Question: Legality of a commune?

Ok so this is a question about how to legally start, keep a comune going and also follow all the laws. I've been doing some research on it and it seems that where I am it would fall under the not-for-profit organisation under the leisure section. this would mean having a board, having a mission statement, liabilities and filing some tax info. does anyone have experience with any of this, or maybe some comments/advice about this subject.

thanks in advance.

 

We had a similar discussion a while back (though it didn't get very far), and we mainly debated if we should "keep it legal" at all. Indeed, many travelling gypsies in the UK don't pay taxes and don't really care much for planning laws - although there are surely some which are more legal. Even many communes that respect the law don't bother with planning permission or at best apply for retrospective planning permission. Tax is a more serious legal issue though!

 

That's just it. In Canada if we plan on buying land that belongs to the commune and not to one of the members than we need to do it legally. I would be willing to buy land for the group but not right now. I don't have that kind of cash, unless I win the lotto. the other thing is since i'm not rich and neither are the other members we would need to fundraise and donate what little money we do have. Fundraising is regulated and only certain charities/npo's are allowed to do so(on a regular basis that is).

 

You need to think outside the box.

PS: the link in your sig is mis-spelt

 

thanks cymru_jules for the info i always spell that too fast, and what do you mean by thinking out of the box?

 

I do not know canadian law, but in the U.S. you would start a non-profit corporation......the main reason for this as you have stated is for tax purposes...if you dont, you are fucked......If you want you can PM me on here or yahoo and we can speak more about it...i am in a paralegal school and already took my class on corporations and am halfway through real estate......so i can do some research for you, I just cant give you "legal advice".

 

By thinking outside the box, I meant really you could sidestep the problem. By buying trying to buy land in Canada things seem to be already getting quite complicated given your financial position, and then things get more complicated with fund raising, long before you've even got to the point of knocking up dwellings in the first place which if it were this country would be the biggest hurdle of all because of planning permission.

As I say I don't know enough about Canada to make an informed decision really, but I would be looking at simple alternatives. For me, living a lifestyle of this type is all about simplification and getting away from the stresses of mainstream society - but it seems this is impossible without breaking the law, because of the issues with tax, and of course the land in which you occupy and the dwellings on it.

The alternatives I was first thinking about in your case (re: "thinking outside the box!) is a nomadic commune. This need not mean a caravan (you could have Yurt-type dwellings transported by vehicle). Indeed, you need not even move that often, but to me it sounds a lot less hassle and stressfull than the situation you are in. On the other hand, the very nature of a nomadic commune could be a lot more hassle and stressfull than something more static with initial hurdles to overcome - I guess it's down to personal preference and what your vision is!

A second alternative is to have semi-static commune dwellings erected in a remote location, with the idea that whoever owns the land doesn't know about it!

Both of these suggestions of course step outside the laws, I guess it depends how much of a rebel you are, and what the penalties are for breaching those laws in your host country. In the UK you just get moved on, unless you put up a fight. In other countries you may be fined and have your property confiscated on the spot, which obviously is not a good thing!

Morals? Well ultimatly, if you believe in "It's not your land, it's God's land - you're just the caretaker!" then this makes breaking the "law" perfectly moral.

One last consideration is social stigma, in that others may feel you are getting a free ride - or flouting the law and getting what they want. On the other hand, a couple of peeps have told me on here that they despise mainstream society that much that they don't really care what the rest of society thinks of them - I don't think many hippy types really have ever been that self concious anyway!

I havn't really mentioned the issue of tax because the penalties over here are not worth the trouble, although as I said earlier it's widely accepted that gypsy types get away with it, but my own estimation is it's too risky - particulary if you later get nabbed for something else like the illegally constructed dwelling or are growing special magic beautiful plants!

I've just read your first post again and it seems you intend to go fully legal where possible, so I apologies if this big post was of no use!!!! My personal circumstances really concern the land issue - I don't really like to stay in one spot for more than a few years, and I know that getting planning permission particulary for hippyist antics would not be easy. Having said that, the benefits of having somewhere that you legally own cannot be overlooked when you've got nowhere else to turn. This is of greater concern as I approach the age of 30!

Wishing thee all the best!

 

the buying of land is not really a concern if it's owned by an individual, the tricky part is not for one person to own it but the commune. or else it's just people paying me to use the land or to help me pay the taxes on it. It to me would be a emulated commune. If it comes down to that, it may just be the best solution. My ideal situation is if it's owned by the commune so that if individual members leave the commune can still go on.

Also building codes are quite strict here as well but we can always camp out or like you said build temporary shelters for that. temporary shelters are ok 3/4 of the year but not in winter.

The members that we have so far are not looking for something nomadic. so unfortunately that's out.

at this point any thoughts are welcome since all the legal aspects and research are not my strong suit. the main info is about setting up a not-for-profit since I'm thinking that's really are only real beneficial choice. still have lots of reading to do though.

 

In the U.S., every state has a Secretary of State office....that is where you register a corporation......that is also where you can find out information on what you have to do to set up a not for profit......it really is not that big of a deal, but with a not for profit you jsut have to make absolutley sure that the tax issue is taken care of. Also, if your nonprofit org goes belly up, if it has any money then only thing you can do with it is give it to another nonprofit org, you can not keep it yourself if it is in the nonprofits name.......see a nonprofit organisation is its own person, you would do things in its name and not your own. It seems complicated, but the plus side to this is that you as an individual can not be held liable for what the corporation does, and since the police can not put a corporation in prison all that happens if you screw up is that corporation ceases to exist.

 

what about having members pay in a membership dues and making these dues refundable upon deciding to leave. would that fly? the intrest on that money would be non-refundable and any money gained by fundraisers also, but what about membership dues? especialy of a dissolution of the NPO. could that be written in.

also from what I have been reading the members are not liable, the board is usually not liable but the director can most definately be liable. any thoughs?

 

the only way the president of any corp. can be liable whether profit or NPO is if he does not do his artilces of incorporation correctly and then they could hol dhim personally liable, that is why you have to make sure you do EVERYTHING by the book when starting up........as far as teh membership dues.........i personally do not know how i feel about paying to be a member of a commune but as far as legality, i am sure that that could work, you would have to call it a "deposit" or something and write it in into your by laws, i am not sure about that so dont take my word for it, i will try to find more info........

 

Thanks Brandonveg.

here's a few other things to ponder.

what about buying a property and selling shares to that property to the members. all the members provide the tools equipment. That way everyone owns the land and tools, the commune doesn't have any assets of it's own. that way if things are dissolved everyone gets what they started with and the npo's assets would be the fundraising stuff that mostly goes to paying taxes/the lease for use of the land/building/upkeep costs.

Or what about the members lending money to the commune, like a personal loan. to be paid back in a certain number of years with little or no intrest?

yeah I'm not too keen on paying to be a member either but unfortunately if we want land we need to buy it and we need shelter and to pay taxes and... Unfortunately people will need to pay in a certain ammount in order to get us to a stage where the investments pay for the commune.

any ideas are welcome. what did people that have been on a commune/are on a commune do, how are others set up? would love to hear some details.

thanks

 

One thing you need to address before you get into "legal organization" are the potential legal hurdles you may face from the neighbors where you intend to locate your "commune". There's a lot of people in the "straight" world that don't want anything of this sort in their neighborhood and with the local "system" on their side they can throw a bunch of monkey wrenches into the mix.



Back in the '60's the locals in Sonoma county California used a bunch of the laws on the books at that time to shut down Morningstar and Wheeler's. It was a lot more lax in other states in the west. Unfortunately, a lot of the laws that existed in California at the time have been re-created in other, more rural, states.

http://libweb.sonoma.edu/regional/notables/utopians.html


Plus, nowadays we have all of the state and federal "forfeiture" laws on the books. (The cops find something illegal on the premises and it's ALL gone!)

Not saying it can't be done, but these aren't the comparatively free wheeling days of the 60's. (And yeah, I'm old enough to remember.)

Bob

 

The only thing i could say about other communes is the one 10 minutes from where i live......They just stay out in the woods and I am pretty sure they ahve been there since the 60's man........its right near a high school, but no one really knows about it.....i found out about it because i was skipping school and i was out in the woods where i saw a cross next to this creek that had peace signs all voer it and the name "dylan" and in each arm of the cross there was a quartz rock and so i got to asking around and someone told me about the commune back there, so ichecked it out and they just basically squat on that land....the cross was there cause one of the guys was fucked up and got hit by a train or something. .....so i dont know too much about existing communes, all I knwo about is the basics of setting up a non profit corporation.....peace.

 

neighbors not a problem in this case. again everything would be legal or by the book...


So we had a community meeting and people are seeing this as a possible investment and so don't want to go not for profit for a while. althought this means we will have to pay taxes on the land and other things we will retain the property and any profits if any are to be had...

We will be discussing this decision furthur so if people still have ideas/advice it would be welcome. thanks

 

Please don’t take any offence but this is starting to sound more like a business venture than a commune. Forgive my idealism, but I thought the hole point of a commune was that everyone contributes (what they can)collectively and profits should be shared with the community (reinvested) so it might still be possible for you to go the not-for-profit route.

 

no offence taken. that was kinda my point as well the only problem is that if we do buy land in a year. our members will not be putting in the same amount and some are still a little aprehensive about the whole thing. if we buy land and it does not work out we may be able to at least sell it and make a small profit so that the members that are interrested can try again. If we start a non-profit all the money and time we put in goes to the commune, which is great. but if too many people drop out then that money is lost and gone for good. and by profits I meant if we have to sell the land nothing else since we would not really have a buisness venture to stand on, at least not at first.

I hate to say it but I don't think our group can start off as a non profit. although it is one of my personal goals. if you have any hints or ideas to make this work pls let me know and I'll try to see if they do and will bring them up at our next meeting on jan 7th. thanks

 

so I've been doing research and have been looking into different legal structures, and I'm still looking at a not-for-profit. the only other structure that might work for us is starting it as a co-op. members buy in, if it fails everyone splits the leftovers instead of having all that go to another non profit. I'm bringing it up in our next meeting, we'll see how it goes. does anyone have any comments on this, experience with the legal/business side of running a commune? Thanks

 

Sorry I just noticed this one....
We're trying the Co-Op with shares routine if the lawyer says that's feasable - the Co-Op is the parent each community is a member and each voting member of the community is amember (voting members of a community control the direction of each community - but may only sell out in case of break up to the parent Co-Op at near reasonable market value (we tend to stress that all assets held by the Co-Op should be 'purchased by the Co-Op under fair market value)...all have shares according to what they put in with the total shares being = to the total assetts - assuming everything keeps climbing in value (i.e. you don't trash it) the Co-Op should have more shares in total than the members have - so each member can get so much extra per yr. - kind of a value added for the work put in...so anyone has something to start over with or 'cash' in should the desire so arise.
And yah Dalamar - it sounds like a bussiness - the best communities usually marry bussiness sense to idealism so that they can survive - a community without a structure depends solely on the assumed total agreement of those involved - and no - it does not work - yah been there tried that - lots of hurt and waste of time.

lot's of good ideas and thoughts in this post - lets keep on brainstorming - aye ?