p*********e
发帖数: 32207 | 1 ☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
Notsaw (没看见 -- 系统发文延时 10 分钟) 于 (Mon Nov 15 18:06:58 2010, 美东) 提到:
USTCAF 的确是海外校友捐款方便
USTCIF 是国内的方便
两者还是相互独立比较好
作为海外校友，实在是不方便捐款到 USTCIF，
而且 USTCAF 可以接受捐款人雇主公司的 match
所以 USTCIF 不要总是跟 USTCAF 打岔
这样校友才放心
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
henry5819 (henry) 于 (Wed Nov 17 00:47:56 2010, 美东) 提到:
在国外给if捐款是不方便，除非有国内银行的账号。但是我连续两年给AF捐款，从来都
找不到自己的捐赠信息，非要我发email联系，才更新网站。AF的网站做得很差很差，
找个信息费老大劲了。尤其对那个subfund的名单印象深刻，就像一个大矩阵
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
zhiyan (moonriver99) 于 (Wed Nov 17 01:22:19 2010, 美东) 提到:
我给IF捐款基本是捐两次成功一次，而且每次信用卡公司都打电话给我是不是帐号被盗
用了。确实不方便。
此外，我需要澄清一点：争论的核心是要不要对AF进行独立第三方的审计，IF已经接受
了审计，而且每年都这么作。还需要澄清一点，争论的双方并不是AF和IF，AF现在的管理委员会也是强烈支持将财务管理规范化的。
大概8年前我开始给AF捐款的时候，我老婆就问我怎么能给一个连审计都不作而且缺乏
外部监督的机构捐款，我当时连想都不想这个问题，因为自己的校友是怎么可能拿我们
的钱干不正当的事情呢？
当然，现在这个争论已经完全没有必要，AF新的财务官克非已经承诺要尽快将财务管理
规范化。大家给他们一点时间吧。等AF的独立第三方的审计报告出来，我会继续给AF捐
款。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
amedio (Boasting Father) 于 (Wed Nov 17 09:17:25 2010, 美东) 提到:
我给IF捐款时，除了要收手续费，没觉得哪不方便；他们效率极高，很快就受到确认。
管理委员会也是强烈支持将财务管理规范化的。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
webwater (deals508.com) 于 (Thu Nov 18 01:50:47 2010, 美东) 提到:
如果 AUDIT 不花钱, 我不反对.
如果需要花钱, 请先公布大概要多少再说.
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
zhiyan (moonriver99) 于 (Thu Nov 18 02:42:54 2010, 美东) 提到:
大概几千吧。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
tosi (夏虫语冰) 于 (Thu Nov 18 10:21:58 2010, 美东) 提到:
I personally asked in my local area and without going into real details of
work load, the ball park number was $6000.
There is one AF life-time member who has real world experience in hiring for
auditions for his/her own business in Eastern USA. S/he recently informed
us the amount could be between $10K-20K.
There are two issues here:
(1) For a one-time auditions to cover the past 15 years of records, it will
cost a lot more than a yearly or bi-annually audition because of more work
load. How much could it be? I have no idea.
(2) From the prospective of AF's cashflow, esp. the cashflow in 2010, it is
clear that the expense of $5K-$20K on external professional audition would
be a significant drainage of AF's General Fund and there is even doubts
whether AF would be sustainable if the cost on audition is on the high end
of estimates and if the audition is to be conducted yearly.
If you have doubts of this fact, please check for yourself: most of the
donations in 2010 were for some subfunds and money in subfunds are either of
small amounts in their nature or, more importantly, with stringent
regulations on its specific use. So those money in subfunds cannot be used
for operational costs such as audition, at least before the bylaws are
revised.
On the other hand, the General Fund or the so-called Operational Cost
Subfund has a low running balance and the incoming amount in the whole year
of 2010 is expected to be between $10K and $20, unless there will be a big
fat donation check to be made in the remainder of 2010. With such a
cashflow for AF may not be sustainable at all, if you also consider the
facts that for example, the first year Good Will Fellowships (around 50
students per grade, $400 per person, therefore $20K) are pre-paid by the
General Fund.
One may argue that when the sponsors are found, those pre-paid money will be
paid back to the General Fund and the balance will be restored. Yes, but
there is an attrition rate, not due to AF's overhead (AF has no overhead on
any of the subfund!), but because (1) some sponsors do not want to
retrospectively pay for those fellowships that had been covered by the
General Fund, (2) Withe the Good Will Fellowship being in existence in ten
years or so, the pool of the sponsors have been reached to a certain extent
that without many more new donors, it is harder and harder to recruit
sponsors for continuously coming batches of new Good Will students (50
students per grade).
AF may need to consider to be able to adjust the size of the recipient
students in future years, but it takes time to reach a consensus and then
talk to USTC for the adjustments to take place.
(3) Just as there are AF members who advocate strongly for external audits,
there are also members, not in rare number, who would be concerned by the
cost associated. Those a few names who have been depicted or implicated as
to being opposed to audits may not be opposed to the idea of audit, but
their take could be that the AF money cannot/may not/would rather not be
paid on this type of cost, since the operational model of AF has been (1)
independence from USTC and other alumni association, and (2) volunteering-
based minimum-cost oriented.
Please be patient and let the GB take their due course of actions.
Please refrain from making finger-pointing arguments because that would
bring hurt to our alumni community, to the AF and to the volunteers who have
worked/been working very hard to get things sorted out in the hope of
bringing the AF to a better shape with a mroe robust mechanism and firm
ground.
Thank you!
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
ustcren (alan) 于 (Thu Nov 18 12:35:02 2010, 美东) 提到:
How about outsourcing this auditing to China?
for
informed
will
is
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
RobinChen (大耳朵) 于 (Thu Nov 18 13:45:39 2010, 美东) 提到:
can some CFA alumi volunteer to do so?
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
tosi (夏虫语冰) 于 (Thu Nov 18 13:52:10 2010, 美东) 提到:
Let me be straightforward here and I do not mean to disagree with your
suggestion: Unless such audition result would qualify for uses with USA/IRS
code in case of such needs, the money to spend on it would not be meaningful
. I do not enough knowledge about auditing and whether USA recognize
auditing results produced in China, and how much less the cost will be.
Lastly, we appreciate every suggestion. But as an organization with bylaws
and run by a group of volunteers who all have a full-time job during the day
across the continents, it is not possible for any suggestions to make into
the discussion instantly and be put into effect without sufficient (
sometimes lengthy) discussions. For example, without knowing the cost
comparison and the acceptability in USA of an audition from China, no wise
decision can be and should be made.
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
ustcren (alan) 于 (Thu Nov 18 16:22:30 2010, 美东) 提到:
I fully respect all the volunteer job by USTCAF.
If USA/IRS has such an auditing requirement, USTCAF has to do it anyhow.
Then, there is no point to discuss about whether we should do it or not.
If auditing is an option, I do not see there is a problem to outsource this
auditing job to China. Alternatively, we can find a volunteer alumni CFA to
do this (if possible).
IRS
meaningful
bylaws
day
into
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
tosi (夏虫语冰) 于 (Thu Nov 18 16:41:56 2010, 美东) 提到:
Let me use the following quote :
"US Small Business administration requires from companies for its annual
certification of the designation of disadvantage small business status -
a) if revenue is less than 1 million per year - it requires some kind of
bookkeeping (excel file etc) or accounting software (preferred) for
bookkeeping being used, a copy of financial statement used for tax
preparation, and the tax return be sent for SBA review. "
USTCAF currently falls in (a). For larger revenues, external audit is
required. That being said, if one day USTCAF is subject to IRS check-up,
then it will find itself in awkward situation if the book audited by a CPA
in China will not be acceptable to IRS and that the AF will have to pay for
an US audit again.
Well, if it would be acceptable, the issue is partly resolved. That's why I
said that it can be discussed, but no decision should be rushed to before
better details (pros and cons) of such an options is known and discussed.
This will not take place as fast as you and me typing on a keyboard :-(
As for volunteer CFA/CPA to do the audit, that will be great! Due to recent
events, there will possibly be someone to do so. We will welcome more such
volunteers, since the task is really heavy: 15 years of books and into the
future, continuous inputs.
As Bai Dawei said, the AF will be operating by its bylaws and established
routines, not by a particular person. However, in the end, volunteers are
needed each year and more than one volunteers are need to help keep AF alive
and running, even if AF has the perfect bylaws (which is not perfect yet)
and a perfectly clean audited book. In this regard, please help me pass the
message of calling for more volunteers: with one more volunteer, we can do
more, do better.
this
to
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
rgg (rgg) 于 (Thu Nov 18 17:10:08 2010, 美东) 提到:
可见非要求审计是无事生非，借机生事。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
ustcren (alan) 于 (Thu Nov 18 17:15:03 2010, 美东) 提到:
Thanks for clarification!
In other words, external auditing is a must if USTCAF becomes larger. Then,
we'd better establish the auditing mechanism now. Maybe, we can find some
USTC alumni who are doing PhDs or Masters in accounting.
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
ktw (Bye-bye朋友们) 于 (Thu Nov 18 18:05:53 2010, 美东) 提到:
In California, the limit is $2 million.
" 2. Independent Audit Of Annual Financial Statements Now Required For
Charities With Gross Revenues Of $2 Million Or More [Government Code
section 12586(e)(1)]
►Charitable corporations with gross revenues of $2 million or more
must prepare annual financial statements audited by an independent
certified public accountant (CPA). The statements must use generally
accepted accounting principles. The independent CPA must follow
generally accepted auditing standards. "
http://ag.ca.gov/charities/publications/nonprofit_integrity_act_nov04.
pdf
larger. Then,
some
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
ktw (Bye-bye朋友们) 于 (Thu Nov 18 18:18:58 2010, 美东) 提到:
BTW, I don't think auditing can be outsourced to China. It must be done
by "Certified Public Accountant".
For
http://ag.ca.gov/charities/publications/nonprofit_integrity_act_nov04.
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
tosi (夏虫语冰) 于 (Thu Nov 18 18:48:06 2010, 美东) 提到:
If ustcaf has a revenue exceeding USD 1 or 2 million, it of course will have
to have independent audit done annually.
If some volunteer CPA(s) would like to offer their help in auditing, why not
ustcaf to accept it!
At this stage of annual incoming donations of about $20K if you exclude
subfunds, it is a practical issue of affordability.
,
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
tosi (夏虫语冰) 于 (Thu Nov 18 19:10:49 2010, 美东) 提到:
To utscen:
one more point to make: since you mentioned "alumni pursuing graduate
degrees in accounting", does it imply that you would be fine with an
informal but still rigorous audit? I think a student in accounting cannot
produce a legally standing audit report (If I am wrong on this, please
correct me), but if an informal independent report would make most of AF
members feel assured and that AF would be able to find such volunteers, that
is the way worth pursuing before AF enters the next stage of being legally
required to be professionally audited.
So our stance are not so different as it initially appeared :-)
,
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
ustcren (alan) 于 (Thu Nov 18 20:00:28 2010, 美东) 提到:
I just expect to establish the auditing mechanism. This is good for USTCAF.
I don't mind if this is done by volunteer CPAs or other paid services.
that
legally
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
zhiyan (moonriver99) 于 (Thu Nov 18 21:50:01 2010, 美东) 提到:
审计的成本高并不是一个组织拒绝外部审计的理由。即使现在由于成本的原因无法进行
（其实AF并为正式表态无法进行审计），内部的监控也必不可少，像过去那样一切财务
大权操于一人之手的情况也确实令人担心。起码AF应该作到钱账分离，收支两条线。
对任何一个组织，内外的监控都是必要的，也是发展壮大的前提条件。希望工程就是由
于缺乏内外的监督而一塌糊涂的。因此要求审计并非无事生非。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
rgg (rgg) 于 (Thu Nov 18 23:17:50 2010, 美东) 提到:
就AF目前规模而言，要求审计只不过是良好建议，锦上添花；
但某些人的帖子把没有审计当成致命弱点，重大把柄来反复来事儿，就是无事生非，居
心叵测。
你是在提建议还是在批判AF没审计，这里有很大不同。
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
ustcren (alan) 于 (Fri Nov 19 00:10:46 2010, 美东) 提到:
我相信绝大多数校友没有怀着无事生非的心态, 大家也都理解自愿的工作不容易. 其实
任何制度的完善都是对当事人的一种保护.
我现在可以理解目前来说外部审计从成本上不可行, 但可以建立INTERNAL AUDITING
MECHANISM. 这其实和对校友的信任无关的, 是一种必要的职业化操作.
☆─────────────────────────────────────☆
Longstreet (Longstreet) 于 (Fri Nov 19 01:15:44 2010, 美东) 提到:
MARK |
|
