MFF's primary purpose is to "facilitate education in anthropomorphic literature and art", which cover many of its activities (like the Sparkledog panel I attended); donating to other non-profits is secondary. Still, it's hard to rationalize some scheduled events as educational. (I guess we touched on MPI/MUF at the MUCK meetup . . .)
You could also argue supporting the sale of art isn't exempt (though in that case, a lot of non-profit galleries out there may need to worry). The tax court did just that in 1985, stating that since Archon applied no quality controls to the items offered, it was not engaged in art education.
You are not operated exclusively for exempt purposes within the meaning of section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, and you are operated, in part, for the private benefit of artists and dealers. Also, you are operated in furtherance of substantial nonexempt commercial, and social and entertainment purposes.
Whether anyone would benefit from a strict enforcement of the exempt organization rules is another matter. MFF, for example, succeeds in raising far more per head than any other furry convention of its size, and I think the art show managed to be beneficial this year despite its lack of selectivity. Both MFF and AC also pick art awards. But certainly, if you're starting a new convention, think long and hard about whether you could reasonably defend your filing choice in tax court.
I've seen MFF give $30,000 in direct support to its annual charity - enough to give other board members pause before they voted it through. Certainly some of that Shiny Sponsor money can be attributed to such gifts.
MFF's primary purpose is to "facilitate education in anthropomorphic literature and art", which cover many of its activities (like the Sparkledog panel I attended); donating to other non-profits is secondary. Still, it's hard to rationalize some scheduled events as educational. (I guess we touched on MPI/MUF at the MUCK meetup . . .)
You could also argue supporting the sale of art isn't exempt (though in that case, a lot of non-profit galleries out there may need to worry). The tax court did just that in 1985, stating that since Archon applied no quality controls to the items offered, it was not engaged in art education.
Furry cons don't look great here. MFF says they "want anyone with interest to be able to display their work", and they're not alone; AC (not a 501(c)(3)) will "accept anyone who has their reservation in on time". FC requires that the majority of an artist's work be on-theme, but is silent as to quality. It's best not to think about games (though Lupus in Tabula has werewolf art!).
Whether anyone would benefit from a strict enforcement of the exempt organization rules is another matter. MFF, for example, succeeds in raising far more per head than any other furry convention of its size, and I think the art show managed to be beneficial this year despite its lack of selectivity. Both MFF and AC also pick art awards. But certainly, if you're starting a new convention, think long and hard about whether you could reasonably defend your filing choice in tax court.