#57

Post by Kiro »

varjag wrote: post #49
KayEss wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They think you should pay VAT on imported services? That sounds very fishy to me. I've never heard of such a thing (and I have been exporting into the EU for many years).

You should, in most places of the world that have VAT. E.g. you pay VAT on inbound courier services like UPS, FedEx, atop of the duty on the goods they carry. (but not on outbound ones).

What do you mean? You pay VAT on imported goods. Not on imported services.

Re: Krita Foundation in Trouble

#58

Post by DangerousPie »

vetinari wrote: post #52
DangerousPie wrote: post #48

> The Foundation was created to be able to have Dmitry work full-time on Krita. Because we sell stuff, the tax inspector has determined that we’re a company, and should have paid VAT in the Netherlands over the work Dmitry has been doing in Russia. Even though there is no VAT in Russia on the kind of work Dmitry is doing. As someone who has dealt with VAT in the EU a bit this sounds really odd to me. Even if the insp…

> Even if the inspector determines that VAT needs to be charged on these services, shouldn't it be Dmitry who is paying them, not the foundation? From the look of it, Dmitry is outside the EU, making the foundation the importer and thus responsible for the VAT.

I never heard of this. Is that actually a rule in the Netherlands? I don't think/hope it is in the UK at least.

Re: Krita Foundation in Trouble

#60

Post by Michielvv »

boudewijnrempt wrote: post #45
KayEss wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They think you should pay VAT on imported services? That sounds very fishy to me. I've never heard of such a thing (and I have been exporting into the EU for many years).

Yes... It's no wonder that my first accountant never realized that this could be possible.

Seems if you click enough, the tax site does mention it in some obscure tool. I always thought it only applied to goods.

For the dutch: https://www.belastingdienst.nl/rekenhulpen/diensten_in_en_ui...

Post reply on HN