[anigbrowl]

Maybe, maybe not. It depends what sort of agency relationship exists between the Foundation and its members, whether the members are considered beneficial owners and so on.

It's not obvious from the website what corporate structure the Bitcoin Foundation has, for example. If it's a nonprofit, it has yet to file a 990 tax form. I find it understandable the the CA regulator wants to know what sort of entity it is dealing with.

[JoshTriplett]

> I find it understandable the the CA regulator wants to know what sort of entity it is dealing with.

That's the kind of thing a regulator should figure out before making legal threats.

[anigbrowl]

I could argue that this is the sort of thing a non-profit ought to figure out before soliciting donations. At present I can find no record of the Bitcoin Foundation having filed for nonprofit status, and they don't explain their corporate structure on their website. You can't just say you're a nonprofit entity, there are rules about how you must apply for that status and what sort of public declarations you must make.

How do you know, for example, that it's not a scam? According to the letter, BF it is incorporated in DC and has offices in Seattle, but good luck finding the address or any other information. Regulators are not psychic, and they're well within their rights to say 'stop soliciting money from the general public until you've made the requisite declarations,' because entities that solicit money without having their paperwork in order often turn out to be operating illegally.

[nullc]

It's a 501(c)(6)— the fact that they are a non-profit is something you should have known in an instant if you bothered looking. Even their bylaws are online: (https://github.com/pmlaw/The-Bitcoin-Foundation-Legal-Repo/b...).

[anigbrowl]

I did bother looking. Why isn't it conspicuously declared on their website? For that matter, why are you averse to supporting your argument with links?

As for their bylaws, I did find those before I wrote my remarks above. Besides the fact that github is not exactly a standard place for posting corporate information, it still doesn't include things like the address of the Seattle offices.

This is the entity data file with the Distict of Columbia: https://corp.dcra.dc.gov/BizEntity.aspx/ViewEntityData?entit... ...you may need to create an account to view this.

Map: https://www.google.com/maps/preview#!q=5431+41st+Pl+NW%2C+Wa...

The Bitcoin Foundation has not filed any documents with the SEC according to an SEC EDGAR search, nor can I find any existing IRS 990 record. I'm not a lawyer, and especially not a corporate lawyer, but I think you're required to file with those entities if you're a company and if you're claiming nonprofit status, respectively. Why haven't they done so, and why doesn't their website have any of that information available?

As for why the state of CA is involved, the fact that the BF has organized a conference in San Jose seems sufficient to establish minimum contact required to say that the company has operations in California.

[nullc]

::shrugs:: The bylaws github page is linked on the Bitcoin foundation's website.

> The Bitcoin Foundation has not filed any documents with the SEC according to an SEC EDGAR search, nor can I find any existing IRS 990 record. I'm not a lawyer, and especially not a corporate lawyer, but I think you're required to file with those entities if you're a company and if you're claiming nonprofit status, respectively

No. SEC only deals with publicly traded corporations, and only some non-profit organizations must file a 990. Bitcoin foundation hasn't existed long enough for any 990s to be publicly available in any case— they're filed a year behind and there is usually a year lag before anyone posts them.