Castanet

"The Canada Revenue Agency has stripped the tax-exempt status from 67 charities, including a B.C. food bank that used a higher chunk of its donations to cover the president’s wages and expenses than it did buying food for clients. Bette’s Single Family & Seniors Food Bank of Westbank, which opened in 2008, violated numerous sections of the Income Tax Act, according to the CRA. However, the food bank’s president said it would appeal the decision."

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Ottawa ... story.html

Sadly, why am I not surprised. Good luck to Ms. Ladd, but her response sounds like so much bluster.

Not surprising at all. Lots more to the story than what Ms. Ladd is letting on. As for the auditor, very professional and knew exactly what she was doing.

Considering the "headquarters" for this food bank are a beaten down old shack on a rundown property it does not surprise me at all that the paperwork was organized "haphazardly". Good luck Ms Ladd but i don't think you have a leg to stand on...take that to the bank.

This is small fries - exactly the kind of business the CRA loves to go after, since they are easy targets, lacking the funds to challenge them.

In a small business, racking up 30, 40, 50 or even 100K in expenses is ridiculously easy. And keeping receipts in a box, however haphazardly, is most definitely not uncommon. Especially if one cannot afford an accountant.

They were (are) providing a vital service to people in need. And from their (small) numbers it seems that is what they were (are) doing.

She can afford an accountant, plus she paid big bucks to a retired auditor who was going to make this non-compliance problem disappear.

Two people designed a very simple filing system for the charity - she ignored both.

When you take "administration" fees (25% for each worker and 50% for Ms. Ladd) off the top of the money they collected individually, the government sits up and takes notice. She was given numerous opportunities to rectify the situation and ignored them all. She was also advised by numerous people what constituted legitimate expenses - her vehicle insurance, fuel, maintenance or repairs, cell phone, internet, etc. weren't legitimate food bank expenses but she continued charging them to the charity.

oneh2obabe wrote:
When you take "administration" fees (25% for the each worker and 50% for Ms. Ladd) off the top of all money donated, the government sits up and takes notice. She was given numerous opportunities to rectify the situation and ignored them all. She was also advised by numerous people what constituted legitimate expenses (didn't include her personal vehicle insurance, fuel, maintenance or repairs, cell phone, internet, etc.) but continued charging them against the charity.

As for administration fees - would that be considered pay for work performed? If so, how is that not an expense, unless one expects them to work for free?

As to the rest of your post, where are you getting this information? I did not see that in the article.

Yes, administration fees are classified as expenses, but she was told by more than one person the 50% she claimed for herself was excessive.

oneh2obabe wrote:Yes, administration fees are classified as expenses, but she was told by more than one person the 50% she claimed for herself was excessive.

Okay, but again, where are you getting your information? I'd like to look at it for myself.

Sn0man wrote:Okay, but again, where are you getting your information? I'd like to look at it for myself.

Check your PM.

oneh2obabe wrote:Check your PM.

Fair enough - I withdraw my comments.

I , wonder if there's any more to the story about the Lanthiers pulling out of the other Westside foodbank, as announced in a recent ad in the Capital News I believe it was,after umpteen years at the helm.

More than likely it's because Faith has ongoing medical problems and doctors can't find the cause.

Sorry to hear, they put a lot of time and life into that. Who's in charge now?

Not sure. Will ask Marge when I see her later this week.