God is not a Mustang

[CalallenStang]

Here's a link that specifically cites section II of the charter;

http://www.umc.org/decisions/41118/eyJy ... BlIjoiMSJ9

The corporate charter of Southern Methodist University (Article II) provides that "said educational institution to be forever owned, maintained and controlled by the South Central Jurisdictional Conference of The Methodist Church.

Southern Methodist University is administered by a Board of Trustees, all of whom are either elected or approved by the South Central Jurisdictional Conference.

again, the charter does not override US law.

[SMUrf]

The corporate charter of the university does not override United States federal law.

But if you are debating that SMU is a 501c3...

Southern Methodist University is exempt from federal income tax as an educational institution under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code.
http://www.smu.edu/BusinessFinance/Cont ... Compliance

SMU is organized in much the same way as a local United Methodist Church. All property is owned by the South Central Jurisdiction of the UMC. This was a point of contention within the UMC when the Bush library was proposed. Look it up.

The property may be owned by the UMC (not sure here) but the institution is a 501c3 and thus is not owned by anyone.

Again, the university's properties are owned (and chartered to be forever owned, maintained, and administered) by the UMC. This is exactly the same way local United Methodist Churches are organized, and they are also 501c3 organizations.

http://www.smu.edu/ola/LegalFacts

Believe what you want...Southern Methodist University is a UM held organization and property.

[SMUrf]

duplicate post

[SMUrf]

Have you actually read the IRS code? 501c3 is not a federal law as you state...it is an IRS code. Perhaps that's splitting hairs...The blog you quoted is incorrect in this instance.

http://www.irs.gov/Charities-&-Non-Prof ... anizations[/quote]

An organization may qualify for exemption from federal income tax if it is organized and operated exclusively for one or more of the following purposes.

Religious.

Charitable.

Scientific.

Testing for public safety.

Literary.

Educational.

Fostering national or international amateur sports competition (but only if none of its activities involve providing athletic facilities or equipment; however, see Amateur Athletic Organizations , later in this chapter).

The prevention of cruelty to children or animals.

To qualify, the organization must be a corporation, community chest, fund, articles of association, or foundation. A trust is a fund or foundation and will qualify. However, an individual or a partnership will not qualify.

Examples. Qualifying organizations include:
Nonprofit old-age homes,

Parent-teacher associations,

Charitable hospitals or other charitable organizations,

Alumni associations,

Schools,

Chapters of the Red Cross,

Boys' or Girls' Clubs, and

Churches.

[couch 'em]

You two are having a semantics argument

[CalallenStang]

I'm not sure how to explain this to you I'm any other way but I think we are talking in parallel here...

I don't know who owns the university's campus nor do I care. What I do know is that SMU - the institution, the organization - is a 501c3 which means that it cannot be owned (by definition). Local UMCs that are organized as 501c3s are the same way. Someone or some other organization can own all the property, etc...but the organization as a 501c3 cannot be owned. Do not confuse the organization and its associated property

Where I am from IRS code is a compoment of federal law...to state that it is not federal law because it is IRS code is a bit picky and relies on technicalities. But if you don't like that blog post, feel free to read the following article from a law firm:

http://cullinanelaw.com/nonprofit-law-b ... nonprofit/

[SMUrf]

You two are having a semantics argument

Perhaps. I would consider possession of property and administrative oversight to be "ownership" and "control", that's all.

[CalallenStang]

You two are having a semantics argument

Perhaps. I would consider possession of property and administrative oversight to be "ownership" and "control", that's all.

Therein lies our difference...I don't see "ownership" and "control" to be the same thing at all.

I did learn a lot from this discussion, so SMUrf, thank you for that.

[Stallion]

I think possession/title is correct but there are no shareholders in a non-profit, there are no shareholder distributions, no interest in the non-profit can be transferred to another party for profit. If you dissolve or terminate a non-profit then all assets after paying all bills and liabilities must be transferred to other exempt non-profit organizations with a similar purpose or it reverts to the State of Texas

Oh and the United States Code is the name of the publication that codifies all federal statutory law

[couch 'em]

It's it possible to take a non-profit 'private'? Meaning, could a Hunt turn SMU into a for-profit entity?

[CalallenStang]

It's it possible to take a non-profit 'private'? Meaning, could a Hunt turn SMU into a for-profit entity?

Yes and no. Check out Grand Canyon University for a case study on what can be done.

The non-profit entity can liquidate its assets by selling all property, etc to a for-profit entity, but the actual non-profit entity still exists until it is dissolved at which time whatever assets it has (liquid or otherwise) must be transferred to another non-profit entity.

By the way, GCU is currently considering becoming a non-profit institution again...

[Nacho]

maybe it's a school that is owned by a church.