News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:GitHub Sponsors by DoreenMichele on Thursday May 23, 2019 @11:27PM (#19998209)
I'm not at my best. Maybe someone other than me can find Patrick McKenzie's HN comment about "please make it easy for me to get an invoice instead of calling it a donation because I have to comply with tax laws and yadda, but would be happy to support your open source project if I actually use it for business purposes and can get the piece of paper called an invoice that my accountant and the government insist on."

I think that's a good direction that is probably underdeveloped currently, though every single time I mention it someone points to a tweet of his rather than the actual HN comment. (Which is not the end of the world and maybe there's a better way to frame that, I'm just not at my best )

Re:GitHub Sponsors by johnbatch on Friday May 24, 2019 @12:23AM (#19998456)
Re:GitHub Sponsors by DoreenMichele on Friday May 24, 2019 @12:31AM (#19998491)
Yes, that's the one (with accompanying pertinent discussion).

Thanks.

Re:GitHub Sponsors by RhodesianHunter on Friday May 24, 2019 @12:48AM (#19998577)
The parent of this thread is someone in marketing suggesting ways this could come out of the marketing budget, very similar to the workaround of invoicing suggested in your linked comment. Both are ways to make donating to OSS a business expense rather than a charitable donation.
Re:GitHub Sponsors by DoreenMichele on Friday May 24, 2019 @01:00AM (#19998629)
No, not really. Adding logos and yadda in exchange for remuneration is a really well established form of commercial monetization. In contrast, invoicing OSS is a new and innovative way to get cash for what you already do, just like a donation.

If people want to go that route, my comments on the internet aren't some kind of bar to that approach, so I'm not sure why you seem to feel some need to argue it.

But if you are doing open source for idealistic reasons and yadda, as per my comment, then invoicing per Patrick McKenzie's explanation is actually something new and innovative that serves a similar function to the donation model in terms of preserving an element of the OSS model that matters to some folks/projects, but opens up the possibility of getting it from a company. In addition to being something of a green field for the donation model and extra source of money, companies generally have deeper pockets than individuals.

I'm not telling anyone they aren't allowed to commercialize their project. I'm just saying it's a space I've thought long and hard about for many years and researched and yadda, and if you are in open source because a business model is antithetical to your mental models and goals for the project, then invoicing may suit your needs in cases where corporate sponsorship feels like the wrong answer.

Re:GitHub Sponsors by zapita on Saturday May 25, 2019 @12:27PM (#20009869)
Invoicing support, maintenance and custom development of open-source software is a more established practice than patreon-style donations to open-source developers.
Re:GitHub Sponsors by DoreenMichele on Saturday May 25, 2019 @03:34PM (#20010830)
I'm aware that OSS sometimes makes money on activities like customer support and custom development. That's not what's being discussed here.
Re:GitHub Sponsors by zapita on Sunday May 26, 2019 @01:58PM (#20016345)
We’re discussing it right now... I’m referring to the concept of “invoicing open-source” which you describe as “new and innovative”. I’m arguing that it’s not. It’s a variation of the support and custom development model which is already very common.
Re:GitHub Sponsors by jjeaff on Friday May 24, 2019 @06:32AM (#20000130)
You don't need an invoice to make something a business expenses and or tax deduction.

Even in the case of an audit, the bank or credit card statement showing who the money was paid to is enough.

Now, if you are giving cash, you would definitely need an invoice.

Re:GitHub Sponsors by jsjohnst on Saturday May 25, 2019 @11:36AM (#20009578)
This is just flat wrong advice in every jurisdiction I’ve worked in and further wouldn’t fly at any employer. The bank statement may provide the WHO in the transaction, but the invoice / receipt / similar provides the most important part, the WHAT that was paid for.
Re:GitHub Sponsors by jjeaff on Sunday May 26, 2019 @10:09PM (#20018909)
No, you are wrong. Sure, employers will all have their own rules. But I am talking about IRS substantiation.

The IRS lists out the different forms of documentation needed to support your expenses.

https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employe...

You can see right there under Expenses that credit card statements as well as cancelled checks are valid documentation for a write-off.

Re:GitHub Sponsors by jsjohnst on Monday May 27, 2019 @09:12AM (#20021896)
From your link:

> Your supporting documents should show the amount paid and a description that shows the amount was for a business expense.

A credit card statement typically doesn’t fulfill the second half of that requirement. That doesn’t mean the card statement isn’t a valid supporting document, just that it wasn’t enough by itself.

I too read an IRS document once, that doesn’t make me an expert on accounting. However, when every single finance person has stated that the WHAT was as important and then your own link says that too, I generally would back down and admit maybe I misunderstood and/or made a mistake. YMMV.

Re:GitHub Sponsors by ambentzen on Friday May 24, 2019 @09:17AM (#20001102)
That is not gonna fly where I am from. Our external accountant, CPA type guy, will absolutely hound our ass, and charge his hourly rate doing it, for the invoice corresponding to the VISA card charge.
Re:GitHub Sponsors by jjeaff on Sunday May 26, 2019 @10:16PM (#20018930)
Well of course the business can have their own policies. I am just saying what the law is and what the IRS is allowed to require you to keep. You don't have to keep receipts. There are lots of other acceptable forms of documentation.

https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small-businesses-self-employe...