- 103 -
organization client to actually write checks. Although such co-
ownership is understood to be an element of compensation, it has
the side effect of making it more difficult to determine what is
the total compensation to the fundraiser. Note that petitioner’s
Form 990 did not report this as an element of compensation paid,
and respondent does not suggest that petitioner should have tried
to find out how much W&H earned as a result of this feature of
the fundraising agreement. In the instant case, the co-ownership
had features that significantly restricted petitioner’s use of
its own mailing list.27 Under section 18 of the Contract, all of
these restrictions even survive the term of the Contract. In
addition, W&H and petitioner interpreted the Contract to permit
W&H to exchange petitioner’s mailing list for another
organization’s mailing list and then require petitioner to
“reimburse” W&H for the expense that W&H did not in fact incur
because of the exchange of mailing lists. A side effect of this
feature is that in such a situation a payment by petitioner to
W&H which appeared to be a simple reimbursement of W&H’s out-of-
pocket expenses would in fact have been additional compensation
by petitioner to W&H.
27 See sec. 14 of the Contract, set forth supra. The
Contract expressly forbids petitioner to “rent, exchange, lease,
sell or give away” the names and addresses that W&H develops “to
any other parties for any purpose whatsoever.” On the other
hand, the Contract expressly permits W&H to use these names and
addresses “in any way it so desires and for any purpose it may so
determine.”
Page: Previous 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011