zlacker

But it keeps the intangible benefits it accrued by being ostensibly non-profit, and that can easily be worth the money paid in taxes.

Otherwise, why do you think OpenAI is doing it?

>>andrew+(OP)
> it keeps the intangible benefits it accrued by being ostensibly non-profit

but there would be no different to a for-profit entity right? i.e even for-profit entities get tax benefits if they convert their profits to intangibles

this is my thinking. Open AI non-profit gets donations, uses those donations to make a profit, converts this profit to intangibles to avoid paying taxes, and pumps these intangibles into the for-profit entity. based on your hypothesis open ai avoided taxes

but the same thing in a for-profit entity also avoids taxes, i.e for-profit entity uses investment to make a profit, converts this profit to intangibles to avoid paying taxes.

so I'm trying to understand how Open AI found a loop hole where if it went via the for-profit then it wouldn't have gotten the tax advantages it got from non-profit route

>>andrew+(OP)
What benefits? What taxes?

Honestly it does not sound like anyone here knows the first thing about non-profits.

OAI did it because they want to raise capital so they can fund more towards building agi.

>>eightn+I2
this long period of OAI non-profit status when they were making no money and spending tons on capital expenditures would not be taxable anyways.

>>eightn+I2
Maybe we're using different definitions of "intangible", but if you can "convert" them to/from profits they're not intangible in my book. I'm thinking donated effort, people they recruited who wouldn't have signed up if then company was for-profit, mainly goodwill related stuff.