The Experts below are selected from a list of 153 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Sarah Bitomsky - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Do Non-Profit Organisations 'Trade' Under the New Work Choices Legislation?
Keeping good companies, 2020Co-Authors: Myles Mcgregor-lowndes, Sarah BitomskyAbstract:The new Workplace Relations Amendment (Work Choices) Act 2005 (Cth) is having a significant impact on all employers and employees, but its applicability to Nonprofit Corporations is unclear. The amended Workplace Relations Act 1996 as a consequence now applies to a “constitutional corporation which is in turn defined as a “foreign corporation, or a trading or financial corporation formed within Australia as per paragraph 51(xx) of the Australian Constitution. The crux of the issue is which Nonprofit organisations, if any, are “trading Corporations? The key dividing line for business organisations is whether they are “Corporations(rather than partnerships or trusts). Clearly, the vast majority of business organisations trade. For Nonprofit organisations the dividing line will be both whether they are a “corporation and whether they “trade".
-
Do Nonprofit Organisations “Trade"Under The New Work Choices Legislation?
2007Co-Authors: Myles Mcgregor-lowndes, Sarah BitomskyAbstract:The new Workplace Relations Amendment (Work Choices) Act 2005 (Cth) is having a significant impact on all employers and employees, but its applicability to Nonprofit Corporations is unclear. The amended Workplace Relations Act 1996 as a consequence now applies to a “constitutional corporation which is in turn defined as a “foreign corporation, or a trading or financial corporation formed within Australia as per paragraph 51(xx) of the Australian Constitution. The crux of the issue is which Nonprofit organisations, if any, are “trading Corporations? The key dividing line for business organisations is whether they are “Corporations(rather than partnerships or trusts). Clearly, the vast majority of business organisations trade. For Nonprofit organisations the dividing line will be both whether they are a “corporation and whether they “trade".
Eric C Hallstrom - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
here we go again the conversion of qualified scholarship funding Corporations from Nonprofit to for profit status what we can learn from the health care conversion bonanza
The Journal of Corporation Law, 2000Co-Authors: Eric C HallstromAbstract:Qualified scholarship funding Corporations (QSFCs) are Nonprofit Corporations established solely for the purpose of acquiring student loan notes from lenders participating in federal student loan programs, ensuring that the lenders have the capital necessary to originate new student loans. In 1996, new legislation made it possible for these secondary-loan buyers to transfer their student loan activities to a for-profit entity. Current economic and political conditions have amplified the desire of some student loan guarantors to participate in the primary and secondary-loan markets without the restrictions that accompany their tax-favorable status. These conversions will only become more common in the future. The issues involved in the conversion of QSFCs from Nonprofit to for-profit status mirror those raised by the numerous conversions that took place in the health care sector during the 1990s. This Note attempts to identify the most important aspects of QSFC conversions given their factual context. The experiences within the health care sector provide additional insight into the nature of the conversions, as well as proposals for reform. The author concludes that public disclosure and effective enforcement should be the aim of any policy geared towards improving the responsiveness of these Nonprofit Corporations and identifies a number of possible changes that will greatly increase the likelihood of more successful future conversion transactions.
-
Here We Go Again?The Conversion of Qualified Scholarship Funding Corporations from Nonprofit to For-Profit Status: What We Can Learn from The Health Care Conversion Bonanza
The Journal of Corporation Law, 2000Co-Authors: Eric C HallstromAbstract:Qualified scholarship funding Corporations (QSFCs) are Nonprofit Corporations established solely for the purpose of acquiring student loan notes from lenders participating in federal student loan programs, ensuring that the lenders have the capital necessary to originate new student loans. In 1996, new legislation made it possible for these secondary-loan buyers to transfer their student loan activities to a for-profit entity. Current economic and political conditions have amplified the desire of some student loan guarantors to participate in the primary and secondary-loan markets without the restrictions that accompany their tax-favorable status. These conversions will only become more common in the future. The issues involved in the conversion of QSFCs from Nonprofit to for-profit status mirror those raised by the numerous conversions that took place in the health care sector during the 1990s. This Note attempts to identify the most important aspects of QSFC conversions given their factual context. The experiences within the health care sector provide additional insight into the nature of the conversions, as well as proposals for reform. The author concludes that public disclosure and effective enforcement should be the aim of any policy geared towards improving the responsiveness of these Nonprofit Corporations and identifies a number of possible changes that will greatly increase the likelihood of more successful future conversion transactions.
Myles Mcgregor-lowndes - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Do Non-Profit Organisations 'Trade' Under the New Work Choices Legislation?
Keeping good companies, 2020Co-Authors: Myles Mcgregor-lowndes, Sarah BitomskyAbstract:The new Workplace Relations Amendment (Work Choices) Act 2005 (Cth) is having a significant impact on all employers and employees, but its applicability to Nonprofit Corporations is unclear. The amended Workplace Relations Act 1996 as a consequence now applies to a “constitutional corporation which is in turn defined as a “foreign corporation, or a trading or financial corporation formed within Australia as per paragraph 51(xx) of the Australian Constitution. The crux of the issue is which Nonprofit organisations, if any, are “trading Corporations? The key dividing line for business organisations is whether they are “Corporations(rather than partnerships or trusts). Clearly, the vast majority of business organisations trade. For Nonprofit organisations the dividing line will be both whether they are a “corporation and whether they “trade".
-
Do Nonprofit Organisations “Trade"Under The New Work Choices Legislation?
2007Co-Authors: Myles Mcgregor-lowndes, Sarah BitomskyAbstract:The new Workplace Relations Amendment (Work Choices) Act 2005 (Cth) is having a significant impact on all employers and employees, but its applicability to Nonprofit Corporations is unclear. The amended Workplace Relations Act 1996 as a consequence now applies to a “constitutional corporation which is in turn defined as a “foreign corporation, or a trading or financial corporation formed within Australia as per paragraph 51(xx) of the Australian Constitution. The crux of the issue is which Nonprofit organisations, if any, are “trading Corporations? The key dividing line for business organisations is whether they are “Corporations(rather than partnerships or trusts). Clearly, the vast majority of business organisations trade. For Nonprofit organisations the dividing line will be both whether they are a “corporation and whether they “trade".
Roger R. Stough - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Evaluating state cooperative technology programs: With a Virginia case study, and comparative data from Illinois
Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 2003Co-Authors: Jakeb D Riggle, Roger R. StoughAbstract:One of the strategies for economic development to emerge during the 1970s and 1980s to stem decline due to industrial restructuring in the United States was the formation of science and technology initiatives in many states. This strategy was of interest because it suggests the creation of high-wage jobs through the application and development of technology. States in the industrialized part of the United States were losing large numbers of high-wage industrial jobs, as restructuring occurred and the jobs moved offshore or were replaced with technology. These initiatives took several forms including, in some states, departments or secretariats of technology, the formation of authorities that were state agencies but one step removed from the legislature and executive branches and the initiatives that were set up as Nonprofit Corporations. Today, science and technology programs exist in every state of the United States. In the mid-1990s, the authors were asked to develop a methodology to measure the outputs and outcomes of one of the state centers in science and technology, a program that was increasingly being focused on technology and commercialization rather than primarily on basic or pure research. A methodology was created by the authors in collaboration with the Battelle Institute and was implemented first in 1996. The purpose of this paper is to explain the methodology developed and how it was implemented in an effort to illustrate a number of issues that arise around the issue of evaluating such programs and to explore the policy impact of such studies. The issues include sample selection, survey design, interview protocol, management of client and research team relations, validity and research protocol. © 2003 Published by Elsevier Science Inc.
K J Hedlund - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the role of 63 20 Nonprofit Corporations in public private infrastructure financings
Public Works Financing, 1997Co-Authors: K J HedlundAbstract:The use of so-called "63-20 Corporations" in structuring public/private infrastructure financings is being promoted as a way to preserve the ability for a project to be financed with tax-exempt bonds, while maintaining for both the public and private participants most of the benefits of private development. This paper describes how involving a 63-20 corporation affects the deal structure and suggests how the parties can protect their respective interests even though the nominal owner of the project is an entity that is not directly under the control of either the public or private parties. Unlike certain prior uses of 63-20 Corporations to facilitate public financings, in a public/private venture, the 63-20 corporation will not just be a passive financing conduit, but will have long-term construction and operating responsibilities. All of the parties need to pay strict attention to their contractual rights under all the project documents. Since the private party has no long-term equity interest in the project to protect, it is imperative that the project contracts grant the public agency participant a strong measure of supervision and control throughout the life of the project.
-
THE ROLE OF 63-20 Nonprofit Corporations IN PUBLIC/PRIVATE INFRASTRUCTURE FINANCINGS
Public Works Financing, 1997Co-Authors: K J HedlundAbstract:The use of so-called "63-20 Corporations" in structuring public/private infrastructure financings is being promoted as a way to preserve the ability for a project to be financed with tax-exempt bonds, while maintaining for both the public and private participants most of the benefits of private development. This paper describes how involving a 63-20 corporation affects the deal structure and suggests how the parties can protect their respective interests even though the nominal owner of the project is an entity that is not directly under the control of either the public or private parties. Unlike certain prior uses of 63-20 Corporations to facilitate public financings, in a public/private venture, the 63-20 corporation will not just be a passive financing conduit, but will have long-term construction and operating responsibilities. All of the parties need to pay strict attention to their contractual rights under all the project documents. Since the private party has no long-term equity interest in the project to protect, it is imperative that the project contracts grant the public agency participant a strong measure of supervision and control throughout the life of the project.
