31–40 of 42 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
501(c)(8) is a hoot. Check out one of the legal requirements to be covered by it.
the fraternal and guild one, which legal requirement stands out to you?
[p.s. also "guild" is incorrect. There is no mention of "guilds" in the code. There are however, 104 instances of "lodge".]
He sold his Tesla shares shortly after his wife slept with Musk. I’m not making this up: https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-affair-sergey-brin-wi...
I'm really curious if this conversation happened: Musk: "hey Sergei, want in on this Twitter deal, say $2B? Ellison wants all of it, but I can hold $2b for you." Brin (to Musk): "No." Brin (to financial advisor): "Let's game plan out the impact on Tesla stock if Musk buys Twitter..."
I don't understand, I am clearly missing something. >The Tesla shares were sold by Catalyst4 for $366 million over four days starting Dec. 14, 2021, the filings show. So, if Catalyst4 sold the shares in December 2021, it cannot have been created with them. On the other hand if the new organization is being setup now, where was the money stored since then?
I don't understand, I am clearly missing something. >The Tesla shares were sold by Catalyst4 for $366 million over four days starting Dec. 14, 2021, the filings show. So, if Catalyst4 sold the shares in December 2021, it cannot have been created with them. On the other hand if the new organization is being setup now, where was the money stored since then?
I don't understand what is confusing. It was founded with assets (Tesla and Google shares) of which it must sell 5% a year but could sell a lot more.
Maybe Brin (or one of his companies/holding/whatever) sold them and later (when, in these days, 1 and a half year later?) this Catalist4 organization has been founded?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't understand what is confusing. It was founded with assets (Tesla and Google shares) of which it must sell 5% a year but could sell a lot more.
The article says that Catalist4 sold the Tesla stock in December 2021. Maybe Brin (or one of his companies/holding/whatever) sold them and later (when, in these days, 1 and a half year later?) this Catalist4 organization has been founded?
Catalyst4 had tax filings worth quoting in 2021 according to the article.. It's his newest ~nonprofit as far as we know, not a brand new nonprofit.
It looks like it was was founded 10/22/2021 according to a CA DOJ search.
He sold his Tesla shares shortly after his wife slept with Musk. I’m not making this up: https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-affair-sergey-brin-wi...
Last I checked, this story was based entirely on anonymous sources and was actively denied by all parties.
Seems like another WSJ hit piece to discredit Musk for no good reason (other than to appease short sellers)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The article says that Catalist4 sold the Tesla stock in December 2021. Maybe Brin (or one of his companies/holding/whatever) sold them and later (when, in these days, 1 and a half year later?) this Catalist4 organization has been founded?
> Another perk of 501(c)(4)s is secrecy. Catalyst4 had tax filings worth quoting in 2021 according to the article.. It's his newest ~nonprofit as far as we know, not a brand new nonprofit. It looks like it was was founded 10/22/2021 according to a CA DOJ search.
>Google co-founder Sergey Brin is setting up a new half-billion-dollar nonprofit focused on health and climate change, and filings show the majority of funding so far comes from Tesla Inc. shares.
> Catalyst4, the new organization, is a 501(c)(4), which allows Brin ...
but it seems like that should have been more like (in plainer English):
In 2021 Brin created a 501(c)(4) organization, named Catalyst4, to which (somehow) he conferred his Tesla stock that were later sold in December 2021, Bloomberg has learned only now by examining its past filings.
> Sergey Brin’s latest nonprofit, Catalyst4, offers the Google co-founder tax breaks, as well as increased levels of flexibility, secrecy and political influence What an awful, cynical way to describe someone donating billions of dollars into philanthropic causes. Bloomberg can do better.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Last I checked, this story was based entirely on anonymous sources and was actively denied by all parties.
I remember Musk even posting a picture of him and Brin partying after this story came out. Seems like another WSJ hit piece to discredit Musk for no good reason (other than to appease short sellers)
Musk unfortunately takes after his father.