Message-ID: <001b01be3c3e$fe33d040$6f6e86a5@default> Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1999 20:14:45 -0600 From: Jerome Katz <mailto:katzja@SLU.EDU> Subject: Summary Report: How are dues handled in other international To: mailto:DEVEL-L@AMERICAN.EDU
This is my feedback to participants on listservs. The problem was adjusting dues to better accomodate currency fluctuations (for an 1800 member international organization).I polled people involved with several Internet discussion lists - DEVEL-L (economic development), entrep-l (entrepreneurship), famlybiz (family business), and BPS-net (strategy). The vast majority of responses can from DEVEL-L. Respondents included Cyril Belshaw, Michael Henson, Marty Asdorian, Kathryn de Lima, Michael Patterson, and Kerry Miller. (My apologies if I missed your name.) I don't think ICSB is close to having an answer, but with the ideas provided by list participants, the ensuing discussion should be a lot more exciting.
To summarize the ideas offered:
1. DO NOTHING - The largest number of responses indicated that organizations make no accomodation to currency fluctuations or devaluations. Invariably, the respondents providing this information felt negatively about it, following the concerns of ICSB members who raised the issue. This may be done with or without explanation of why USD without adjustment is used.
2. CHARGE IN US DOLLARS, BUT PROVIDE PAYMENT OPTIONS - Some organizations (e.g. IIRA the International Industrial Relations Association) have a fixed dues rate, but permit payment using direct deposits or transfers that minimize transaction costs. Other simply permit payment using credit cards to deal with this issue. Everyone pays the same dues, but the plethora of payment options minimizes the ancillary costs of converting currencies into checks drawn with US dollars.
3. GRADED SCALES - (Cyril belshaw) Some organizations (e.g. International Union of Anthropological and Ethnological Sciences) have set up dues rates (and journal rates such as those for _Current Anthropology_ ) based on economic conditions of the country. People in "A" list nations pay the highest dues and subscription rates, those in "B" list nations pay less, and so on, right through "X" list nations, where membership is free. This is particularly likely among organizations with involvement with UNESCO.
4. LOCAL ACCOUNTS - Cyril Belshaw explained that Current Anthropology maintained a current accounts system for individuals who were supposed to pay dues, but where currancy transfer was not possible. In such cases CA created a "local account" in the local currency at a bank in the foreign nation. Subscribers would pay into the account using local currency, and the funds were used by CA staff (or traded to others) when in that country.
5. DYNAMIC ADJUSTMENTS - Dues could be set, but a provision made explicit for appeals based on personal or currency hardships.
6. BENCHMARKING - Michael Henson gave an impressively comprehensive model for handling dues over a year with some accomodation of currency fluctuation. I quote his idea directly.
... you could link it to the value of SDR, as used by the World Bank and IMF, and as a benchmark indicator in thirdworld debt magnitudes by major institutional sovereign debt negotiators. You could I suppose accept contribution with a stipulation that a certain amount should be paid, and that invoicing for further amounts or refund in the instance of overpayment will occur only if currency variations in the payment period exceed a given percentage, so that exchange costs are minimised.
7. BARTERING - (Kerry Miller) A variation on local accounts, but take something in trade for the membership. This can also be done through bartering organizations or websites such as www.transaction.net/money or www.publiccom.com/wb/ithacahour.
You could attempt reasoning with the members, by saying that the exchange costs and uncertainty justify the membership due being paid in a certain sum stipulated in Dollars or a currency in use where any major activity of the organisation, involving banking, is based, but that if they are aggrieved on account of force majeure in the form of currency value variation, they should draw their plight to the attention of an officer who is responsible so that a specific arrangement may be reached, certainly where there is hardship, and usually where there is simply grievance on account of the lower value and expectation of benefit from the membership within the jurisdiction where the economic instability represented by the revaluation is found.
8. AGGREGATING - (Michael Patterson) Have individuals pay dues to the national levbel chapter who incurs a one-time transaction cost converting the monies to US dollars.
Jerome (Jerry) Katz, Murray Endowed Professor, Saint Louis University, 3674 Lindell Blvd., St. Louis, MO 63108 USA, mailto:katzja@slu.edu, 314-977-3864w, 314-275-8721h, 314-275-7513fax, www.slu.edu/eweb