[News] Oilers Charity scam?

[White Out 403]

https://www.oilersdaily.com/nhl/news...am-5050-raffle

I think this has already come up on the forum in one of the Oiler threads, but the Oilers have basically come out and admitted that it is true. Instead of promising to do better or apologizing for what I would think is fraud, though I am not sure about the legality, they simply say, "Hey, listen, we grew the amount of dollars spent, so it is okay that we give such a low percentage to actual charities." As fans of normal hockey clubs with ownership groups that are not gross, I think we would see this as nothing but disgusting and gross. Even possibly fraudulent.

This money is supposed to go to people who cannot afford groceries. It is supposed to go to families with children who are very sick and need care. I do not know how this is legal. This is really disgusting.

[Royle9]

Expect nothing less from an organization that loves to cross the line and employ wife beaters.

[troutman]

https://forum.calgarypuck.com/showpo...postcount=2959

[BigThief]

Originally Posted by troutman

https://forum.calgarypuck.com/showpo...postcount=2959

It's okay man, not everything needs to be squeezed into a mega thread.

[Itse]

They just make it so easy to hate them.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Itse

They just make it so easy to hate them.

Its the one thing they're actually good at.

[Rejean31]

They are a disgusting organization from top to bottom and if Connor McDavid was smart he would do everything in his power to get away from the scum that is the Edmonton Oilers.

[YourMother]

I hope when McDavid leaves that part of his explanation involves this and the employment of Stan Bowman.

[Reggie Dunlop]

On top of strong-arming a homeless shelter (settled "out of court").

[heep223]

The Flames went through something similar with the flames foundation 5 years ago. Accounting for operating costs in foundations actually can legitimately be looked at a number of different ways, and can be spun to make the entity look better or worse.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calga...ence-1.4887824

The flames situation, including holding assets and investments on their balance sheet, is very very common and one of the benefits of being a foundation. So that part of the report is dumb. This watchdog organization could look at every registered foundation in Canada and make similar claims - the capital grows tax free and creates more sustainability in distributing out 5% to charities. It’s a strategic decision of the board, whether to spend down the capital and have less in the future or spend less and have more sustainability.

Very different than the oilers situation though, paying earnings to a related private entity definitely seems “fraudy”. This would / should come out from their auditor though, if it was audited it’s very likely legit

[Matty81]

Katz is basically taking millions of dollars from the charity in "licensing" fees.


What do you expect out of that guy.... coke head pedo

[Major Major]

Originally Posted by heep223

The Flames went through something similar with the flames foundation 5 years ago. Accounting for operating costs in foundations actually can legitimately be looked at a number of different ways, and can be spun to make the entity look better or worse.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calga...ence-1.4887824

The flames situation, including holding assets and investments on their balance sheet, is very very common and one of the benefits of being a foundation. So that part of the report is dumb. This watchdog organization could look at every registered foundation in Canada and make similar claims - the capital grows tax free and creates more sustainability in distributing out 5% to charities. It’s a strategic decision of the board, whether to spend down the capital and have less in the future or spend less and have more sustainability.

Very different than the oilers situation though, paying earnings to a related private entity definitely seems “fraudy”. This would / should come out from their auditor though, if it was audited it’s very likely legit

Lol, that report is a joke. She said it doesn't include 50/50 because that doesn't count as charity, but if they did, they would count the winner payouts as operating costs making the numbers even worse!

[curves2000]

This is another one that has a really bad smell to it as well. This a private/public partnership in connection with some AB Gov connected investors who decided to rip out the proper location of the center in Calgary and make it a private business in Edmonton, thus allowing all Canadian patients who would benefit from this treatment to be flown to Edmonton.

https://www.nhl.com/oilers/news/rele...nour-announced

[Reggie Dunlop]

Despicable.

The Oilers make the Hell's Angels look like Cub Scouts.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Let’s not forget this is the same organization that tried to screw the homeless shelter across the street from the arena out of their promised donation.

Katz has always been a scumbag and always will be a scumbag.

[Reggie Dunlop]

Goes back to the days of Peter Pocklington.

[taxbuster]

I wrote about this some time back. The funds derived from 50/50 draws are NOT regarded as “Charity” funds … they are non-receipted fundraising. No different than any other charity these funds do NOT have to be spent in any particular manner other than being within the bounds of their operating license from AGLC.

Accordingly the Board can determine exactly how said funds are to be used. Charity law, on the other hand for TAX-RECEIPTED donations MUST be used in accordance with requirements of the Income Tax Act.

Odious? Certainly.
Maddening? Sure.
Legal? Quite.

The fact that they “position” some of the donations as “their” charity in no way diminishes any of the above. It didn’t start from them, but by purchasing a lottery ticket…it becomes “theirs” to use (per AGLC).

(Summarized, not detailed explanation.)

[White Out 403]

Originally Posted by taxbuster

I wrote about this some time back. The funds derived from 50/50 draws are NOT regarded as “Charity” funds … they are non-receipted fundraising. No different than any other charity these funds do NOT have to be spent in any particular manner other than being within the bounds of their operating license from AGLC.

Accordingly the Board can determine exactly how said funds are to be used. Charity law, on the other hand for TAX-RECEIPTED donations MUST be used in accordance with requirements of the Income Tax Act.

Odious? Certainly.
Maddening? Sure.
Legal? Quite.

The fact that they “position” some of the donations as “their” charity in no way diminishes any of the above. It didn’t start from them, but by purchasing a lottery ticket…it becomes “theirs” to use (per AGLC).

(Summarized, not detailed explanation.)

ok all that aside, a 50/50 is pretty commonly understood as half to the winner, half to charity.

[Southside]

Originally Posted by White Out 403

ok all that aside, a 50/50 is pretty commonly understood as half to the winner, half to charity.

Or 50/30.4/19.6. Half to the winner, 30.4 to Katz and 19.6 to charity.

[taxbuster]

Originally Posted by White Out 403

ok all that aside, a 50/50 is pretty commonly understood as half to the winner, half to charity.

Yup. And the Oilers Foundation - like the Flames Foundation - IS a Registered Charity…meeting the general “understanding”.

(Don’t get me wrong…I worked in the Charity sector for 20 years and more…I don’t like it, but it’s perfectly well within the bounds of law if done properly.)