I believe ARIN will accept a copy of a legitimate business tax certificate from your municipality in lieu of evidence of incorporation.
There are other documents they will accept as well. I’ve never had a problem registering multiple non-incorporated organizations over the years. Owen > On May 18, 2019, at 8:02 PM, Paul McNary <pmcn...@cameron.net> wrote: > > Ronald > A Sole Proprietorship 1040 Schedule C does not have to be registered with the > State of Missouri. > Your Social Security Number is all that is required. > Department of revenue issues you a number for Sales Tax and Withholding Taxes. > The Feds give you a Withholding employer ID. > However you do not have to have anything recorded with the Secretary of State. > So I have had problems with ARIN not being able to authorize my business. > You don't have to be incorporated in any state to have a legal business. > > On 5/18/2019 9:38 PM, Ronald F. Guilmette wrote: >> In message <beeb33f0-d800-4099-b5a7-8ad232dc8...@arin.net>, >> John Curran <jcur...@arin.net> wrote: >> >>> On May 18, 2019, at 5:06 PM, Ronald F. Guilmette <r...@tristatelogic.com> >>> wr= >>> ote: >>>> And as I have already asserted, ARIN would have done well... and done >>>> better than it has done... to have at least made itself aware of these >>>> facts. If it had done so, then perhaps appropriate questions could >>>> have been raised about all of this much much earlier, at the outset, >>>> some 4+ years ago. >>> Ronald - >>> >>> However, it is quite likely that the state registration issue would have >>> been promptly corrected once raised, at which point we would have ended up >>> with the same outcome. >> It's an arguably valid point, but I disagree, for the following reasons. >> >> It's one thing to try to run a fraud against a non-governmental private >> non-profit organization, like ARIN, which has both a strong incentive >> never to litigate and also a strong and widely-known history of vitrually >> never doing so. It is quite another thing entirely to commit a fraud >> where the gateway requirement to begin the scam is to perpetrate at least >> a portion of the fraud against one or more of these United States. >> >> State attorneys general have rather more financial backing than does ARIN, >> and they are, I think, rather entirely less likely to just let stuff >> slide, e.g. for fear of being bankrupted as a side-effect of litigation. >> >> Additionally, there are a number of fundamental principals involved here, >> and these should not be overlooked. I'm talking about longstanding >> principals of both law and commerce that should never be violated under >> any circumstances. >> >> Wherever you are, within the ARIN region, just look down the street at >> you local bookshop, your local corner drug store, or your local hair salon. >> These businesses are all formally registered to do business in your state, >> you province, or your country. Why then should *any* Internet business >> which also and likewise maintains a physical nexus to your state be somehow >> magically immune from fufilling this normative legal requirement that >> everyone else has to satisfy? (In fact, under law, they aren't. All >> businesses with a physical nexus must register. No exceptions.) >> >> More to the point, why should ARIN ever be, in effect, materially aiding >> and abetting -any- business in illegally skirting that business' state tax >> liability? And likewise, why should ARIN be, in effect, materially aiding >> and abetting any business as it skirts its home state's reasonable state >> business regulations? (You know, the ones that the voters of a given state >> have, through their legislatures, adopted for the common good.) >> >> The answer, I think, is that it shouldn't. ARIN should not be aiding and >> abetting tax evasion, money laundering or any of the other myriad crimes >> and misdemeanors that the people of your state, or my state, have, in their >> wisdom, deemed either criminal or actionable. >> >> A lot of people seem to still be operating under this popular delusion that >> "Internet businesses" can and do somehow float freely, somehere in the >> intangible ether, totally unmoored from the legal realities that we poor >> mere mortals, living here on terra firma, have to contend with every day >> of our professional lives. But through the courts, and largely thanks >> to Amazon, we have already had this question asked and answered. The >> answer is no, if you have a physical nexus in a state, you *cannot* simply >> or unilaterally elect to *not* register in that state, and likewise you >> *cannot* simply duck out on you state tax liability. (You also have to >> obey state labor laws and so forth.) Using the word "Internet" is not a >> magic get-out-of-jail-free card that absolves you from state taxes or >> state regulation. >> >> So now, how many dollars did Oppobox pay in state taxes to the state of >> Ohio during its alleged four year tenure in that state? The answer is >> self-evidently zero. But the company did apparently make a good deal of >> revenue, over those same four years, from the large chunks of IP address >> space that were issued to it. So it is reasonable to ask: Issued by whom? >> Who granted this fiction of an "Ohio" company a nice profitable concession, >> from which they made plenty of dough even while never paying a dime in >> state taxes? >> >> One type of business that quite certainly does float freely, unmoored, >> most of the time anyway, from terra firma is an airline. So if, for example, >> Southwest Airlines applies for landing rights at the Cincinnati airport, >> would airport authorities be acting properly if they didn't even check to >> see if Southwest Airlines was or was not even registered to do business >> in Ohio? No, they would not. And in fact Southwest Airlines *is* properly >> registered in the State of Ohio, as it should be and as it must be. If >> Southwest had landed even a single plane at the Cincinnati airport before >> the company's Ohio corporate registration was in place, then somebody on >> the airport commission would be out of a job by now. >> >> I see no reason why the normal and normative longstanding rules of commerce >> and law should be either ignored or flaunted by ARIN. Before granting a >> commercially valuable concession to any arbitrary commercial entity X, >> alleged to be located in state Y, it is both normal practice and entirely >> appropriate to check that X really is registered to do business in state Y. >> The fact that ARIN apparently *isn't* doing these simple checks makes ARIN >> an outlier and an anomaly... a quirky bizzare misfit among all of the >> eminently reasonable governmental and non-profit entities that have been >> doing these simple and appropriate checks, day and and day out, for decades. >> >> Now, in this present Micfo case, the whole thing has blown up in a rather >> spectacular fashion. We have Grand Jury indictments, federal marshals, >> the works. It's certainly an excellent show, and I look forward to the >> video(s). But what about all of the *other* stuff that's still quietly >> hiding in the cracks and crevices, even as we speak? What about all of the >> "Internet" businesses that *aren't* suing ARIN and that *aren't* defrauding >> ARIN and that are only just off in some quiet corner of ARIN-land someplace, >> quietly and only defrauding their home states of tax revenue, even as they >> are making money, hand over fist, by reselling various bits of what ARIN >> has bequeathed to them? >> >> I know what people here will say. They will say "ARIN isn't the state tax >> police and we adamantly do not *want* ARIN to be the state tax police." >> It's an old refrain and I know it well. But it utterly misses one vital >> nunace. >> >> Nobody wants ARIN to enforce state laws of any kind... tax... labor... >> whatever. Least of all me. But there's a material difference between >> actually being a state attorney general, and doing, or not doing, what >> that job demands and, in contrast, doing what ARIN does, i.e. routinely >> handing out millions of dollars worth of commercially valuable concessions >> to entities that, if you were not deliberately turning a blind eye, could >> be seen to be self-evident tax cheats. (Checking this is free and takes >> about five seconds, so the usual excuses of it being either too costly >> or too time consuming don't apply.) >> >> To be clear, it is my contention that what ARIN does... or rather, what it >> does not do... in the way of vetting is in no sense "normal", and it is >> arguably enabling tax fraud. ARIN may not be driving the getaway car on >> these crimes, but I'm not sure that that the distinction is sufficiently >> large, in practice, to quibble about. >> >> So, the question is just this: Why should ARIN be exempt from normal and >> ordinary vetting procedures that are routine and commonplace everywhere >> else? If the Cincinnati Airport Authority can do it and does do it, and >> if the department within the State of California that awards the concession >> for the lemonaid stand in Yosemite Park can do it and does do it, then >> what makes ARIN so special that it has to NOT do it? And wouldn't it be >> better, all around, if it did do this minimal checking? Wouldn't it be >> better for both society as a whole and also for the ARIN membership if >> ARIN did not let the really really obvious tax cheats into the club in the >> first place? >> >> This isn't "policing". It's just reasonable and minimal club roster hygiene. >> >> And based on this Micfo case, I think that the benefits should by now be >> apparent to all. >> >> >> Regards, >> rfg >> >> >> P.S. For the benfit of anyone who thinks that I am just spouting pure >> hyperbole when I assert that ARIN could be viewed as being in some sense >> complicit with tax fraud, if anyone asks I'll be happy to try to get my >> old friend Suresh in here. Then I'll let him tell the story... and provide >> the links for... the time when law enforcement descended on RIPE headquarters >> in Europe, fully prepared, apparently, to arrest someone for RIPE's apparent >> role in money laundering. Fortunately, it did not actually come to that, in >> the end, but the story, which is 100% true, may perhaps illuminate the fact >> that I may not be totally alone in attributing some level of culpability to >> these RIRs which think themselves too good or too special to fully check >> the bona fides of the various people and entities that they allow into their >> respective clubrooms. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> ARIN-PPML >> You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to >> the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net). >> Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: >> https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml >> Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues. >> >> > _______________________________________________ > ARIN-PPML > You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to > the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net). > Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: > https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml > Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues. _______________________________________________ ARIN-PPML You are receiving this message because you are subscribed to the ARIN Public Policy Mailing List (ARIN-PPML@arin.net). Unsubscribe or manage your mailing list subscription at: https://lists.arin.net/mailman/listinfo/arin-ppml Please contact i...@arin.net if you experience any issues.