Originally posted by Unregistered
View Post
The IRS doesn't care about alleged conflicts of interest among the board of directors of nonprofits. It cares about taxes. That's it's job. IRS records might be used as evidence by other law enforcement agencies, but the IRS itself is only concerned with collecting taxes.
The US DOJ does care about various types of corporate fraud, but generally only if it's interstate. The DOJ probably doesn't care that a soccer coach working for two clubs might be putting the interests of one ahead of the other.
The tort you seem to be thinking of is "breach of fiduciary duty". Fiduciary duty doesn't attach to all employee/employer relationships--in most cases of a conflict there, the recourse of the employer is to terminate the employee. It does attach to the relationship between a director and a corporation; the director is supposed to put the interests of the corporation (in this case, a nonprofit) above his or her own. Other professionals (accountants, realtors, lawyers, etc.) also have fiduciary duties to their clients.
However, proving that can be tricky; you generally have to show that the agent in question was knowingly betraying the interests of his/her client. Note that "breach of fiduciary duty" (the tort that you can sue for, or which may subject someone to professional discipline or even criminal penalties) is a much higher standard than "conflict of interest" or appearance thereof--many things that may look unethical or downright dirty may be in fact perfectly legal.
In the case of soccer coaches who are working for more than one club: generally, both clubs are aware of (and approve of) such relationships, and the parties who have standing to assert claims of BoFD or CoI are the clubs themselves, not the parents.
If there is a club that a) has a self-perpetuating board, b) such board is captive to a DoC or other principal employee, and c) tolerates said employee enriching himself to the club's detriment--the recourse of the public, in these cases, is generally to take your business elsewhere. If a club's board is publicly elected, another recourse is to try and oust the existing board.
But unless there is obvious fraud, the cops are generally not going to get involved in youth soccer disputes. Particularly of the sort "he's employed by Team X, but spends all his time with (and steers players to) Team Y, who he is also employed by". It is the duty of the management Team X, not the parents of its players, to ensure that the relationship is satisfactory.
The US DOJ does care about various types of corporate fraud, but generally only if it's interstate. The DOJ probably doesn't care that a soccer coach working for two clubs might be putting the interests of one ahead of the other.
The tort you seem to be thinking of is "breach of fiduciary duty". Fiduciary duty doesn't attach to all employee/employer relationships--in most cases of a conflict there, the recourse of the employer is to terminate the employee. It does attach to the relationship between a director and a corporation; the director is supposed to put the interests of the corporation (in this case, a nonprofit) above his or her own. Other professionals (accountants, realtors, lawyers, etc.) also have fiduciary duties to their clients.
However, proving that can be tricky; you generally have to show that the agent in question was knowingly betraying the interests of his/her client. Note that "breach of fiduciary duty" (the tort that you can sue for, or which may subject someone to professional discipline or even criminal penalties) is a much higher standard than "conflict of interest" or appearance thereof--many things that may look unethical or downright dirty may be in fact perfectly legal.
In the case of soccer coaches who are working for more than one club: generally, both clubs are aware of (and approve of) such relationships, and the parties who have standing to assert claims of BoFD or CoI are the clubs themselves, not the parents.
If there is a club that a) has a self-perpetuating board, b) such board is captive to a DoC or other principal employee, and c) tolerates said employee enriching himself to the club's detriment--the recourse of the public, in these cases, is generally to take your business elsewhere. If a club's board is publicly elected, another recourse is to try and oust the existing board.
But unless there is obvious fraud, the cops are generally not going to get involved in youth soccer disputes. Particularly of the sort "he's employed by Team X, but spends all his time with (and steers players to) Team Y, who he is also employed by". It is the duty of the management Team X, not the parents of its players, to ensure that the relationship is satisfactory.
Comment