All-Star To Be Continued...

Welcome to our Cheerleading Community

Members see FEWER ads... join today!

The practice is called a "non-profit/for-profit collaboration" in business and they provide a lot of good for everyone involved. And no, that doesn't mean the for-profit should provide 100% funding to the non-profit they collaborate with, it's a two way beneficial relationship.

Go read the comments from the donors: "Way to go Mawia! So proud of you!" "What an honor and awesome opportunity! So proud and happy for you!" "We love you Ed, so proud!" "So excited for you! Can't wait to follow you in this journey!" "Congrats Britt! What an awesome opportunity for an awesome girl!"

What you consider "tacky" provided some pretty uplifting comments and support from family and friends and at no expense or inconvenience to you.



Adamant defense? All I've ever said, and provided articles, is STP is about government facilities that are built specifically to bring in tourism and cities get the revenue off of their city hotel taxes. Those that can bring the money get the venues and dates they want. My defending only goes as far as understanding their dilemma of needing limited large venues on specific dates. I will also "defend" STP when people say the hotel prices are always more expensive, that's just not true. I find yours and others Varsity hate rather entertaining, but when the comments are blatantly false, I speak up. If that's your definition of "adamant defense", so be it.

The practice in tax law is called inurement. All other sports governing bodies are registered as 501C 3 NOT 501 C 6 as in the case of ICU And USA Cheer. Why not them? Possible they applied and their articles of incorporation and bylaws did not pass the litmus test to be organized as a C3? All Olympic sport governing bodies that I have found are C 3s in keeping with the spirit of the Ted Stevens Act. Inurement forbids the use of tax exempt organizations to directly or indirectly unduly benefit an individual or person that has a close relationship with the organization OR is able to exercise significant control over the organization (Wikipedia). There is so much more to this than simply governing structure, tax law etc but more importantly what happens on the path to the governance. The “greater good” as should be the case in any non profit deserves a shot at freedom from conflict of interest, elected officials without ties to the profit sector, published board meeting minutes, etc . Add insult to injury and reread many threads on this board where banning and blocking anticompetitive behavior occurred and I am not so sure that people are cynical or haters... perhaps a bit more than that.
 
did not pass the litmus test to be organized as a C3? All Olympic sport governing bodies that I have found are C 3s in keeping with the spirit of the Ted Stevens Act

TIL.

Really makes sense because the athletes on the USA Cheer board are far and few between and are limited in their roles, in my experience.
 
The practice in tax law is called inurement. All other sports governing bodies are registered as 501C 3 NOT 501 C 6 as in the case of ICU And USA Cheer. Why not them? Possible they applied and their articles of incorporation and bylaws did not pass the litmus test to be organized as a C3? All Olympic sport governing bodies that I have found are C 3s in keeping with the spirit of the Ted Stevens Act. Inurement forbids the use of tax exempt organizations to directly or indirectly unduly benefit an individual or person that has a close relationship with the organization OR is able to exercise significant control over the organization (Wikipedia). There is so much more to this than simply governing structure, tax law etc but more importantly what happens on the path to the governance. The “greater good” as should be the case in any non profit deserves a shot at freedom from conflict of interest, elected officials without ties to the profit sector, published board meeting minutes, etc . Add insult to injury and reread many threads on this board where banning and blocking anticompetitive behavior occurred and I am not so sure that people are cynical or haters... perhaps a bit more than that.

I don't have a legal or tax background so I'll leave that to someone that does, but I think a lot of the discussions and frustration on the board stem from comparing other sports to cheer. If anything, as a "sport" cheer is still in the very developmental stages and considered provisional, so everything they're establishing is going through legal, CPA's, IRS and is going to be challenged legally by others. What you call "banning, blocking and anti-competitive behavior" is a huge part of establishing their legal boundaries and has to pass, as you said, the legal litmus test. Where I differ from many on the boards is I don't have the personal relationships, so I'm not emotionally attached to the legal outcome, that doesn't mean I don't feel for what others have put their heart into. As far as my "cynical and hater" comment, I just said I think the "extreme" viewpoint (meaning in general) has taken over to the point we often refuse to see the good. The cheerleaders have an opportunity, they have sponsors, the sponsors get acknowledged, they can fundraise for more money, that's a good thing.
 
16 athletes, 2 coaches, 1 admin
Thurs arrival via plane (CO), departed Tues. Treated the kids to Universal Studios for dealing with our bs all year ;-)

Total cost: $27k

A good amount was paid for by fundraising. But in the end each family had to cover a portion for their athlete.

I’m glad we are close enough to make it via an uncomfortably long van ride.

I do it for 60% of that cost.
 
Back