Here are some key elements to include in the written agreement and other important considerations as you move forward.

Term and Termination

Any contract, including one for professional services, should define the term of the agreement.   The term includes an effective date and a termination date.  The duration of a contract can vary, but if you aren’t sure the relationship will be a good fit, consider a shorter initial period of three to six months. A renewal can be quickly negotiated if the partnership is successful. 

Termination provisions allow either party to cancel the contract under specific circumstances.  Typically, professional services contracts allow either party to terminate upon written notice of thirty or sixty days.  It is also common to include a provision for termination “for cause,” in the event one party materially breaches the contract and fails to fix (or cure) the problem within a specified time frame.  

The organization should consider a provision for immediate cancellation in the event its good reputation is threatened.  This protection is important if the influencer’s unforeseen behavior garners bad press and reflects negatively on the charity through its association with the influencer. 

Code of Conduct

Consider including a code of conduct provision requiring the influencer to agree to online conduct that won’t interfere with the charity’s ability to fulfill its charitable endeavors, harm the charity’s fundraising efforts, or jeopardize the charity’s tax-exempt status.  The contract can require that the influencer refrain from featuring explicit music or language in its posts for the charity and prohibit the influencer from promoting other organizations in the same content created pursuant to its agreement with the charity.  

Intellectual Property

The contract should spell out which party owns any intellectual property (“IP”) developed as part of the agreement.  In addition to the usual grant of a limited license to use the organization’s logo and other trademarks, if the organization wants to secure ownership of any IP developed as part of the partnership, the contract should stipulate in clear terms that any IP created under the agreement (e.g., trademarks or copyrights) belongs to the organization.  Content can include photographs, images, videos, as well as other media created within the scope of the work done for the organization.  In some cases, an influencer may want any content that they develop and post on their own social media account to be their owned IP (excluding only the IP elements incorporated in the content that the charity may own). Ultimately, it’s most important to set clear expectations around IP ownership developed within the scope of the partnership to avoid future conflicts due to a lack of a meeting of the minds. 

Compensation

The contract should clearly state the compensation terms, including when payments are due and which expenses (if any) will be reimbursed.  It should make clear what is owed if the contract is terminated early.  If the influencer posts content encouraging people to donate to the organization, this could imply their status as a professional fundraiser, triggering charitable solicitation registration and reporting requirements in several states.  While there are certainly resources available to meet such requirements, the regulatory obligations it places on the influencer may discourage them from doing so, so be sure to have a clear discussion upfront if you are considering paying an influencer in connection with any fundraising efforts. 

Review and Approval of Content

While organizations may want to review and pre-approve any social media posts, many influencers will resist having their content, which are often primarily disseminated from their own social media accounts, managed in this way, particularly if they are doing so on a voluntary and uncompensated basis.  Your organization will need to strike a balance by being clear with its expectations upfront and thoroughly vetting the influencer’s content. One option is to pre-approve the general types of content, and provide accurate, vetted information that the influencer can use, while giving the influencer a choice of the ultimate details to be communicated.   This type of provision may require negotiation to reach mutually agreeable terms.

If a strict pre-approval process is not implemented, one other way to mitigate risk is to require that the influencer take down any posts that don’t meet the approval of the organization or contradict the vetted information provided to the influencer. 

FTC Rules 

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has published regulations on principles of advertising, also called the FTC Guides, which include disclosures influencers must provide to make it clear they have received compensation (in the form of money, products, and so on) for the content they are publishing.  The contract with an influencer should include the requirement to abide by the most recent FTC Guides.  

Representations and Warranties

The contract should include a representation and warranty from the influencer that the content they create will not infringe upon the rights of any third parties, particularly third-party intellectual property rights. This language is essential because it provides grounds for termination for cause as a material breach of the agreement.  

Templates for Efficiency

If the organization is contemplating several contracts, either with the one influencer or many, consider creating a template that can be adapted for different purposes.  For the same influencer, the organization can have an umbrella contract and attach different statements of work, depending on the social media campaign the influencer is working on. 

The rise of social media influencers already plays an important role for charities looking to expand their brands (charities are brands too!) and reach a wider audience to support their cause.  If your organization chooses to work with influencers, formalizing the relationship through a written agreement will help reduce ambiguity, ensure alignment, and minimize risk for your organization.

The post Does Your Nonprofit Want to Hire an Influencer?  What to Keep in Mind. appeared first on Perlman & Perlman.

While there is no actual codified definition, MRIs are generally understood to be risk-adjusted or “prudent” market-rate investments.  It is a financial vehicle made out of the organization’s investment assets (e.g., its endowment) rather than its program assets.  Unlike its counterpart, the Program Related Investment (PRI), which has the primary goal of accomplishing a charitable purpose, an MRI seeks to generate a market rate of return on capital while also furthering a social purpose.  Put another way, PRIs offer solutions where the markets do not have a solution, while MRIs use the power of the market to create impact. 

It’s important for foundations seeking to establish their investment strategy to understand the key legal and structural differences between PRIs and MRIs.  Since the requirements to qualify as a PRI are more stringent than an MRI, a PRI avoids being classified as a jeopardizing investment, and can be counted towards a foundation’s annual distribution requirement.  

An MRI, on the other hand, is a commercial investment that also has a goal to create social impact but is not subject to the stringent standards of the PRI.  Consequently, an MRI does not count towards a foundation’s annual requirement and is not excluded from the rules governing jeopardizing investments.  In addition, in calculating the amount of a foundation’s five percent annual distribution requirement, MRIs are not excluded from the foundation’s assets, as is the case with PRIs. (For an in-depth discussion of PRIs, please read Are You Looking to Make an Impact? Consider a Program Related Investment).  

While the rules governing the MRI are not as rigid as those governing PRIs, there are a few key ones that MRIs must comply with. The “Jeopardizing Investments” rule, found in Section 4944 of the Internal Revenue Code (“Code”), imposes an excise tax on private foundations that invest “any amount in such a manner as to jeopardize the carrying out of its exempt purposes.” A private foundation and its management may be subject to excise taxes for making a jeopardizing or imprudent investment.  Because the Jeopardizing Investments rule applies to MRIs, MRIs must be comprised of prudent investments.

MRIs must also comply with the “Excess Business Holdings Rule.” Section 4943 of the Code states that a foundation, together with its disqualified persons, may own no more than twenty percent of the voting stock of a business enterprise (some exceptions may apply). 

Since MRIs are not treated as a charitable activity but rather as commercial investments, they must meet the prudent investor standards under state and federal law.  The applicable State-enacted version of The Uniform Prudent Management of Institutional Funds Act (UPMIFA) applies a standard for prudent investments whereby “each person responsible for managing and investing an institutional fund shall manage and invest the fund in good faith and with the care an ordinarily prudent person in a like position would exercise under similar circumstances.”  In addition, UPMIFA lists a number of factors that must be considered, if relevant, when making an investment.  Most states have adopted a form of UPMIFA. 

Developing an MRI Strategy

The board of an organization that is considering embarking on an MRI strategy should, as a matter of good governance, consider its rationale. Whether as a stand-alone policy or a policy that is incorporated into the organization’s investment policy, drafting a written MRI Policy should be the board’s first step.  The discipline of drafting an MRI policy will ensure that everyone is in agreement when it comes to incorporating MRIs into the overall investment strategy. 

The substance of the MRI Policy will depend in part on the organizational view of MRIs and their purpose.  Some may view MRIs from a programmatic standpoint, wherein the MRI serves as a tool available to the organization in implementing its philanthropic strategy.   Other organizations may view MRIs from an investment perspective and consider it as an opportunity to make a market rate investment that also happens to foster social impact.    

The following is a list of important questions that should be asked when drafting an MRI Policy. 

• Why Does the Organization Want to Make an MRI? 

It’s helpful for an organization to consider what it believes is the key objective for entering into an MRI strategy.  The organization should consider what it hopes to accomplish by making an MRI.  If the full board is in agreement regarding the rationale or objectives for entering into MRIs, it will help support the development of a uniform set of metrics used by the organization when assessing the success of MRIs in achieving those goals.

• Does the organization have the skills and staffing within the organization to carry out an MRI Strategy?  

In order to implement an MRI, organizations will need to rely on individuals with various expertise including investment, programmatic and legal experience.  Executives and the board should determine whether they can utilize in-house staff or board members, or whether they should consider engaging consultants.

The board should take into consideration if it will require a legal opinion that the potential MRI does not qualify as a jeopardizing investment. The size of the MRI relative to the organization’s investment portfolio may be a factor for consideration when determining whether a legal opinion is warranted.  

• Who will be responsible for oversight?  

Prior to entering into an MRI strategy, the board should consider who will be responsible for oversight of the strategy.  If the organization is considering the MRI as a key tool in accomplishing its philanthropic objectives, it may make sense to have both an advisor with programmatic experience as well as one with investment experience onboard. 

On the other hand, if the foundation views the MRI primarily as a market rate investment that also has social impact, a person or committee with investment experience, guided by a board-approved statement of social impact objectives, may suffice.  The investment committee of the board may be an appropriate oversight body for this responsibility when aligned with the foundation’s MRI objectives.  

• What will the balance be between investment risk and social return?

In advance of embarking on an MRI strategy, the board should determine whether it is willing to take a greater financial risk (while still complying with UPMIFA) to the extent the social returns of the investment have the potential to be great.  It may be that, regardless of the potential for social impact results, the board’s appetite for investment risk will remain the same.   Making a riskier investment may require altering existing investments within the organization’s portfolio in order to comply with UPMIFA’s requirement that each individual investment be reviewed in the context of the entire portfolio, in accordance with prudent investor standards.   

Consider the scenario in which the financial rewards are substantial, but the social impact is not as significant.  The answer to these questions will largely depend on how the Board views mission-related investing and why it has decided to enter this arena.  A board would be well-advised to determine in advance of entering into an MRI how it feels about risk and what the appropriate balance is in guiding its MRI strategy.  

• How will the organization measure the success of a Mission Related Investment? 

In reviewing the performance of an MRI, members of the board and management of the foundation should discuss how they intend to measure success.  The foundation could establish that success is based on the investment generating a minimum level of return, while achieving a loosely defined social impact.  For example, investing in a clothing manufacturer that uses environmentally friendly dyes for its fabrics could result in generous returns to its investors but only modest results in terms of reducing harmful environmental impact.  

With a benchmark focusing significantly on market rate returns, an investment that generates modest financial returns but generates substantial social impact may be considered unsuccessful because the return on investment was too low.  The members of the board should consider how much of a social impact they are looking to make through any MRI.   

In Conclusion

The philanthropic sector has come to understand that aligning investments with mission and values can be financially rewarding.  A greater number of foundations have decided to take a portion of their endowment and invest it in ways that align with their mission. Some have decided to invest their entire investment portfolio or endowment in line with their mission.

I predict that in the next few years we are going to see a dynamic shift in the way funders and their boards view their fiduciary obligations. Foundations contemplating entering into MRIs would be well advised to create a policy that articulates how MRIs can be thoughtfully carried out to achieve the desired investment and social objectives.

The post Mission Related Investments – Advantages, Rules, and Risks appeared first on Perlman & Perlman.

Why do we need bylaws? 

Bylaws are important for many reasons, legal and practical. Each state has specific corporate laws that regulate the actions taken by nonprofit boards. Bylaws distill those laws into a series of clear procedures for the board to follow, providing an operational framework and helping to ensure that the actions taken are legally compliant. 

Who should draft our bylaws?

Ideally, drafting bylaws is a collaborative process between the board and an attorney with nonprofit expertise. Your organization’s governance practices will be dictated by the laws of the state in which your organization is incorporated, as well as federal tax laws applicable to exempt 501(c)(3) organizations. 

Nonprofit corporate laws vary from state to state, some with more specific requirements than others. There are areas of the law that provide the board with significant flexibility in deciding how it chooses to operate, so certain sections of the bylaws can be customized to reflect the board’s preferences on governance procedures. An experienced attorney will know the corporate laws of the state in which your nonprofit is formed and be able to advise your board on its legal requirements, optional provisions, and best practices. 

Copying another nonprofit’s bylaws or downloading a sample from the internet may seem like a good option, but it can be costly in the long run.  If your bylaws are not compliant with the laws of the state in which your nonprofit is formed or are not tailored to your board’s needs and preferences, you may face trouble down the road.  In a worst-case scenario, the actions of a board can be challenged by regulators or in court if the board has not been following its bylaws or its bylaws are not legally compliant. 

What should our bylaws cover?

Typical provisions in nonprofit bylaws include –

• Size of the board – minimum (and maximum, if any) number of directors 
• Procedures for the election, resignation, and removal of directors.
• Directors’ term lengths and term limits (if any). 
• Notice requirements for regular meetings and special meetings of the board. 
• Quorum requirements (the minimum number of directors that must be present at a meeting in order to take action). 
• Approval requirements for routine board actions and special approval requirements for major transactions. 
• Procedures by which the board can take action without meeting.
• Procedures for forming and authorizing committees. 
• Procedures for the election, resignation, and removal of officers.
• Officer titles and responsibilities. 
• Indemnification of directors and officers. 
• Procedures for amending the bylaws.
   

Can we change our bylaws? 

Yes! Bylaws can, and often should, be amended to better match the organization’s practices and goals. The bylaws that worked for your nonprofit in its start-up phase frequently need to change as your organization grows and develops.  Laws also change from time to time, so we recommend having an experienced attorney review your bylaws with your board every few years. 

There’s a lot more we can say about governance and bylaws, but we’ll save that for future articles.

The post Bylaws – Legal, Practical and Foundational appeared first on Perlman & Perlman.

While a nonprofit entity is the most typical structure for an organization seeking to create positive social impact, many mission-driven entrepreneurs are choosing for-profit vehicles to achieve their goals. To determine if a nonprofit organization is the right structure for your vision, you must understand what is required to obtain and maintain nonprofit (and tax-exempt) status. 

What Does It Mean to be a Nonprofit Organization? 

First, it is critical to understand the core legal requirements and restrictions of being a nonprofit to determine if it is the right fit for your venture.¹  You may be wondering if “nonprofit organization” and “tax-exempt organization” are interchangeable terms. Although most nonprofit organizations are also tax-exempt, these terms do have different meanings. 

The term ‘nonprofit’ is typically used to refer to an organization’s legal form under state law. Most often, nonprofits are formed as corporations, but other legal forms, such as trusts or unincorporated associations, can be used. A corporation is the most popular legal structure for nonprofits, however, and offers many benefits to mission-driven ventures, including greater liability protection for the incorporated nonprofit’s directors and officers. 

A key distinguishing feature of nonprofit entities from for-profit entities is that nonprofit entities cannot distribute profits to individuals who control the organization. Unlike a for-profit corporation, a nonprofit corporation is not owned by anyone and does not have shareholders. 

Federal Tax-Exempt Status

The purposes and activities of the nonprofit will help determine whether it will qualify for exemption from federal income tax. Many nonprofit organizations are tax-exempt under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code (“Code”), which is the designation for charitable organizations. 501(c)(3) organizations are classified as either public charities or private foundations, depending mostly on whether they are diversely funded (public charity) or primarily funded by one or a few sources (private foundations). Other sections of the Code provide tax-exempt status to non-charitable nonprofits, the most common of which are 501(c)(4) social welfare organizations, 501(c)(6) business leagues, and 501(c)(7) social clubs. For this article, we will focus on the requirements of the 501(c)(3) public charity.

To obtain 501(c)(3) public charity status, an organization must be organized and operated exclusively for exempt purposes. Exempt purposes under section 501(c)(3) of the Code include those that are charitable, educational, religious, scientific, literary, fostering national or international sports competition, preventing cruelty to children or animals, and testing for public safety. To be organized exclusively for exempt purposes means that the organization’s governing documents must describe its exempt purposes and limit the use of its assets exclusively to those exempt purposes. To be operated exclusively for exempt purposes is, in large part, a negative test, i.e. an organization will not be considered to be operated exclusively for exempt purposes if (1) more than an insubstantial part of its activities is in furtherance of a non-exempt purpose, or (2) its net earnings inure in whole or in part to the benefit of private individuals. 

If more than an insubstantial part of the organization’s activities is not in furtherance of an exempt purpose, the IRS may deny or revoke the organization’s exempt status. To maintain 501(c)(3) status, an organization must do the following. 

• Not participate in political campaigns of candidates for local, state, or federal office
• Restrict its lobbying activities to an insubstantial part of its total activities
• Ensure that its earnings do not inure to the benefit of any private shareholder or individual;
• Not operate for the benefit of private interests such as those of its founder or the founder’s family
• Not operate for the primary purpose of conducting a trade or business that is not substantially related to its exempt purpose

Key Reasons Why You Should, or Should Not, Form a 501(c)(3) Nonprofit Organization

Deciding on whether a 501(c)(3) nonprofit entity is the right legal structure requires consideration of both the advantages and constraints of this legal form and tax status. While any decision should ideally be made in consultation with legal counsel, here are a few practical considerations that may help guide your assessment. 

Advantages of 501(c)(3) Nonprofit Status

Tax-Deductibility of Donations and Eligibility for Grants or Government Contracts 

Tax-deductibility is an important incentive for donors. Donations made to a 501(c)(3) nonprofit are generally tax-deductible for the donor, whereas donations to for-profit entities or most other types of exempt organizations are not. Similarly, many institutional funders only make grants to 501(c)(3) organizations, and 501(c)(3) status may be a prerequisite for certain government contracts. If you envision donations or grants being a significant source of funds for your organization, and the requirements of public charity status don’t unduly limit the core activities you seek to engage in to accomplish your mission (e.g., lobbying activities), then 501(c)(3) status may be beneficial for your organization. 

Exemption from Income Taxes

Generally, the income generated by a nonprofit organization from revenue-generating activities is exempt from federal income taxation if the generation of that revenue actually accomplishes the organization’s tax-exempt purposes (e.g., college tuition or hospital service fees). It’s important to understand when revenue is “substantially related” to accomplishing an exempt purpose, an evaluation that’s heavily driven by facts and circumstances, and best undertaken with advice of legal counsel. 

Public Transparency/Accountability 

Choosing the nonprofit form can signal trustworthiness, in part, because a nonprofit is legally required to operate exclusively in furtherance of the organization’s charitable purposes and is subject to regulatory scrutiny. In fact, studies have shown that nonprofits are among the most trusted institutions in the U.S. and are relied upon to shape better policies and deliver better results in local communities.² A 501(c)(3) nonprofit is subject to significant operational requirements and restrictions as well as public disclosure obligations under both state and federal laws. At the federal level, 501(c)(3) tax-exempt nonprofits must annually file Form 990 financial informational returns, which are publicly available on the IRS’s website. At the state level, most states require charitable organizations which are soliciting or otherwise conducting charitable activities in the state to register annually. Many of the state charity regulatory databases make even more information available to the public than the IRS makes available, such as organizations’ governance documents, IRS tax-exempt application, Form 990s, and audited financial statements. 

Disadvantages or Constraints of 501(c)(3) Nonprofit Status

Limits on Leveraging Commercial Market Strategies

If you want to use a more traditional market approach to accomplish a social impact objective, e.g., leveraging investor capital to expedite innovation and growth, a tax-exempt nonprofit vehicle may not be an ideal structure. However, there are creative structuring options that can involve tax-exempt entities, including joint venture or subsidiary structuring options.

Limits on Ability to Maximize Profit and Compensation

If your goals involve simultaneously maximizing profit and social impact (even if the profit generated does not benefit any insiders or investors), a tax-exempt vehicle that’s subject to numerous regulatory restrictions may limit the organization’s strategic options when trying to maximize profit, as you must simultaneously ensure that those strategic options do not require the organization to engage in activities that may jeopardize its tax-exempt status. Nonprofit 501(c)(3) organizations must also pay “reasonable compensation” for services, which may limit the organization’s ability to compete with for-profit entities for talent in certain fields. 

Limits on Founder Control

If founder control is paramount, a nonprofit may not be ideal. No individual(s) can “own” a nonprofit or its assets. A founder may be voted out of their position by the board of directors if the board does not agree with the direction of the founder. In addition, while rare, if a state attorney general (“AG”) determined that a founder was failing to uphold their fiduciary duties, the AG could petition the court to remove the founder from any leadership roles with the organization. 

Limits Based on What the IRS Considers a “Charitable” Purpose

There are a number of groups that genuinely believe that their organizational purposes are “charitable” because they provide a significant benefit to the community or the world at large. However, the IRS, which is the gatekeeper of 501(c)(3) status, does not always agree. This difference in perspective has been seen in a number of areas, ranging from farmer’s markets to open-source software initiatives to, most recently, NIL Collectives, as highlighted in tax-exempt application denials and other IRS-issued guidance. Seeking legal counsel is especially important when an organization is seeking to operate in areas where the IRS has previously scrutinized (and denied) qualification for 501(c)(3) tax-exempt status. 

In our experience we have found that a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt nonprofit corporation is a good fit for most parties seeking to establish a new charitable project, and that the benefits of nonprofit tax-exempt status outweigh the burden of the regulatory requirements and restrictions. However, given the increasingly creative approaches taken to optimize social impact through charitable initiatives, in order to best achieve your goals, before moving forward it is important to understand the fundamental structural requirements of a tax-exempt nonprofit.

1 For organizational leaders to benefit from the protections of the corporate form, they must maintain appropriate corporate formalities, including properly maintaining corporate records of meetings, and not commingling personal and organizational funds.

2 See “Trust in Civil Society,” a report prepared by Independent Sector in partnership with Edelman Data & Intelligence, published on May 19, 2022.

The post You Have Passion and Purpose – Should You Start a Nonprofit Organization? appeared first on Perlman & Perlman.

Expansion of Electronic Consent

Under the N-PCL, members and directors are permitted to take action without a meeting by unanimous written consent, which consent can be either written or electronic. (See N-PCL §§ 614(a) and 708(b)) Under the previous law, electronic consent was limited to electronic mail, otherwise known as e-mail.

To keep up with emerging changes in technology, the legislation allows members and directors to act without a meeting by unanimous consent undertaken by “other electronic means” in addition to email. This means that director or member consent can also be provided through other technology methods besides e-mail, such as the use of electronic portals that facilitate the collection of votes.

Board Vacancies

Under the previous law, when a director was elected or appointed to fill a vacancy in an unexpired term, that director was only able to fill that vacancy until the organization’s next annual meeting. (See N-PCL § 705(c)) This provision was often impractical for organizations with classified boards in which board members serve for staggered, multi-year terms, and the seat of the director whose vacancy was being filled was not set to expire at the next annual meeting.

The legislation provides increased flexibility in selecting terms for replacement directors. A director elected to fill a vacancy in an unexpired term can now hold office until the end of the term that the director was elected or appointed to fill, or for a different term determined by the board which ends at an annual meeting. These changes give boards more leeway to select a different term when filling a vacancy that better aligns with the organization’s specific objectives.

Clarification to Board Quorums

Under the N-PCL, any action taken by the board of directors requires a quorum to be present at the time of the vote.  (See N-PCL § 708(d)) The amendment clarifies that directors who are present at a meeting but not at the time of a vote due to a conflict of interest or related party transaction are deemed present at the time of the vote in determining if there is a quorum.

Takeaway

These latest amendments to the N-PCL help to modernize and update the laws around not-for-profit governance structures in a positive way. New York not-for-profit organizations may want to consider updating their certificate of incorporation and/or by-laws to reflect these changes, which may help them streamline their governance procedures.

The post New York Modernizes Nonprofit Law by Enacting Technical Amendments appeared first on Perlman & Perlman.

While “pay-for-play” is still prohibited by the NCAA,² these new rules have opened the door for college athletes to explore a new world of sponsorships, endorsements and compensation.  For example, college athletes can now earn money for commercials, appearances, speeches, social media posts, hosting sports camps, giving lessons, writing books and more — all without violating NCAA rules.

“NIL collectives” have emerged as the chief brokers of these opportunities.  This article discusses what NIL collectives are, their legal forms of organization, and the regulatory framework that governs them.

How are NIL Collectives Structured?
NIL collectives are entities that are structurally independent of a school, yet fund NIL opportunities for the school’s student-athletes. They are typically founded by well-known alumni and supporters of the school.  Collectives generate and pool revenue raised through contributions from a wide variety of sources, including boosters, businesses, fans and more.  They use these funds to create opportunities for student-athletes to leverage their NIL in exchange for compensation.

While a number of NIL collectives have been formed as for-profit entities,³ in a growing number of cases, they have been formed as nonprofits. Numerous nonprofit collectives have, in turn, sought and obtained 501(c)(3) public charity status from the IRS, which potentially allows donors to receive a tax-deduction for their contribution to the collective.⁴

Tax-exempt collectives typically use student-athletes as independent contractors to help further their charitable mission.  For example, some provide in-kind contributions of a student-athlete’s services to other charities, including speaking, appearances and other public relations services that help expand the charities’ reach and visibility in their communities.  The student-athlete is paid by the tax-exempt collective to provide the services, while the other charities receive these services on a pro bono basis.

Special Rules Governing Tax-Exempt NIL Collectives
Collectives that obtain tax-exemption should be mindful of special rules that apply to tax-exempt entities.  These rules are enforced not only by the IRS, but also by State Attorneys General, whose responsibility is to ensure that charitable funds are used for charitable purposes. These rules require that tax-exempt cooperatives operate differently from the typical NIL collective.

For example, NIL collectives commonly facilitate endorsement, merchandising and marketing deals that allow for-profit companies to promote their products and services using a student-athlete’s NIL, which helps these for-profit companies increase business and revenues.  Many NIL collectives have the flexibility to promote such commercial interests due to their structure as for-profit (and therefore, taxable) entities.

However, facilitating commercial deals does not constitute a permissible purpose for a charitable, tax-exempt organization.  Therefore, if a tax-exempt NIL collective engages in such activity, revenues from this activity could be taxed by the IRS as unrelated business income – i.e., income from a trade or business, regularly carried on, that is not substantially related to the collective’s charitable mission.

Also, if the IRS finds that these commercial activities constitute a primary or substantial non-exempt purpose of the organization, the IRS could revoke its tax-exempt status.⁵ State Attorneys General could bring enforcement actions for similar reasons.  Therefore, if a tax-exempt collective facilitates marketing or similar NIL arrangements, it should generally avoid arrangements promoting goods and services of for-profit companies.  However, it could use the NIL of student-athletes to help promote and amplify the charitable missions of nonprofits serving communities.⁶

NIL collectives are also becoming well-known for offering lucrative compensation to student-athletes in connection with promotional deals.  For many collectives, their status as for-profit entities give them the flexibility to do so.

But, in the context of a tax-exempt collective, these payments must be reviewed carefully to ensure they do not constitute “excessive compensation” for federal tax law purposes.  NIL collectives should therefore carefully structure athletes’ compensation in accordance with IRS rules to ensure it does not exceed fair market value.  Failure to do so could put the collective at risk of losing its tax-exemption, and lead to potential enforcement actions by State Attorneys General.

However, it should be noted that even if such compensation is determined to be reasonable, a tax-exempt NIL collective could nevertheless lose its exemption if the IRS determines that its primary or substantial purpose is to pay or recruit student-athletes.  For this reason, it’s important that tax-exempt collectives work closely with legal counsel to ensure they have well-constructed charitable programs.

Given the risks outlined above, an NIL collective seeking tax-exempt status should carefully consider whether any of its time and resources will be spent on pursuing commercial (non-exempt) activities.  Collectives considering such activities should consult with counsel to reconsider its structural options, and discuss whether it would be advisable to create a for-profit subsidiary to house any commercial activity.

NCAA Interim Rules
Aside from understanding the regulatory framework discussed above, NIL collectives (no matter their legal form) should have an understanding of the NCAA rules which, as of the time of this writing, consist of interim rules adopted in July 2021.  These interim rules will remain in effect until federal legislation creates a national standard (which is what the NCAA is calling for), or until new NCAA rules are adopted.  While the purpose of the interim rules is to suspend NCAA restrictions on athletes’ profiting off their NIL, the rules maintain certain guardrails to prevent “pay-for-play” and similar arrangements.  Subject to state law, the following is prohibited under the interim rules:

• NIL opportunities cannot be used as a recruiting tool for prospective student athletes.  Such an action is considered an “improper recruiting inducement.”  Therefore, NIL collectives should refrain from making offers of NIL opportunities contingent upon a student-athlete’s enrollment at a particular school.
• As discussed above, NIL arrangements that constitute “pay-for-play” are also prohibited.   This rule prohibits any kind of arrangement that constitutes compensation in exchange for a student-athlete’s participation or performance in college athletics.
• NIL agreements should be specific about the NIL work being performed by the athlete in exchange for compensation, and such compensation should be paid only for work performed.  Such compensation must be determined through an independent analysis, based upon the facts of each specific case and the value each athlete offers to an NIL arrangement.
• The NCAA interim rules prohibit compensation from any school in exchange for the use of a student athlete’s name, image or likeness.  In addition, schools may not direct how student-athletes use NIL compensation.  (For example, schools may not require a student-athlete to use NIL compensation for financial aid.) Athletic department staff are not allowed to represent student-athletes in marketing their athletic ability or reputation.  They also may not communicate with a recruit on behalf of an NIL collective.  In addition, such staff may not facilitate a meeting between an NIL collective and a student-athlete, including, for example, by sharing a recruiting list or watch list.

State Laws and School Policies
As noted above, the NCAA’s interim rules are subject to state law, which varies depending on the state.⁷  Therefore, NIL collectives should take steps to ensure compliance under any applicable state law, including any state law that applies to the collective, the school where the student-athlete is enrolled, as well as the state where the NIL activity will take place.

The collective should also look at any specific NIL policies established by the college.

Both state laws and school policies may include reporting requirements that NIL collectives should be aware of, and some state laws prohibit athletes from entering into a contract that conflicts with the student-athlete’s team contract.

Understanding the regulatory framework governing NIL collectives will help avoid missteps that can lead to punitive actions by the IRS, NCAA or State Attorneys General, or scrutiny from Congress, which has also taken an interest in these entities.  As the NIL’s regulatory environment continues to evolve, it is incumbent on both collectives and student-athletes to take affirmative steps, including consulting with legal counsel, to ensure compliance.

1 This dramatic shift by the NCAA also came on the heels of its loss before the U.S. Supreme Court in NCAA v. Alston 141 S. Ct. 2141 (2021). Though NIL compensation was not the subject of this case, Justice Kavanaugh wrote a concurring opinion which suggested that the NCAA’s NIL compensation rules could be in violation of antitrust laws, and stated that “the NCAA is not above the law.”  The NCAA’s change also follows action by numerous states that, since 2019, had led the way in creating NIL rights for student athletes.

2 As discussed later in this article, “pay-for-play” refers to any kind of arrangement that constitutes compensation in exchange for a student-athlete’s participation or performance in college athletics.

3 Other legal forms taken by NIL collectives have included formation as for-profit limited liability companies (“LLCs”), which provides more flexibility in a number of ways.  For example, unlike tax-exempt nonprofits, for-profit LLCs are not subject to a cap on what’s considered reasonable compensation.  They may therefore offer student-athletes NIL work at any compensation structure.  For-profit LLCs are also not subject to limitations on the type of activities they can facilitate.  Therefore, unlike tax-exempt entities, for-profit LLCs may facilitate NIL arrangements for student-athletes such as merchandising or endorsement deals which promote commercial activities.  NIL collectives should consult with counsel to discuss the various pros and cons of these options.

4 On September 29, 2022, Senators John Thune (R-S.D.) and Ben Cardin (D-Md.) introduced the Athlete Opportunity and Taxpayer Integrity Act which, if passed, would “prohibit individuals and organizations from using the charitable tax deduction for specific contributions that compensate college or incoming college athletes for the use of their (NIL).”   They argue that “(s)uch activity is inconsistent with the intended purpose of the charitable tax deduction, and it forces taxpayers to subsidize the potential recruitment of – or payment to – college athletes based on their NIL status.”  As of the time of this writing, this federal legislation is the latest of more than a handful of NIL proposals introduced, but not yet passed, in Congress.  Congress’ appetite for eventually passing NIL legislation is unclear, though these proposals do indicate that NIL collectives are facing increased scrutiny from Congress.

5 Regs. Sec. 1.501(c)(3)-1(e)(1) and Sec. 1.501(c) (3)-1(c)(1).

6 One example of this approach is discussed in the previous section – i.e.,  tax-exempt collectives that provide in-kind contributions of a student-athlete’s services to other charities to help them promote their charitable missions.

7 As discussed above, the NCAA is lobbying Congress for legislation that would create a national standard, and thereby pre-empt differing state laws.

The post Seeking Tax-Exemption for a Name, Image and Likeness Collective (NIL)? What to Know. appeared first on Perlman & Perlman.

Navigating the types of activities that tax-exempt nonprofits are allowed to engage in (and how much) without jeopardizing their tax-exempt status can be tricky.  Many charities engage in types of activities that are important to the organization’s mission, donors, and people they serve.  Two activities that charities may use to influence public policy include “advocacy” and “lobbying.”  While advocacy and lobbying are terms that are sometimes used synonymously, the two are distinct in important ways, most notably because federal tax law limits the amount of lobbying that charities may engage in.

How Does Advocacy Differ from Lobbying?

Advocacy can take many forms that do not constitute lobbying, including: leading, directing, conducting, and publishing research; and disseminating educational information.  Charities may engage in many different types of advocacy, and so long as that activity does not constitute lobbying, 501(c)(3) organizations are generally not limited in the amount of time or money they can spend on advocacy.

Lobbying, on the other hand, is subject to specific, restrictive rules.  Charities may engage in only an insubstantial amount of lobbying, and must take care not to jeopardize their tax-exempt status or run afoul of other lobbying restrictions.  Lobbying is any attempt to influence legislation, which can include acts, bills, resolutions, or ballot initiatives by Congress, state legislatures, local councils, or similar governing bodies.  An organization whose employees contact or urge others to contact members or employees of one of these bodies for the purpose of influencing (by encouraging them to adopt, reject, support, or oppose) legislation, is engaging in lobbying.

State and Local Lobbying Registration, Reporting, and Disclosure Requirements

In addition to following the strict federal tax rules governing the type of lobbying and amount of lobbying an organization can engage in,  charities should also be aware of any state and local requirements to register (including registration of certain employees as lobbyists, or registration of the organization itself, which retains and pays lobbyists) and to report lobbying expenditures and activities on a regular basis.¹ Federal and state lobbying rules can be confusing and complicated, and often depend on several factors, including: (1) whether the organization employs an in-house lobbyist or an outside lobbyist; (2) whether any of the organization’s employees are lobbying; (3) the total amount of expenses the organization spends on lobbying activities; and (4) the timing of any contacts or communications made with federal or state officials.

After the organization makes a determination about which federal and state registration requirements apply to its lobbying activities, the organization and its lobbyists must file regular reports (often quarterly or semi-annually) until the registration terminates (the method by which registrations are terminated also varies from state to state), or otherwise expires.

If an organization decides to engage in lobbying activities, it is critical to ensure that executive staff are aware of the applicable requirements for registration, reporting, and disclosure.  Failure to comply can result in fines, censure from the regulatory agency, and possible negative press exposure for the organization.

1 While this article is focused on the lobbying rules as they pertain to 501(c)(3) public charities, it is worth noting that 501(c)(4) organizations, which may engage in unlimited lobbying in furtherance of their tax-exempt missions, are more likely to trigger lobbying registration and disclosure requirements.

The post Is Your Charity Engaged in Lobbying? Make Sure You Know the Rules! appeared first on Perlman & Perlman.

While most nonprofits are required to register in many states to conduct charitable fundraising, religious organizations are generally exempt from the registration requirement. It’s important to be aware, however, that the scope of the states’ religious exemption varies. Therefore, religious organizations should carefully review each state’s statutory exemption to determine where they are exempt, and where they are not exempt and therefore may need to register to solicit contributions.

Overview of Charitable Solicitation Registration & Religious Exemptions

Charitable fundraising activities are primarily regulated at the state level, through the offices of the Attorney General, Departments of State, Consumer Protection and the like. Charitable solicitation regulations were established to protect the public from fraudulent fundraising and assist prospective donors in making well-informed giving decisions. Each state’s statutory framework typically requires charities to register with the state, disclose information about their finances and fundraisers, and provide certain oral or written disclosures to their prospective donors. Currently, forty-one (41) states and the District of Columbia require most organizations to register before soliciting charitable contributions in their respective jurisdictions.

Most states exempt or exclude religious organizations from their charitable solicitation registration and reporting requirements. Keep in mind, however, that each state defines the scope of its exemption for religious organizations differently. As a result, some religious organizations may be required to comply with a state’s registration requirements while others may not. Several states require that religious organizations make a written request to confirm that they are exempt from the state’s registration requirements, while others consider it a legal determination to be made by the organization, and explicitly advise that they do not provide legal advice or make a formal determination as to whether or not an organization is exempt.

For some states, the religious exemption provisions are broadly constructed, and exempt any “duly organized religious corporation, religious institution or religious society.” Other exemption provisions are more narrowly drafted, exempting only those religious organizations that are not required to file the Form 990 with the IRS, which primarily includes churches¹, their integrated auxiliaries², and ecclesiastical or denominational organizations. Churches and other non-990 filers are exempt from registering in all states unless they use the services of a professional fundraiser.

As a general matter, religious organizations that are required to file the Form 990 with the IRS will be exempt in some, but not all, states. Many religious organizations that are required to file Form 990 describe their mission as both religious and charitable as together these constitute an expression of their religious faith and values. Direct services for human needs may include the provision of food, shelter, education, and medical support to vulnerable populations. Oftentimes, they incorporate prayer and religious instruction in their programmatic work, and will require their employees to agree to an organizational statement of faith.

It is worth noting that the laws of a few states continue to include a provision in their religious exemption law which the Supreme Court has declared unconstitutional. These unenforceable provisions limit the scope of the religious exemption to only those religious organizations that are primarily supported by contributions from their members or congregation.³

Impact of Religious Exemptions on Fundraising Professionals

Even when a religious organization is exempt from registering in a state to solicit contributions, in most states, when a fundraising professional provides their services to the organization, the fundraiser must be registered with the state. In a few states, the religious organization’s exemption also extends to the fundraiser’s contract filing and reporting obligations, thereby relieving them of any such filing requirements.

Professional fundraisers (also known as commercial fundraisers or paid solicitors) that directly solicit funds on behalf of charitable organizations are required to register in up to forty-four (44) states. In addition, they must post surety bonds in each state, file copies of their fundraising contracts, and file annual financial reports relating to each fundraising campaign conducted in the state. There are ten (10) states that extend the religious organization’s exemption to their professional fundraiser’s contract filing and reporting obligations.

Fundraising counsels (also known as fundraising consultants) that help plan, manage, advise, or produce and design solicitation campaigns, but do not directly solicit or have custody or control of contributions, are also required to register in twenty-seven (27) states, file contracts, and in a few states, post bonds. There are seven (7) states that extend the religious organization’s exemption to their fundraising counsel’s contract filing and reporting obligations.

Fundraising professionals need to understand the scope of a religious organization’s registration or exemption status in those states in which they will be providing fundraising services to the organization. Not only must they comply with their corresponding filing obligations, but they must also ensure compliance with collateral obligations, such as solicitation disclosures. Thus, it would be prudent for religious organizations to ensure that they have appropriately assessed their exemptions, have documentation to support the exemption in each applicable state, be registered to solicit where required, and communicate with their fundraising professionals to ensure alignment on the impact of their status as a religious organization on both parties’ filing obligations.

Does a religious organization need to register if it solicits on the internet?

In addition to ascertaining whether a religious organization is exempt from registration based on its religious status, a separate analysis should be undertaken to determine if the organization’s solicitation activity creates a jurisdictional nexus that would trigger a state’s registration requirement. For example, a website with a donate button that is accessible to residents in all states does not necessarily create a sufficient jurisdictional nexus. In many cases, it makes sense to undertake a jurisdictional analysis based on the organization’s targeted and/or online fundraising activities before delving into the religious exemption analysis as there may only be a few states where the organization has a jurisdictional nexus based on its fundraising activities. In such cases, the organization may simply review the applicability of the religious exemption in those relevant states.

For more information on how to assess an organization’s registration requirements based on its online fundraising activities, please read this article.

What are the practical steps for religious organizations to determine their registration requirements?

Assess whether registration is necessary or not based on a jurisdictional analysis, taking into account both traditional forms of fundraising (e.g., direct mail, telemarketing, events) and online fundraising activities.
Review with your legal counsel whether your organization qualifies for the religious exemption in the relevant states.
Apply for religious exemptions where applicable and appropriate.
Follow the exemption application procedures in the states that have such procedures in place.
For states that take a “self-determination” approach, and will not formally confirm an organization’s qualification for the state’s religious exemption, it may nevertheless be prudent to submit a letter, putting the states on notice of the organization’s position that it is statutorily exempt from registering as a religious organization.
Register in all applicable states where: (1) a registration requirement exists; (2) the organization is soliciting (and the state has jurisdiction over their solicitation activity); and (3) the organization does not qualify for the religious exemption. Note that charitable solicitation registration must be renewed annually in each applicable state.

The post When are Religious Organizations Exempt from Charitable Registration? appeared first on Perlman & Perlman.

Impact of COVID-19
The impact the COVID-19 pandemic has had on the charitable sector was a focus of the conference. Yael Fuchs, NASCO President and Co-Section Chief for the Charities Bureau of the New York Attorney’s General Office, pointed to many state regulatory changes in areas such as virtual meeting guidance, registration deadline extensions, changes to signature requirements, and modified filing requirements. Some of these changes can be found in the NASCO chart of state registrations laws. While many of the pandemic related modifications are set to, or have already, expired, NASCO is looking for feedback as to what virtual components and guidance modifications should stay. For further information on virtual member meetings, please read Virtual Nonprofit Board and Member Meetings in the Time of COVID by my colleague Jeremy Coffey.

Ms. Fuchs described the effects the pandemic has had on filings requiring regulatory approval. While the trends are anecdotal, it was a shared observation that charity regulators are seeing an increase in divestment of real property, deaccessioning of art, mergers, and amendments to certificates of incorporation. She further noted that charity regulators have not yet seen an increase in endowment modifications and dissolutions, but based on historic trends, they expect these types of transactions may be forthcoming in the near future.

Federal Trade Commission (FTC)
Tracy Thorleifson, Attorney and FTC’s leading expert on charitable solicitation fraud, highlighted some of the key work the FTC has been doing in the charitable sphere, and explained the role the FTC plays in charitable regulation. Specifically, the FTC has regulatory authority under the FTC Act to prosecute sham charities engaged in fraudulent and deceptive fundraising activities. The FTC also has oversight over robocalls when made by fundraisers hired by charities (i.e., professional fundraisers) on the federal level. The FTC encourages everyone to report any suspected or known charitable fraud activity to www.reportfraud.ftc.gov.

Policy Updates and Trends
Courtney M. Aladro, Assistant Attorney General and the Chief of the Non-Profit Organizations/Public Charities Division at the Massachusetts Attorney’s General Office, NASCO Board Member, and Chair of the Policy Committee, presented a handful of legislation and policy changes from the past year.

State Legislation
The first focus was on two state legislative changes. The Washington Nonprofit Corporation Act (Chapter 24.03 RCW) makes changes to the existing regulatory regime. First, it updates the rules governing electronic communications and member meetings. Second, it enhances the Attorney General oversight of charitable assets held by nonprofit corporations. Finally, it allows for “domestication” and for-profit to nonprofit conversion. This new act will go into effect January 1^st, 2022.

The other state legislation highlighted was the California Bill on oversight of charitable giving on online platforms (AB 488), which was signed into law on October 7^th, 2021. The bill requires online platforms facilitating charitable fundraising to register with the Attorney General’s office. It also requires certain disclosures and prompt distribution of donations. Finally, it prohibits solicitations for charities that are not “in good standing” with the Attorney’s General Registry of Charitable Trusts, the Franchise Tax Board, or the IRS. NASCO has a crowdfunding working group that is continuing to monitor online fundraising activities. For a deeper understating of this bill, please read California Enacts New Law to Regulate Charitable Fundraising Platforms by my colleague Karen Wu.

Federal legislation
Ms. Aladro highlighted two federal bills applicable to charitable organizations. The first bill was the Fraud and Scam Reduction Act (HR 1215). This act was supported by NAAG/NASCO in an open letter sent on behalf of 47 states. The bill passed the House on April 15, 2021 and is currently awaiting Senate approval. The bill, if passed, would establish a Senior Scams Prevention Advisory Group to support training and education efforts to identify and prevent scams targeting the elderly. The bill would also establish the Office for the Prevention of Fraud Targeting Seniors in the Bureau of Consumer Protection of the FTC.

The other federal bill discussed was the Accelerating Charitable Efforts Act (S 1981, known as the “ACE Act”). This bill, which was introduced on June 9th, would create new rules for private foundations and donor-advised funds (DAF). The legislation takes aim at regulating DAF funds specific to deduction eligibility and payout requirements and timelines.

Supreme Court Decision
Americans for Prosperity Foundation v. Bonta was discussed. In this case California enacted a rule requiring all charities that fundraise in the state to disclose their confidential IRS Form 990 Schedule B, if they filed one, with the California Registry of Charitable Trust. The Supreme Court found this rule unconstitutional and struck it down. In doing so, it did acknowledge that states can obtain Schedule B information through subpoenas and audits, but only if there is an underlying reason. In response to this case, California, Hawaii, New Jersey, and New York have altered their Schedule B collection rules and/or practices. For more information on this case leading into the Supreme Court’s opinion, please read Schedule B Disclosure Cases Head to the Supreme Court – Is Donor Privacy Threatened? by my colleague Seth Perlman.

Alternative Nonprofit Fundraising
Brian Yacker, Adjunct Professor at the University of California Irvine, discussed issues surrounding alternative fundraising. Alternative fundraising can include many things (for example auctions or “virtual” bake sales), special event fundraisers such as games (raffles, bingo, etc.), virtual events (gala, run/walk, etc.), or crowdfunding. Some of these activities may generate unrelated business income tax (“UBIT”). If the amount of unrelated business activities become too substantial, it could jeopardize an organization’s tax-exempt status. It is therefore important that nonprofit boards keep a vigilant eye on the type of fundraising activities that generate UBIT to ensure that it does not become too substantial. It is also important that these activities are properly reported to the IRS on the Form 990. Failing to report properly could lead to tax liabilities, penalties, and an uncertain tax position.

Charities Working with Non-Charities
A panel of regulators discussed the various considerations an organization must take into account when deciding to partner with a non-charity. On the federal level, such considerations include the 501(c)(3)’s purpose, unrelated business taxable income, private benefit, jeopardizing investments, and self-dealing. On the state level, the considerations become much broader. An organization must consider, among other things, the various duties (loyalty, obedience, care, and accounting), the Uniform Prudent Management of Institutional Funds Act (“UPMIFA”, enacted in all states except PA), registration and reporting requirements, charitable solicitation laws, donor expectations, and charitable purpose. One of the panelists, Assistant Attorney General for Washington Joshua Studor, pointed to the 2019 American Law Institute’s Restatement of Charitable Nonprofit Organizations Law as a great resource for many of these state considerations.

Fundraising Events – Virtual, In-Person, and Hybrid
Sara Hall, Chief Legal Officer for St. Jude’s Children Research Hospital, spoke on the uncertainty of fundraising events. She noted an increasing expectation for returning to in-person events. As a lesson learned, Sara addressed the hybrid event. Ms. Hall noted the heightened challenges of hybrid events (both virtual and in-person). The logistical issues with both types are compounded when thrown together.

Ms. Hall also noted that, in the area of event contracting, force majeure clauses have become less reliable. Vendors are specifically excluding COVID and no longer excusing non-performance. It is important to negotiate at time of booking with catering that cancellation penalties will be credited towards future bookings and that you have a date to confirm your numbers before food is purchased.

Cryptocurrencies, NFTs, and Beyond
Ms. Hall also spoke to the burgeoning areas of cryptocurrency and NFT donations. Currently, cryptocurrencies are considered property for tax purposes. If a charitable organization wishes to accept cryptocurrencies, it is important that they set clear policies and controls for doing so. These include: establishing gift acceptance policies and safeguards that are consistent with the organization’s finance and audit procedures, custodian agreements for individuals with account access, and monthly reporting and auditing of their crypto wallet. It is also important that charities work with vendors and exchanges that are regulated by the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (“FinCEN”) or the New York Department of Financial Services (“NYDFS”) if you are a New York entity. For more information on how charities should handle cryptocurrencies, please see What Nonprofits Should Be Asking About Virtual Currency Regulation and Fundraising by my colleague Jeremy Coffey.

The post The 2021 NAAG/NASCO Virtual Conference – Noteworthy Issues for Nonprofits appeared first on Perlman & Perlman.

Within a week, the group created the ConstitutionDAO, organized its followers on Discord (a messaging and community platform), and raised roughly $47 million in virtual currency.⁴ Armed with their new war chest, the group bid on, but ultimately failed to win, the Sotheby’s auction, losing out to a hedge fund billionaire who purchased the copy of the Constitution for $43.2 million (the Constitution DAO had withheld some funds to cover costs associated with winning the auction).⁵

Following their loss, the creators of the group were faced with what to do with the virtual currency sitting in the DAO’s treasury. Many of the community members sought refunds, only to learn that the transaction costs (also known as gas fees) would eat up much of their original contribution.⁶ Ultimately, the ConstitutionDAO’s founders decided to shut it down.⁷ The token issued in connection with the project, originally intended to be used to allow holders to vote on what the DAO would do in the future, lives on, with some holders still hoping to profit.⁸

What if the ConstitutionDAO had succeeded? Who would have “owned” the copy of the Constitution the group would have purchased? In a later interview one of the founders of ConstitutionDAO, Jonah Erlich, disclosed that the group had partnered with a traditional nonprofit organization that would have had legal custody of the Constitution.⁹ The fact that this new type of organization would be reliant on a traditional nonprofit provides excellent insight into the emerging world of DAOs. It also gives us an entry point to examine this new structure.

WHAT ARE DAOS?

In a traditional corporation or limited liability company, the organization is formed by filing paperwork with a government office, typically a state’s Department of State. By creating a legal entity, the people behind the organization are protected from liability. When someone sues a corporation over a contract dispute or other liability, the directors, officers, employees, members, and volunteers are not liable individually. Rather, it’s the corporation that must answer for its liabilities.

In a DAO, however, there is no formal legal entity. Built using the same blockchain technologies that underly the virtual currency ecosystem, DAOs are organizations that are never incorporated in any state (with limited exceptions). The founders create the DAO, and it simply exists.

While DAOs actual structures vary, most DAOs issue a token that gives members of the DAO voting rights. Once tokens are issued, in order to make decisions, all token holders are allowed to vote. The idea, touted by DAO supporters, is that this new structure democratizes organizational decision-making, placing it in the hands of the members. An oversimplified comparison would be a for-profit company that has no paid executives or board of directors, making every decision by allowing all shareholders to vote.

Although the ConstitutionDAO is a well-known example, DAOs are proliferating in the nonprofit community. Here are a few interesting examples: DiatomDAO is raising support to protect the oceans;¹⁰ KlimaDAO hopes to speed up solutions for climate change by increasing the price of carbon assets;¹¹ Bloomeria is using NFTs to increase biodiversity; ¹² and The Regen Network is issuing a token as part of a group of entities to realign the agricultural economy with ecological health.¹³

While each of the foregoing organizations uses the language of the DAO and decentralization, they also demonstrate how the DAO community encompasses many different structures. For instance, the Regen Network is comprised of a traditional C-Corporation, a traditional 501(c)(3) public charity, and a decentralized DAO program.¹⁴ The DiatomDAO is purely a decentralized entity, “owned and directed” by its token holders (see more on this below). The ConstitutionDAO, while operated as a decentralized DAO, would have relied on a traditional 501(c)(3) public charity (one named EnDAOment¹⁵) had it won the Sotheby’s auction and needed a legal entity with which to hold the copy of the Constitution. As you can see, while many groups use the mantle of “DAO”, the term encompasses many different structures.

WHAT ARE THE BENEFITS OF DAOS?

Now that we’ve discussed what DAOs are, and seen some examples, let’s step back to consider what DAO proponents like about the structure. In theory, a pure DAO offers each supporter the opportunity to participate in the group’s decision-making. If a member of a charitable DAO wants to make a grant, they would propose it to the rest of the DAO community. The members then hold a vote. Using this structure, a DAO represents a more direct form of organizational decision-making and, for donors, more direct-action philanthropy.

Further, by avoiding any legal structure, some DAO proponents believe this new structure will give DAOs greater flexibility. Without a state’s laws dictating how decisions have to be made or how boards have to be structured, a DAO might be nimbler. Some libertarians believe that DAOs, who have no real jurisdictional nexus to any state, might even be able to avoid generally applicable laws.¹⁶

WHAT ARE THE DRAWBACKS OF DAOS?

While there is a lot to be excited about by DAOs, they use an organizational structure in its infancy, with many more questions than answers. One critique is that the voting structure adopted by most DAOs (1 token = 1 vote) replicates existing problems with shareholder structures, namely, that the larger shareholders control organizational decision-making, alienating smaller shareholders. If one person holds 60% of the DAO’s tokens and the DAO implements a 50+1% vote threshold decision-making could be even more centralized than it would be in a traditional organization with a board and executives who can counterbalance a large shareholder’s interests. The DAO community has proposed some possible solutions to this problem, such as limiting votes to one per token holder, or creating non-transferable tokens to limit token holder hoarding. Each of these solutions have drawbacks, but they could drive decision-making closer to the idealized notion of the DAO.

Another issue is the legal uncertainty of DAOs. Assume that the libertarian notion that DAOs are legally unaccountable as organizations, since they are not organized in any state nor do they have any other jurisdictional nexus with any local, state, or federal government. That might put the DAO beyond the reach of regulators and law enforcement, but it would not exempt the individuals participating in or working for the DAO, all of whom are real people subject to normal laws. Actually, the idea of a group of people running an unincorporated organization isn’t new. In New York, for instance, such an entity would be deemed an “unincorporated association.” Under longstanding common law, an unincorporated association is not legally separate from the members who comprise it.¹⁷ That means that members of a DAO could be taking on direct legal risk from their participation in the DAO. If the DAO were to breach a contract, discriminate against an employee, or cause other real-world harm, the DAO’s members might be jointly and severally liable.

It’s also an open question whether regulators will share the libertarian view that DAOs are not subject to local, state, or federal laws. It wouldn’t be surprising to see the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) bring an enforcement action against a DAO, given that it has already notified the Decentralized Finance (DeFi) community that it considers many DeFI products analogous to products regulated by the Commission.¹⁸ The SEC has already brought an enforcement action against a Wyoming organization operating under the guise of a DAO, albeit only after the entity sought SEC approval to register two tokens as securities.¹⁹

Finally, DAOs in the philanthropic sector face the additional hurdle of providing tax-deductibility to donors. In general, a contribution to a non-charitable intermediary doesn’t allow a donor to take a tax-deduction. The answer to that question isn’t clear²⁰ as it depends on how the entity is treated for tax-purposes, whether its distributions would otherwise qualify for a tax-deductions, and whether it is considered an agent for the donors or beneficiary charities. A person hoping for a tax-deduction should contact a tax professional to examine the particular DAO’s structure and the taxpayer’s circumstances. To date, I’m unaware of any DAO specifically advertising the deductibility of contributions to its treasury, nor having considered tax-deductibility as part of their DAO structure (except, of course, for DAOs like Endaoment and Regen Network that operate using a traditional 501(c)(3) corporate structure).

WHAT’S NEXT FOR DAOS?

Despite the novelty of and the uncertainty surrounding DAOs, their popularity is undeniable. This was exemplified by the incredible enthusiasm around ConstitutionDAO. Taking advantage of the late 2021 surge in the value of many cryptocurrencies, DAOs provide an opportunity for the crypto community to put its assets to work in novel ways, including philanthropy. While they are evolving, DAOs will likely persevere, barring regulator intervention to shut them down.  Donors and charities looking to participate in the DAO community should do so carefully, and with the benefits of advisors familiar with the DeFi and DAO space.

1 https://www.sothebys.com/en/digital-catalogues/the-constitution-of-the-united-states

2 Id.

3 https://www.theverge.com/22820563/constitution-meme-47-million-crypto-crowdfunding-blockchain-ethereum-constitution

4 https://www.constitutiondao.com/

5 https://www.vice.com/en/article/qjb8xv/hedge-fund-ceo-who-bailed-out-gamestop-short-seller-bought-the-constitution

6 https://www.theverge.com/2021/11/24/22800995/constitutiondao-refund-progress-steep-gas-fees-cryptocurrency

7 https://www.theverge.com/2021/11/23/22799192/constitutiondao-shutting-down-lost-auction-refunds

8 The latest price quote for the PEOPLE token can be found at  https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/constitutiondao/.

9 https://www.theverge.com/22820563/constitution-meme-47-million-crypto-crowdfunding-blockchain-ethereum-constitution.

10 https://diatom.fund/

11 https://www.klimadao.finance/

12 https://bloomeria.org/

13 https://www.regen.network/

14 https://www.regen.network/faq/organization

15 https://endaoment.org/

16 For instance, in his conversation on the Deep Background podcast, Erik Voorhees argued that a DAO could avoid the difficulties of employment law because no states employment laws would apply. https://www.pushkin.fm/episode/whats-the-deal-with-decentralized-autonomous-organizations/

17 See, generally, New York Elec. C. Assn. v. Local Union No. 3, (NY Sup. Ct. 1941), available at https://casetext.com/case/new-york-elec-c-assn-v-local-union-no-3

18 https://www.sec.gov/news/statement/crenshaw-defi-20211109

19 https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2021-231; https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2021/11/11/sec-stops-wyoming-based-dao-from-registering-2-digital-tokens/.

20 For an excellent discussion, see Prof. Samuel Brunson’s blog post https://lawprofessors.typepad.com/nonprofit/2021/11/charitable-daos-revisited.html.

The post DAOs and the Nonprofit Sector – How Can they Work Together? appeared first on Perlman & Perlman.