Real world explanation please

[brett8883]

Then you are not a CBO. I had JUST posted about this.

We actually do meet the requirements to be described under IRS Code (c)(3) Exemption Requirements Section 501(c)(3) Organizations | Internal Revenue Service

Note that the FAA Authorization Act of 2018 does not require that we be officially recognized with “tax exempt status” only that we would be “described [as a charity or non-profit] under IRS 501(c)(3).

We are also “exempt from tax” under 501(a) as we do not accept donations and do not have expenses.

For your sake I will add to the bylaws that no person or entity can claim tax deductible expenses for the benefit of FlyersUnlimited.

 

[tcope]

We actually do meet the requirements to be described under IRS Code (c)(3) Exemption Requirements Section 501(c)(3) Organizations | Internal Revenue Service

Note that the FAA Authorization Act of 2018 does not require that we be officially recognized with “tax exempt status” only that we would be “described [as a charity or non-profit] under IRS 501(c)(3).

Yes it does. Anyone can _claim_ that they don't owe taxes... but they are required to file and prove it. Same way with tax exceptions. You are not officially recognized by the IRS as being tax exempt until you file the application and it is approved by the IRS (it is the reason the application exists). You say this is not required by the FAA. This is incorrect. The FAA requires that the CBO have a tax exempt status from the IRS:

‘‘(1) is described in section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986; ‘‘(2) is exempt from tax under section 501(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986; ​

"IS" exempt. Someone is not except until they are actual except as granted by the IRS. As I mention, you can argue that you don't owe taxes... and you may be right. But you are also required to file in order to prove this. Same way with tax exemption.

The minimum fee for this application is $275.00

What you claim is that someone only needs to _claim_ that they are tax exempt in order to be considered tax exempt. It does not work this way. Again, it is why an application for this status exists. If you only need to claim you met the criteria, no one would need the application or to pay the fees to get this status.

One final note... if I was not clear, I don't agree with the inclusion of following a CBO's guidelines. Never have. IMHO, initially it was in the regs so that CBO's could make aviation rules over their members. Now it appears that the committee that made the new guidelines were just pandering to the AMA.

 

[kensteele]

i think the point is and it's sad...is that in a free america, we still don't believe in real freedom and somehow if all kinds of rules and forms and fees and reports and permits and paperwork are not approved or filed or authorized, then NO. why can't a group of americans get together and form a club and become a bona fide organization? sure it was tongue-in-cheek but why the pushback/resentment/hate/such blockage?

"let me see your papers!"

 

[tcope]

why can't a group of americans get together and form a club and become a bona fide organization? sure it was tongue-in-cheek but why the pushback/resentment/hate/such blockage?

I think everyone would agree that there needs to be some regulation, especially when you have aircraft (some manned) sharing the same airspace. As I mentioned above, I've never agreed with the CBO requirement as it seems completely pointless. Shouldn't the FAA regs protect these interests? Why should the FAA need to have CBO regulations in order to keep people safe? That makes no sense to me.

If anyone wants to tell me of any thoughts as to why we need to include CBO regs in order to keep airspace safe and not just FAA regs, let me know.

I'd love to hear the FAAs (official) response to the question if their own regs address the issue and why their regs fall short so we need CBO's regs as well.

 

[BigAl07]

We're getting quite a bit off topic. Let's get it back on track here.

 

[BigAl07]

I think everyone would agree that there needs to be some regulation, especially when you have aircraft (some manned) sharing the same airspace. As I mentioned above, I've never agreed with the CBO requirement as it seems completely pointless. Shouldn't the FAA regs protect these interests? Why should the FAA need to have CBO regulations in order to keep people safe? That makes no sense to me.

If anyone wants to tell me of any thoughts as to why we need to include CBO regs in order to keep airspace safe and not just FAA regs, let me know.

I'd love to hear the FAAs (official) response to the question if their own regs address the issue and why their regs fall short so we need CBO's regs as well.

I agree completely. I think that it's the way of the "Easy Button". Instead of having "Flying Club" regs and then have non-flying club regs they just wanted to allow for "either/or". It creates too much grey area IMHO.

 

[tcope]

We're getting quite a bit off topic. Let's get it back on track here.

Not sure how any of this is not on topic.

 

[Madmax229]

Gee, this claim seems oddly familiar.

Your CBO is on file as being tax exempt? Please post this proof.

There is always one in the crowd!