Hacker News Reader

Comment by esotericn | Hacker News Reader

You're stating, essentially, that anyone who wants to publish FOSS software with a donation link should be forced to go through some convoluted procedure and register as a charitable organization. (where? in the US? in their specific region? does it matter? how much time will it take for them to figure out? is this even possible in all regions? does this require ongoing effort e.g. accounting, document submission, general bureaucracy?)

This is simply not how the real world works. If it ever does, you've created a dystopia.

Google are being bureaucratic twats here. There's plainly and obviously a difference between WireGuard and the 10,000,000th iteration of some bullshit F2P casual game, and there's obviously a distinction between donations and purchases - the intent of the user, for one.

That they put prole-tier support on the case and 'accidentally or otherwise' sling the banhammer at pivotal pieces of software is their problem to figure out.

View on HN

True, I'll agree that going non-profit is a nightmare.

But again, what is FOSS with a donation link vs free-to-use software with pay-as-much-as-you-want.

One sounds like a non-profit while the other sounds like a for-profit.

Perhaps if you can directly show your software is FOSS via licensing etc that there should be a special exemption?

Seems like there needs to be a sole-proprietier non-profit... but man that seems like rife for abuse.

Sure, there is very little distinction. I'd argue that both are donations. Pay-as-much-as-you-want (if $0 is an allowable price) represents a donation with a slightly different funnel.

The for-profit vs non-profit distinction is immaterial to me; the distinction is between actually paying for products (e.g. buying an ingame item or support or a subscription or whatever; some sort of 'contractual' thing), and literally giving money away with no strings attached.

Google's particular funding model for their App Store is a different kettle of fish entirely - they can decide that apps beginning with the letter A pay a 90% fee and that's just how it works.

To purely play devil's advocate, there are a number of 'home restaurants' (operate out of my home) that are pay-what-you-want and operate quite profitably. I believe 100% they should be taxed (i'm totally conflating taxes and apple/google profit share but it's a form of a network fee?).

Through this discussion I do wish there was an exception for FOSS for individuals at a legal level.

I can 100% agree though that the fees which google/apple charge are extortionist.

How taxation is collected is a completely different issue and has a trillion nuances.

Not for profit status is susceptible to abuse so I'm glad the process is strict. But you're proposing that app developers should be able to self-describe as charitable in order to dodge fees? And how well do you think that would work exactly?

Having a donation link in your app that is completely voluntary and confers no benefit other than fuzzy warms (and yes, indirectly, if enough donations are acquired, continued development) should not carry fees.

I don't believe that the app stores would cease to function or even suffer appreciably decreased profit by doing so. In-app purchases result in new features or items or something being unlocked.

Donations do not. They are gifts.

I disagree with the concept of fees for the Google and Apple play stores because they are monopolies within the platform entirely, but if they must exist, attempting to charge fees for donations is just bad form.

this exactly is how the world works. if you receive money, wherever it comes from, in more and more countries it must be taxed as income. if you want it tax free, you must prove that you are eligible to do so.

the question is whether or not it is right for google to act as a gatekeeper here. i think not.

Gifts are trivially tax free in the UK excepting cases of Inheritance Tax whereby someone pretends to 'gift' an inheritance before dying instead of having it taxed normally.

It would surprise me if that were not true globally.

A donation is definitionally a gift. If it's not due to some legal wankery, rename it, doesn't matter.

it's not.

as far as i know, at least in the US only donations to registered non-profits are tax free. any other donation is taxed like any other income.

if it's a one-off, sure, calling that a donation may be trivial, but if you start getting donations on a regular basis, you have to prove that they are in fact donations, and not hidden payments for a service. if it weren't so, we would not need to have entities register as non-profit.

You can't just freely receive donations and not pay any tax. There is definitely an argument that you are donating to ensure future development of the software, essentially quid pro quo.

Edit: Wireguard literally make that case while soliciting donations

>We're extremely grateful for all donations, which enable us to continue developing WireGuard as free open source software. We are happy to receive donations from interested companies who would like to see WireGuard development continue and thrive, as well as individual donations from folks who would simply like to say "thanks".

Well, if I'm not on antidepressants yet, I will be soon.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com