Can anyone explain NHRA?

bill dedman · 04-22-2009, 07:54 AM

Thanks, Bruce. That is precisely the sort of thing I had reference to. I am sure that the majority of tax-exempt organizations are well-meaning, useful companies, that have their tax-exempt status rooted in services that benefit deserving factions of society who might not be self-sustaining for one reason or another, using conventional business practices.

What I was referreing to was the loose, seemingly laissez-faire structure of the rules governing the top-level compensation that would seem to make it possible for anyone to form a "not--for-profit" business and eventually pay themselves a salary that was in no way commensurate with the work they do.

The way Julie described it, there seems to be little in the way of governmental oversight for riding herd on people like Tom ($700,000.00-a-year) Compton and his little buddy, Graham Light, who's been listed as a "part-time" employee" making almost half that.

Those are the kind of situations I had reference to; I should have made that clear. My apologies to anyone who was offended by my comment, but, I stand by what I said; if these bozos can milk that much $$$ out of an organization that basically is just a "Hot Rod Club", with no governmental oversight/regulation or input from the organization's members, then yes, these situations do sound like a "license to steal." At least, to me. Bruce did add some useful information that demonstrated that what I described is not always true, but they must not have gotten around to NHRA, yet...

I just can't think of a nicer way to put it. Looks for all the world to me, like a "license to steal."

Bill

04-22-2009, 07:54 AM	#11
bill dedman VIP Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Conway, AR Posts: 1,739 Likes: 0 Liked 6 Times in 4 Posts	Re: Can anyone explain NHRA? Thanks, Bruce. That is precisely the sort of thing I had reference to. I am sure that the majority of tax-exempt organizations are well-meaning, useful companies, that have their tax-exempt status rooted in services that benefit deserving factions of society who might not be self-sustaining for one reason or another, using conventional business practices. What I was referreing to was the loose, seemingly laissez-faire structure of the rules governing the top-level compensation that would seem to make it possible for anyone to form a "not--for-profit" business and eventually pay themselves a salary that was in no way commensurate with the work they do. The way Julie described it, there seems to be little in the way of governmental oversight for riding herd on people like Tom ($700,000.00-a-year) Compton and his little buddy, Graham Light, who's been listed as a "part-time" employee" making almost half that. Those are the kind of situations I had reference to; I should have made that clear. My apologies to anyone who was offended by my comment, but, I stand by what I said; if these bozos can milk that much $$$ out of an organization that basically is just a "Hot Rod Club", with no governmental oversight/regulation or input from the organization's members, then yes, these situations do sound like a "license to steal." At least, to me. Bruce did add some useful information that demonstrated that what I described is not always true, but they must not have gotten around to NHRA, yet... I just can't think of a nicer way to put it. Looks for all the world to me, like a "license to steal." Bill __________________ Bill Last edited by bill dedman; 04-22-2009 at 06:17 PM.