- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
Roar Rookie
Joined June 2019
0
Views
0
Published
202
Comments
Published
Comments
Thanks for reply TJP… You are welcome, I have no doubt there are some shonks, but just to clarify profits can be distributed to owners/shareholders, etc, Religions operating as an NFP are different for this very reason, they can’t. The organisation can retain some earnings if they have a surplus and is probably prudent for them to do so, but they can’t make a profit.
Israel Folau is reportedly on the verge of an NRL comeback
TPJ you are wrong in so many ways, and if you were on the board of an NFP with this view you would be exposed to a lot of personal liability.
I am on the board for an NFP, but barring stupidity, my liability is limited to $50 with director’s liability insurance. Yes, what I wrote is an extremely dumbed down version of complicated tax law, but when we are jumping in at the very shallow end of the difference between Profit and Retained earnings, it needs to be so. In the interests of brevity, most of your points are taken care of with proper use and understanding of profits vs retained earnings. The GST paid would be claimed back by the vast majority of NFP’s that are registered for GST and you seem to operating under at least one false premise in your last paragraph. There are some concessions offered for “Basic Religious Charities” but these are pretty nuanced.
Israel Folau is reportedly on the verge of an NRL comeback
If they make a profit they cannot distribute it to their members, it has to sit in their bank account. Then it’s called retained earnings, not profit, profits can be distributed, retained earnings can’t.
Israel Folau is reportedly on the verge of an NRL comeback
Same as a business/Universities/services clubs etc etc etc. It’s really not rocket science, they also don’t pay tax on individual sales etc, it’s on the overall profit.
Not For Profits by very definition don’t make a profit to pay tax on. The whole “Tax religions” argument is really only pushed by those without a basic understanding of how taxation in Australia works, and so by raising it show them self to be illinformed.
Israel Folau is reportedly on the verge of an NRL comeback
It’s really pretty simple, profits get taxed, and there aren’t any. Similarly Universities have pretty good real-estate, but don’t get taxed as there is no profit. It’s not the special treatment that some think.
Israel Folau is reportedly on the verge of an NRL comeback
I suspect the uproar would only be a whimper, people have bigger issues to deal with now.
Qantas stops spending on sports sponsorships in major blow to Rugby Australia
It’s easier to have a baby than raise the dead, maybe waiting until the nail is in the coffin of RA and starting again is the best option, wouldn’t then have to deal with the RAs baggage.
Qantas stops spending on sports sponsorships in major blow to Rugby Australia
On the surface, it seems like he got 2nd prize, but when you delve a bit more into it, it has the potential to be the best option. It will be interesting to see if he can mix it with the top 3 with the Mercedes engine. It would have been a pretty easy decision to jump ship given that McLaren already has the better aerodynamics package, and will then get a vastly superior engine as opposed to staying at Renault.
Ricciardo rolls Renault for make-or-break McLaren move
“Nah….” Yeah, she was quick to jump on the bandwagon and not follow due process first, as you now agree to with the dates.
The siege on Castle in review
“You don’t understand how the process works.” His Instagram post was on the 10/4, they said they were going to terminate his contract on the 11/4, the breach notice wasn’t issued until the 15/4. She jumped the gun to appease those wanting his blood.
The siege on Castle in review
“So she was supposed to issue the breach notice arrange for the tribunal to take place, wait for the hearing to take place, wait for the decision to be returned and only then make a public comment?” You seem to have a propensity to try and misrepresent what has been said. You can make plenty of comments without someone saying they are going to terminate someone before due process has taken place. She could have easily condemned the post and said we will now go through the disciplinary procedures to determine the appropriate punishment.
The siege on Castle in review
“Folau’s lawyers obtained affidavits from Kepu and Kerevi relating to, among other things, their religious beliefs.” If that is the best you have, that is drawing an extremely longbow and “The contracts were solid. Employers win weaker cases than that all the time.” is at odds with every legal opinion I read on both sides of the coin who all said such cases always end up in a settlement as they are untested.
The siege on Castle in review
“The settlement took place because Folau’s lawyers were going to call several current and former wallabies as witnesses and ask them under oath what their views were on homosexuals.” I call BS, source?
The siege on Castle in review
“Do you think it’s really reasonable to say Raelene Castle has done something wrong” Yes, the buck has to stop somewhere, but where I think she was mostly at fault here was pushing hard into an area of uncertainty. She should have never broadcast her intention to terminate his contract before the legally questionable process had even taken place, that just ensured the whole situation went nuclear. Without knowing any legal advice, it is entirely probable that RA was advised of the ambiguity of the employment law and proceeded anyway.
The siege on Castle in review
“Folau’s case was based on his contract being legally binding.” Yes, from RA’s perspective, but hindsight and several million dollars suggest it probably shouldn’t have been, which is the failing.
The siege on Castle in review
“And it was never proven that it wasn’t legally binding.” I never claimed that it was, the payout he received certainly suggests it legally questionable which is what I said. If not the CEO, who do you think is responsible for ensuring its legality? Other codes may also have similar issues, that doesn’t absolve RC of her responsibility in regard to the issue.
The siege on Castle in review
Its composition is immaterial, there was never a question about if he breached the code of conduct, the question was whether it was legally enforceable. The panel was just there to see if he had breached the code of conduct which was in reality just a sideshow.
The siege on Castle in review
If due process was followed, and that led them into legally questionable territory, then I think that is even more at the CEO’s feet, whether he breached his contract is immaterial if it’s not legally binding. I think that the article is the most balanced one I have seen about RC tenure, but I think allowing legally questionable contracts to be implemented, and then proceeding as if they weren’t is a major failing of due process.
The siege on Castle in review
“She doesn’t need to articulate that to the fans though.” and yet she resigned to give “clean air”, that wouldn’t be needed if she had sold a vision that people had bought into.
Australian rugby has its problems, but Raelene Castle was not one of them
“But RWC years are outside the CEO’s control” Who is in control then? seems a bit baseless.
Raelene Castle resigns as Rugby Australia CEO
My take is that she didn’t do terribly, but borderline as to whether it was good enough or not. In a normal world, I think she should have seen out her contract, and not had it extended. I think the COVID-19 crisis had meant though that better is needed, and time and money is short. When you combine that with someone like Wiggs coming onto the board, who seems to be someone who rises to the occasion in a way that seems to highlight some of Castles shortcomings, I think it’s time to change. I feel a little for her, but that’s the way it often goes at the top, and they are usually well compensated for it.
Raelene Castle resigns as Rugby Australia CEO
“Actually no one at all has said that, but don’t let facts get in the way,” Nobody said “she took a thriving business and drove it into the abyss” either, but you liked that comment, so much for your care about facts. My comment was to counter obvious hyperbole with obvious hyperbole, but it also handily highlighted your lack of objectivity.
Raelene Castle resigns as Rugby Australia CEO
“The only thing that’s gone backwards is the Wallabies ranking” So they are in a financially better position now? I doubt it, that would have to be the main comparison for a CEO in my opinion and that was dire even before COVID-19. You seem to have cherrypicked some pretty particular results to try and make her look good, I am not claiming that she didn’t have any “wins” but as I said, the time for fiddling around the edges has long past. If she couldn’t make it work in a pre-COVID-19 world, then I cant see how she can after, Greenberg fell n his sword earlier and the NRL was doing a whole lot better than the ARU.
Raelene Castle resigns as Rugby Australia CEO
My view from a somewhat disinterested place is that after a reasonable amount of tenure, the game was in a worse place than when she started, yes it takes a while to turn a ship around and she might have slightly deviated course, but I think that was about it. Rugby in Australia doesn’t need someone to tweak around the edges it needs someone to revolutionise it. Maybe with Covid19 and the dire financial state rugby finds itself in, it means someone can come in and take a broom to what is existing, and plot a totally new course, not just hoping that plugging the ship will work.
Raelene Castle resigns as Rugby Australia CEO
The liability insurance doesn’t extend to negligence. Your description suggests you are negligent and should be removed as a board member….
That’s a big call for someone who still doesn’t seem to be able to get their head around the difference between profit and retained earnings, given your obvious lack of understanding of the issue, I don’t know what incorrect assumptions you are having to make to draw that conclusion.
Your response was so dumbed down it was just dumb. Confusing capital gains with sales isn’t complex…
No confusion here, they are both considered income, businesses pay tax on their net profit, and yes it was dumbed down, and you still appear not to get it.
You say I am operating under false premise but don’t expand….
Let’s start with the Pope making lots of money, then maybe, then maybe that it’s a”major issue” but it is all a little nonsensical as well.
Israel Folau is reportedly on the verge of an NRL comeback