There move is part of a different project, on the site. See Key Aero website for details..

H

Thanks Peter,

It must be selectable on joining as I thought. Modern privacy laws I suppose…

H

I joined just short of 5 years ago. As a result, have no experience of the “previous system”.

To think that Key Pubs, the facilitator of the forum, appear to have no / little control of it seems to me to be a little worrying. If I have understood previous comments on the matter!!

I have been / am a member of a number of forums – all have the rule of no cutting and pasting links into historic posts. With the ultimate sanction of removal, from the forum.

When I joined, I’m certain that I was given the option of private message opt in / out. As we can see Vahe.D is uncontactable. Trolley Aux, who joined 8 months ago, is also uncontactable. Can somebody please confirm – I am contactable. If Trolley Aux could confirm the “option” is correct I would appreciate it. I may be confusing this forum with another, in that regard.

I believe he is bringing up the old posts, to add to them, and then not revisiting them so anything we post afterwards is unseen by him. As a further point the Modern Military Aviation area is littered with his activity.

I believe his behaviour needs escalating to HQ, at a very senior level, for their view on the matter. Although, my comment in Para 2 above may mean that a solution is not forthcoming there either.

H

Superb restoration – all I need to do now, is win the Lottery!!

H

I wanted to find out, having read some of the many posts, on this forum how TIGHAR is allowed to exist. 

I have found out and, as I said earlier, I’m shocked and stunned. The largest economy on the planet, runs its taxation regulation in such a slap dash manner. Lack of regulation allows the law of the jungle to exist!!

It is his business model that is driving all this hot air. Change the rules (one of my earlier proposals) the other was stop donations (a lot more difficult to do) was the other. Either way TIGHAR would be forced to close down and the excessive hot air would disappear. As you said earlier it is up to his supporters to decide how and where they spend their money. If TIGHAR didn’t exist the supporters could invest their money in a genuine air museum, for example.     

The current lack of regulation(s) allow and almost encourage TIGHAR’s behaviour. 

I have decided that further reading of TIGHAR posts on this forum, by me, will not occur. 

H

My other half says she saw the Lancaster, on finals to its former home of Cranfield at 17:44 UTC today.

Being relatively new to the world of TIGHAR I wanted to understand how they are allowed to exist…..

It might come as a surprise to the readership. But Mr Gillespie and TIGHAR are not doing anything wrong. He / they are simply exploiting a massive hole in US financial and / or organisational law – it would seem. TIGHAR is registered with the Internal Revenue Service (tax authority) as a charity. Business No 51-0282621 filed a F501 (C) (3) application sometime ago, possibly in 1985, it was accepted. As such they are exempt paying tax and relatively free to do as they wish – it would also seem. Every year they submit a F990 Declaration. It indicates the financial turn over for the year, just past, the number of staff employed, and their salaries if appropriate. It also indicates the hrs per / week senior staff work. In the case of Mr Gillespie that is 60 hrs / week. So obviously he’s a very busy man. On the Declaration they also claim to have 200 supporters. Reading between the lines these would seem to be their main source of income. However, the public can donate via the TIGHAR website.

I have not seen any control measures in place, in the US, to control senior staff salaries. Having a senior member of a UK charity on a salary is very strictly controlled by HMRC (tax authority).

If TIGHAR was registered in Oxford, UK instead of Oxford, Pennsylvania they would be subject to scrutiny by the Charities Commission. They, the commission, have the power to decide whether the organisation should be accepted as a charity. From that follows the tax status. Part of the demonstration of suitability, in the UK, is an indication of what the organisation does for the community. The Charity Commission have the legal powers to investigate suspected breaches of the very tight rules and regulations imposed on UK charities. Which could result in prosecution, closure, or both. I can’t find any evidence of a separate regulatory authority in the US – it is quite possible there are many thousands of organisations over there exploiting the holes in the system.

In the UK the Charity Commission is empowered to ask difficult questions like: How many historic aircraft have you recovered in the last 40 years? Where are they? How many do you expect to recover in the next year? Etc.

What appears to be a lack of oversight, in the US system, means there isn’t anybody, in authority, to ask those difficult questions. On the other hand, the UK system is designed to guard against fraud, money laundering, misrepresentation and theft. As well as ensuring tax is paid where it is warranted.

My little bit of research here has taught me much.

H