Anton Kovalyov in an article on "Spraggett on Chess" website

[Caesar Posylek]

Re: Anton Kovalyov in an article on "Spraggett on Chess" website

This is a very nice photo of Anton:

[Caesar Posylek]

Re: Anton Kovalyov in an article on "Spraggett on Chess" website

Please see his collection of photos here: https://www.google.com.om/search?q=a...w=1920&bih=961

[Caesar Posylek]

Re: Anton Kovalyov in an article on "Spraggett on Chess" website

Does anybody know when is Anton next chess tournament?

[Hal Bond]

Re: Anton Kovalyov in an article on "Spraggett on Chess" website

I believe I was President at the time. I worked with our Treasurer, Bob Gillanders, to come up with a plan that would permit the issuance of a tax receipt. I can't recall the exact details and I don't believe they were finalized, but we linked it to Anton's appearance at the Canadian Open in Montreal that year. This was not good enough for Kevin, who accused the executive of being racist, inept, etc. As Patrick Kirby suggests, it really makes no sense. It makes one wonder what representations Kevin made to the prospective donor.

[Brad Thomson]

Re: Anton Kovalyov in an article on "Spraggett on Chess" website

When I worked at the CFC we had a government auditor come in and spend a day with us, going over everything.

I specifically asked her about this type of situation. Her answer was clear. NO, you cannot accept a donation and issue a tax receipt if the donor wants the money spent in any specific way.

If the CFC had accepted this donation, on the agreement that the money would be spent in any particular way, and then issued a tax receipt, it would have been breaking the law.

[Jeff Verman]

Re: Anton Kovalyov in an article on "Spraggett on Chess" website

When I worked at the CFC we had a government auditor come in and spend a day with us, going over everything.

I specifically asked her about this type of situation. Her answer was clear. NO, you cannot accept a donation and issue a tax receipt if the donor wants the money spent in any specific way.

If the CFC had accepted this donation, on the agreement that the money would be spent in any particular way, and then issued a tax receipt, it would have been breaking the law.

My understanding - and I'm no expert in this matter - is that you can specifically donate money to - say - The National Ballet's Dancers' Wellness Program - and get a tax receipt. What you can't do is specifically donate that money to the ballet company with the instruction that it be paid to a particular dancer who can do with it what he/she wishes, and still get a tax receipt.

Basically, the value of the donation should surely have to go to the organization getting it. The ability to issue tax receipts is a privilege not a right! We taxpayers pay to give organizations such a privilege. Getting a tax receipt is always at taxpayer expense.

I'd be the first to say tax money isn't always wisely spent. But that doesn't mean we should encourage abuse of the system.

Our government sponsors so many other sports, including Ringette! I'm not arguing against such sponsorship - just pointing out where the real battle should be for chess.

This is just my own opinion, for what it is worth.

[Gordon Ritchie]

Re: Anton Kovalyov in an article on "Spraggett on Chess" website

The whole story looks self-serving and fishy to me. Patrick is dead on. This alleged sponsor could simply have given the money without a receipt or if he was really picky give the after-tax amount as Kirby suggests. Particularly given the pitiful sums involved.

[Ed Zator]

Re: Anton Kovalyov in an article on "Spraggett on Chess" website

The whole story doesn't make much sense to me. If they give $15,000 and receive a donation credit worth $x, their effective donation is $15,000 - $x.

If the CFC declined to issue them a tax receipt what would be stopping them from just donating the after tax amount?

Because the X here is the $15,000! Sponsors that want a tax credit to cover their donation, want taxpayers to foot the bill.

But it is unfortunate that the rules can't allow sponsoring individuals. The government is worried about kickback schemes
by companies to dodge paying their taxes.

[Fred Harvey]

Re: Anton Kovalyov in an article on "Spraggett on Chess" website

It seems that some posters on here don't know what happened a few years ago. This is when a few parents of kids going to the WYCC asked the CFC to give them tax receipts for their expenses in funding their kids costs to attend the CYCC. The CFC obliged, and then found that Revenue Canada correctly took a very dim view of this finagling, and ultimately rescinded their charitable status.

It was a very bad scene, and the president at the time abruptly resigned mid term, for fear of possible legal entanglements. Surprised he is still in organized chess?

And for those that will criticize the CFC for not staying on top of various stuff...the officers are volunteers, and not really answerable to all you perfectionists as to what or not they have to spend their life doing. I'm not sure what more you all expect, but until the money starts flowing into the CFC from the members, you get what you get!

[Bob Armstrong]

Re: Anton Kovalyov in an article on "Spraggett on Chess" website

It seems that some posters on here don't know what happened a few years ago. This is when a few parents of kids going to the WYCC asked the CFC to give them tax receipts for their expenses in funding their kids costs to attend the CYCC. The CFC obliged, and then found that Revenue Canada correctly took a very dim view of this finagling, and ultimately rescinded their charitable status.

It was a very bad scene, and the president at the time abruptly resigned mid term, for fear of possible legal entanglements. Surprised he is still in organized chess?

And for those that will criticize the CFC for not staying on top of various stuff...the officers are volunteers, and not really answerable to all you perfectionists as to what or not they have to spend their life doing. I'm not sure what more you all expect, but until the money starts flowing into the CFC from the members, you get what you get!

Hi Fred:

What you have said is not quite accurate, though the popular belief. It is true that Revenue Canada was investigating CFC transactions. But our pro bono lawyer was putting up a stiff battle that the CFC was OK. It had turned into a Mexican standoff for many years. RC did nothing.

Then the PC Government went hunting generally for charities they felt should never have gotten charitable status in the first place initially...that at that time they didn't qualify, and should never have received charitable status. CFC came on the radar on this second ground, while the first ground was still deadlocked.

CFC fought to show its "educational" elements, but RC ruled that CFC's purpose had to be "totally educational" to qualify. Clearly CFC is not this. CFC has no successful legal argument to entitle it to keep its charitable status.

Ergo, CFC's Charitable Status was rescinded, not on the ground of wrong issuing of tax receipts in the case you mentioned, but because CFC never was a "Charity" under the strict definition, and should never have qualified when it first applied for charitable status.

It was never charged that CFC did anything wrong (there was just an investigation, and then ongoing negotiations). And there was nothing CFC could have done not to lose its charitable status. It fought the good fight, but was destined to lose.

Bob Armstrong, CFC Public Relations Coordinator.

[Vlad Drkulec]

Re: Anton Kovalyov in an article on "Spraggett on Chess" website

And for those that will criticize the CFC for not staying on top of various stuff...the officers are volunteers, and not really answerable to all you perfectionists as to what or not they have to spend their life doing. I'm not sure what more you all expect, but until the money starts flowing into the CFC from the members, you get what you get!

My understanding is that the decision to not fight the loss of charitable status came down to the fear that if they fought the decision too hard that they might lose the Foundation assets that had been built up. Not fighting might have been a reasonable decision based on the assets which finance a portion of the CFC budget versus the likely cost in charitable donations which were not particularly significant in recent years. I wish that they had continued the fight as the loss of those assets was an unlikely outcome in my opinion but like you say the people doing the fighting were volunteers with a limited amount of time and energy.

It takes a significant amount of time and energy just to maintain the status quo and fight entropy.

[Steve Douglas]

Re: Anton Kovalyov in an article on "Spraggett on Chess" website

Hi Vlad:

I wasn't involved with the CFC issue and IANAL and I don't claim expertise or direct knowledge.

However, to become a charity an entity has to have a stated "purpose" (i.e. research for cancer cures). The CFC (and CMA I believe) had "education" as one of their stated purposes, along with "promoting chess". While "promoting chess" may or may not be something that the Canadian government approves of (apparently not right now), they have almost always approved of education.

Education charities have become a kind-of industry in recent years. Very fashionable. You can hear their ads on 680News dealing with Math skills, Phonics, etc. There has also been a huge growth in private schools all of which have applied to be "charities". The CFC got swept up in what was a larger review of all charities, particularly those claiming "education" as a purpose.

Bob Armstrong is very right to point out that the CFC did not "get its license revoked" because of fraudulent receipts. They were "delisted" along with all sorts of other organizations because couldn't demonstrate that they were (still) a legitimate charity.

If the CFC had issued the tax receipt for a targeted $15K donation so they would have been complicit in a fraud on the Canadian taxpayers for roughly $7.5K and there is NO QUESTION that would have been caught. Last I saw that would have been a sizable chunk of the CFC's entire operating budget. As Patrick Kirby said, there was nothing stopping the sponsor from giving either the whole amount or the after-tax amount directly.

Steve

(BTW Bob A., this would have happened regardless of which government was in power--this issue had been building for some time.)

(Vlad, it would have made a LOT of sense if the loss of charitable status was inevitable to stop fighting and hang onto what was already donated.)

(I don't know what the situation is with CMA, but there is no question they provide education, whereas the CFC would be hard-pressed to explain it. I don't know whether CMA was reviewed. Larry B. probably knows the most about any of this stuff.)

[Larry Bevand]

Re: Anton Kovalyov in an article on "Spraggett on Chess" website

Hi Steve,

We incorporated the Chess'n Math Association as a not-for profit organization in 1985 in Quebec. If I had known what I know today (in otherwords I never expected the organization to grow to this extent) I would have done things differently. So basically CMA is a not-for-profit that can do business in Quebec and Ontario...with affiliates in other provinces. We can not issue tax receipts...however I guarantee you that if you donate to our organization, your money will be used wisely as per your request...as long as I am in charge. We receive about $5,000 a year in private donations (NO TAX RECEIPTS) while the rest of our revenues come from our programs and our retail sales. We are doing extremely well these days thanks to the incredible work done by our Toronto Director, Francis Rodrigues, his family (Clara, Gary and Kirk) and his team of staff and teachers.

I did see a lawyer on getting a National charitable status. Essentially (if my memory is still good)...we would have to wind down the CMA and re-incorporate Nationally as a charity. All I remember is that is was very complicated and there were no guarantees. Gary Gladstone (AN AWESOME GUY!) has been very helpful (and patient with me! :) on this matter.

I will speak with him this week and see what I misunderstood on this :).

My dream today: The Chess'n Math Association be recognized as a Canadian Charity with the objective of bringing the game of chess to Canadian youngsters. Is this possible? From what I understand it is more complicated than it sounds :)

Larry

[Gary Ruben]

Re: Anton Kovalyov in an article on "Spraggett on Chess" website

The CFC doesn't need charitable status to be viable. Some time ago I suggested doubling the membership fees and overhauling the life membership fee to reflect the higher life expectancies. It hasn't been done.

A national organization can not be properly run on chump change, in my opinion of course.

[Vlad Drkulec]

Re: Anton Kovalyov in an article on "Spraggett on Chess" website

The CFC doesn't need charitable status to be viable.

You are correct. We do need charitable status or some equivalent such as sporting federation status in order to be able to receive corporate donations for certain activities that we engage in such as sending teams to an olympiad or kids to WYCC or World Junior events. Small corporate donations in the $500 to $1500 range are relatively easy to come by if you are a charitable group.

Some time ago I suggested doubling the membership fees and overhauling the life membership fee to reflect the higher life expectancies. It hasn't been done.

Doubling the membership fees without increasing services in a way that is meaningful to the average member would be a suicidal course of action in my opinion. Doubling the membership fees could cut in half the number of people willing to join the CFC if the demand follows a normal downward sloping demand curve. This in turn would cut rating fees in half so you might even see a decrease in net income as a result depending on the slope of the demand curve.

Life membership fees are a bargain for individuals who wish to play tournament chess for a lifetime. They are also a bargain for the CFC because we get players to commit to a lifetime of being a member.

A national organization can not be properly run on chump change, in my opinion of course.