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

Pocketbase lost its funding from FLOSS fund

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 109 posts

Re: Pocketbase lost its funding from FLOSS fund

#41

Post by mbreese »

8cvor6j844qw_d6 wrote: post #38
fossmaintainer wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's the actual e-mail the fund sent: Hey ******, I hope you're doing well. I apologise for the long delay on this disbursal from our end, and for not reaching out to you sooner. I am writing to you with an update on GitHub Sponsors, your preferred mode of payment. Unfortunately, we're currently unable to process payments through GitHub Sponsors, Liberapay, OpenCollective, or similar platforms due to regulatory con…

Looking at the required paperwork, I agree with Pocketbase to refuse funding.

If you were already setup as a non-profit entity with 501c3 US taxes (or similar in other locales), this would be straightforward. Or, even if you were a for-profit company taking part with an LLC or other corporate structure. In those cases, you probably already have an accountant or tax advisor to help handle this stuff. For smaller individual level contributors, I can see how the extra paperwork and overhead could create enough of a hassle to make it not worthwhile. Which is sad.

It looks like the author here is from Bulgaria, so who knows what other hassles they would have on their side.

Re: Pocketbase lost its funding from FLOSS fund

#42

Post by [deleted] »

sreekanth850 wrote: post #20
embedding-shape wrote: post #8

Back in 2024, FLOSS/fund was described like this on HN: > To apply, the project must place a funding.json in their public code repository or at a well-known uri location on their domain [...] That's already 10x more simpler than the 20 page document some of these other orgs have you fill. - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41857032 But the author of the issue for Pocketbase writes: > due to some unforeseen regula…

India have a strict process for sending and receiving money from outside as investment. Its mainly to avoid black money i guess.

[deleted]

Re: Pocketbase lost its funding from FLOSS fund

#43

Post by fdefitte »

DiabloD3 wrote: post #13
murillians wrote: post #3

I think this submission should be re-titled. From the post, it seems that the author voluntarily declined funding from FLOSS/Fund because they "don't trust them, nor the India government, with processing and storing personal sensitive data"

I think it shouldn't. The funding source was dropped by Github, and the terms Pocketbase accepted for funding include being paid through Github by FLOSS Fund. FLOSS Fund refused to follow the regulatory requirements to continue funding projects through Github, and Github dropped them as a funding source. What the Pocketbase maintainer decided was to drop FLOSS Fund after they tried to renegotiate the contract in dang…

[dead]

Re: Pocketbase lost its funding from FLOSS fund

#44

Post by choilive »

8cvor6j844qw_d6 wrote: post #38
fossmaintainer wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's the actual e-mail the fund sent: Hey ******, I hope you're doing well. I apologise for the long delay on this disbursal from our end, and for not reaching out to you sooner. I am writing to you with an update on GitHub Sponsors, your preferred mode of payment. Unfortunately, we're currently unable to process payments through GitHub Sponsors, Liberapay, OpenCollective, or similar platforms due to regulatory con…

Looking at the required paperwork, I agree with Pocketbase to refuse funding.

Why? I don't see it as particularly onerous. They are simply complying with their country's KYC requirements. I've gone through worse to accept payments from US citizens with a US corporation. KYC/AML is annoying but its pretty unavoidable unless you want to do crypto.

Re: Pocketbase lost its funding from FLOSS fund

#45

Post by swiftcoder »

iririririr wrote: post #39
fossmaintainer wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's the actual e-mail the fund sent: Hey ******, I hope you're doing well. I apologise for the long delay on this disbursal from our end, and for not reaching out to you sooner. I am writing to you with an update on GitHub Sponsors, your preferred mode of payment. Unfortunately, we're currently unable to process payments through GitHub Sponsors, Liberapay, OpenCollective, or similar platforms due to regulatory con…

invoice for fund disbursement? are they trying to donate as expenses?

Most US companies take a tax deduction for charitable donations, I don't see why that wouldn't be the same for an Indian firm.

Re: Pocketbase lost its funding from FLOSS fund

#46

Post by sentientslug »

a456463 wrote: post #21
sreekanth850 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

India have a strict process for sending and receiving money from outside as investment. Its mainly to avoid black money i guess.

[flagged]

I don’t think it’s fair to conflate the people of India with their government

Re: Pocketbase lost its funding from FLOSS fund

#47

Post by yieldcrv »

USDC has been an option for nearly 10 years

You can circumvent international wire transfers for cheaper and faster

The same banks give less scrutiny to domestic transfers so just convert your international wires into domestic ones - from the domestic exchange to your domestic bank account

We’ve done that specifically with our Indian vendors and vice versa for 10 years

there are options that are stable and regulated, so there is absolutely no reason to appeal to the authority of an antiquated and onerous regulation

Re: Pocketbase lost its funding from FLOSS fund

#48

Post by ExpertAdvisor01 »

These are very reasonable requirements .

These are just the requirements to claim treaty benefits . A little bit of research wouldn't hurt.

You have to fill out the Form-10f to claim treaty benefits for the reduction of withholding tax on services and royalties .

These are the requirements:

Tax Residency Certificate (TRC) (= extract from cantonal commercial register) • Non-Permanent Establishment Declaration (No PE Declaration) • Form 10F: If you are registered accordingly, Form 10F can be submitted online.

Source: https://www.s-ge.com/en/article/export-knowhow/2023-e-india-...

This is very unprofessional in my opinion how pocket base handled that issue as this is a perfectly reasonable request .

It's a similar to the W8-BEN non us resident aliens have to file .

Re: Pocketbase lost its funding from FLOSS fund

#49

Post by ExpertAdvisor01 »

fossmaintainer wrote: post #31
murillians wrote: post #3

I think this submission should be re-titled. From the post, it seems that the author voluntarily declined funding from FLOSS/Fund because they "don't trust them, nor the India government, with processing and storing personal sensitive data"

Here's the actual e-mail the fund sent: Hey ******, I hope you're doing well. I apologise for the long delay on this disbursal from our end, and for not reaching out to you sooner. I am writing to you with an update on GitHub Sponsors, your preferred mode of payment. Unfortunately, we're currently unable to process payments through GitHub Sponsors, Liberapay, OpenCollective, or similar platforms due to regulatory con…

These are perfectly normal requests .

These are needed to reduce withholding taxes and claim treaty benefits .

Re: Pocketbase lost its funding from FLOSS fund

#50

Post by ExpertAdvisor01 »

swiftcoder wrote: post #45
iririririr wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

invoice for fund disbursement? are they trying to donate as expenses?

Most US companies take a tax deduction for charitable donations, I don't see why that wouldn't be the same for an Indian firm.

No it's just that the Indian company is required to withhold taxes . But they want to use the double taxation treaty to claim benefits to reduce it
Post reply on HN