Foundation:FoundationFutureState

Pros

1.) The corporation will be governed by an elected body chosen by the Gentoo community which retains it's autonomy. As stated at [1], "Gentoo will never be reigned by a company nor be dictated by an organization."

2.) The corporation may, at-will, contract the required services (e.g. bookkeeping/taxes) as needed to ensure compliance with all United States tax laws.

3.) By retaining services at-will, the corporation may lower overhead costs by selecting among various companies.

Cons

1.) The elected body must continue to deal with the financial and legal matters of the distribution (c.f. Pros 2).

1a.) Historically, there has been a low turnout of nominations for individuals to be considered for election to the board. This may be evident of the technically driven nature of most contributors/volunteers or simply because individuals were hesitant due to the dire tax situation that preceded.

2.) The lack of retained certified legal experts to advise should any potential lawsuits or other legal matters impact the distribution. 2a.) This has historically not been an issue, but threats have been made from disgruntled individuals.

3.) The corporation must ensure that the public support test is met. Currently, there is one donor that has been faithful in their donations which would break the public support test. However, such contributions can be denied (or a request to spread over multiple years) in order to meet such criteria [5] (among other articles available).

Pros

1.) The umbrella would manage all tax and bookkeeping related matters while ensuring compliance as a tax-exempt non-profit organization under United States law.

2.) The umbrella, as a broader set of non-profits, would allow for larger contributions while generally meeting the public support test (c.f. 501c3 Cons 3)

Cons

1.) The general electorate is dismissed and the distribution loses its autonomy. As such, interested parties must join the respective umbrella to influence (through voting or other measures) policy (e.g. licensing) and any other relevant legal or financial matters (note: this does not impact Gentoo's earmarked contributions).

2.) Umbrellas differ in the rates charged for sponsoring a project. Some may charge a flat rate (e.g. 10%) or may charge a monthly or annual fee. Fixed percentages may eventually cost more than retained services dependent on contributions while monthly/annual costs are predictable and recurring.

501(c)3 + business

• Mozilla Foundation 501(c)3 & Mozilla Corporation: the corporation was entirely owned by the 501(c)3.

501(c)6 + business

501(c)6 + 501(c)3

Umbrella 501(c)3 + business

Umbrella 501(c)6 + business

Umbrella 501(c)3 + 501(c)6

Umbrella 501(c)6 + 501(c)3

Other???

SFC

• Pros:
• Cons:
• Costs:
  • 10% of gross income?
• Governance:
  • See the representation section in https://sfconservancy.org/docs/sponsorship-agreement-template.pdf
  • The representation section contains multiple examples of possible structures

Linux Foundation

• Notes:
  • This would lead the Gentoo Foundation to being a Directed Fund under Linux Foundation, much like the Ceph Foundation
  • See example at Linux Foundation Networking Participation Agreement
• Pros:
  • ?
• Cons:
  • ?
• Costs:
  • Per document above:

    A General & Administrative (G&A) fee will be applied by the Linux Foundation to funds raised to cover Finance, Accounting, and operations. The G&A fee will be 9% of the Directed Fund’s first $1,000,000 of gross receipts each year and 6% of the Directed Fund’s gross receipts each year over $1,000,000.

• Governance:
  • ?

Open Collective

Open Collective is primarily a PLATFORM for running finances. It has individual fiscal host collectives, which set their own policies. SFC believes this is a good thing to have more choice: https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2020/jul/09/org-proliferation/