The connotation of a non-profit is that it's being audited. It would be extremely silly to suggest otherwise.

It may have that connotation to you, but in general (at least in the US) non-profit organizations are not required to have independent audits. Typically, that requirement only happens if they receive a certain amount of government funding. An organization may choose to undergo audits in order to make people feel better about donating to it.

I really, really don't think that anybody is being fooled or misled into thinking that Anna's Archive is a "legitimate" audited organization when they describe themselves as a non-profit.

▲

addaon 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> The connotation of a non-profit is that it's being audited.

This is very geography-specific. In the US, 501(c)(3)s (what most people think of when they say "non-profit" where I am) have no general requirement for audits. There's also plenty of non-profit-by-some-definition organizations that never file a Form 1023, giving up some benefits of the 501(c)(3) regulations but in exchange being even less regulated.

	▲	Projectiboga 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		The entities are regulated at the state level in the usa, with the responsibility to comply with both state and federal tax authorities.

▲

badlibrarian 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Audits have nothing to do with it; all entities are subject to audit.

The primary difference between a non-profit and a for-profit is that a non-profit does not distribute profit to shareholders, including the founders.

	▲	cakealert 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		Audit or threat of audit is the mechanism of enforcement and that is all that ever matters.