zlacker

[parent] [thread] 4 comments
1. bradle+(OP)[view] [source] 2023-03-01 13:12:47
They technically didn’t get rid of the non profit but instead formed a partially owned for profit subsidiary.

In theory non profits are subject to oversight by the state of incorporation’s attorney general. In practice it’s mostly a free for all.

replies(1): >>tapoxi+Y8
◧
2. tapoxi+Y8[view] [source] 2023-03-01 14:10:13
>>bradle+(OP)
This is the loophole. It's what Mozilla did (Foundation created Corporation, and moved employees there), and even IKEA is technically owned by a nonprofit (Stichting INGKA Foundation).
replies(2): >>bradle+0c >>croes+9C
◧◩
3. bradle+0c[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-03-01 14:27:47
>>tapoxi+Y8
The IKEA situation is far more complicated, exploiting gaps in how the laws of several different countries interact.
replies(1): >>Tijdre+md
◧◩◪
4. Tijdre+md[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-03-01 14:35:06
>>bradle+0c
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IKEA#Corporate_structure
◧◩
5. croes+9C[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-03-01 16:38:40
>>tapoxi+Y8
Or Bertelsmann

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bertelsmann_Stiftung

[go to top]