[sac-board] Re: SAC Constitution and Proposed Amendment 2.0
- From: "Peter" <pargenz@xxxxxxx>
- To: <sac-board@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2005 07:58:00 -0700
With regards to liability, the general membership isn't really at risk - just
the officers.
Incorporation shields the officers from personal liability by creating a legal
entity.
Actually, incorporating in Arizona is a lot less expensive than that. It will
cost you $10 to
reserve the corporate name for 120 days. The fees are $60 (only $40 for a
non-profit). It will cost
$10 annually to file the required annual report with the ACC. No, it isn't very
hard at all - it is
more just assembling existing/known data into the application. The result is a
non-tax-exempt
non-profit corporation. A non-profit corporation is still required to file an
income tax return with
the IRS annually.
Another possibility is concurrently filing for a 501(c)(3) exemption of the IRC
(done through the
IRS). This will cost around $500 and is a little more involved than
incorporation (it is the federal
government, after all). The result is a tax-exempt non-profit corporation. This
situation would be
very advantageous for a club like SAC.
Peter
-----Original Message-----
From: sac-board-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:sac-board-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Stars
Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2005 7:25 AM
To: sac-board@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [sac-board] Re: SAC Constitution and Proposed Amendment 2.0
The only true way to truly protect the board members and general members would
be to incorporate the
club as a non-profit origination. The cost of doing this should be around
$500.00 The paperwork is
not that hard. I did all the paperwork myself to incorporate my business. I
don't think that a
non-profit corporation is much different. SAC already has an established name,
so getting a
registered name for the club should cost only about $15.00 if I remember
correctly. I did mine
through the Department of State of Arizona. Once you have a registered name,
you file the
corporation paperwork, cost around $120.00, wait for a reply, then publish the
corporation paperwork
in one of the news-papers and send the certification of publication to the
state. Since I already
had my trade name registered, it took less than 90 days to do. If everything is
done correctly, you
will receive your notification from the corporation commission that you are now
incorporated. You
have to file a corporation report each year, stating any change in officers or
status of the
corporation. It will be paperwork, but again it is not all that complex. The
state's corporation
has all the forms that are needed on there web site with instructions. This
only has to be done
once. This is one of the easiest states to incorporate in.
This would mean no wavers to have to attend with, and the board and members
would be protected. Yes
the club could still be sued, but only for it's assets.
If what you are trying to accomplish is to protect the club, there is no better
way that I am aware
of.
Tom Hilton
- Follow-Ups:
- [sac-board] Re: SAC Constitution and Proposed Amendment 2.0
- From: Thad Robosson
- [sac-board] Re: SAC Constitution and Proposed Amendment 2.0
- From: Stars
- [sac-board] Re: SAC Constitution and Proposed Amendment 2.0
- From: Stars
- [sac-board] Re: SAC Constitution and Proposed Amendment 2.0
- From: Jeff Hopkins
- References:
Other related posts:
- » [sac-board] SAC Constitution and Proposed Amendment 2.0
- » [sac-board] Re: SAC Constitution and Proposed Amendment 2.0
- » [sac-board] Re: SAC Constitution and Proposed Amendment 2.0
- » [sac-board] Re: SAC Constitution and Proposed Amendment 2.0
- » [sac-board] Re: SAC Constitution and Proposed Amendment 2.0
- » [sac-board] Re: SAC Constitution and Proposed Amendment 2.0
- » [sac-board] Re: SAC Constitution and Proposed Amendment 2.0
- » [sac-board] Re: SAC Constitution and Proposed Amendment 2.0
- » [sac-board] Re: SAC Constitution and Proposed Amendment 2.0
- » [sac-board] Re: SAC Constitution and Proposed Amendment 2.0
- » [sac-board] Re: SAC Constitution and Proposed Amendment 2.0
- » [sac-board] Re: SAC Constitution and Proposed Amendment 2.0
- » [sac-board] Re: SAC Constitution and Proposed Amendment 2.0
- » [sac-board] Re: SAC Constitution and Proposed Amendment 2.0
- » [sac-board] Re: SAC Constitution and Proposed Amendment 2.0
- » [sac-board] Re: SAC Constitution and Proposed Amendment 2.0
- » [sac-board] Re: SAC Constitution and Proposed Amendment 2.0
- » [sac-board] Re: SAC Constitution and Proposed Amendment 2.0
- » [sac-board] Re: SAC Constitution and Proposed Amendment 2.0
- » [sac-board] Re: SAC Constitution and Proposed Amendment 2.0
- » [sac-board] Re: SAC Constitution and Proposed Amendment 2.0
- » [sac-board] Re: SAC Constitution and Proposed Amendment 2.0
- » [sac-board] Re: SAC Constitution and Proposed Amendment 2.0
- » [sac-board] Re: SAC Constitution and Proposed Amendment 2.0
- » [sac-board] Re: SAC Constitution and Proposed Amendment 2.0
- » [sac-board] Re: SAC Constitution and Proposed Amendment 2.0
- » [sac-board] Re: SAC Constitution and Proposed Amendment 2.0
- » [sac-board] Re: SAC Constitution and Proposed Amendment 2.0
- » [sac-board] Re: SAC Constitution and Proposed Amendment 2.0
- » [sac-board] Re: SAC Constitution and Proposed Amendment 2.0
- » [sac-board] Re: SAC Constitution and Proposed Amendment 2.0
- » [sac-board] Re: SAC Constitution and Proposed Amendment 2.0
- » [sac-board] Re: SAC Constitution and Proposed Amendment 2.0
- » [sac-board] Re: SAC Constitution and Proposed Amendment 2.0
- » [sac-board] Re: SAC Constitution and Proposed Amendment 2.0
- » [sac-board] Re: SAC Constitution and Proposed Amendment 2.0
- » [sac-board] Re: SAC Constitution and Proposed Amendment 2.0
- » [sac-board] Re: SAC Constitution and Proposed Amendment 2.0
- » [sac-board] Re: SAC Constitution and Proposed Amendment 2.0
- » [sac-board] Re: SAC Constitution and Proposed Amendment 2.0
- » [sac-board] Re: SAC Constitution and Proposed Amendment 2.0
- » [sac-board] Re: SAC Constitution and Proposed Amendment 2.0
- [sac-board] Re: SAC Constitution and Proposed Amendment 2.0
- From: Thad Robosson
- [sac-board] Re: SAC Constitution and Proposed Amendment 2.0
- From: Stars
- [sac-board] Re: SAC Constitution and Proposed Amendment 2.0
- From: Stars
- [sac-board] Re: SAC Constitution and Proposed Amendment 2.0
- From: Jeff Hopkins