Member-Managed LLCs Versus Manager-Managed LLCs

Learn the difference between the two different management structures for LLCs.

Image: https://tingenwilliams.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/AdobeStock_57614259-e1498234014331-1000×450.jpeg

When you form a limited liability company (“LLC”), you will need to decide how your LLC will be managed. With LLCs, there are two different possible management structures. You can choose to have a member-managed LLC where all the members (owners) participate in running the business. Or, you can have a manager-managed LLC where only designated members, or certain nonmembers/outsiders, or a combination of members and nonmembers are given the responsibility to run the business. The other members in a manager-managed LLC are passive investors who are not involved in business operations.

Member-Managed LLCs: The More Common Choice

Most people who set up an LLC choose member-management, meaning that all the members share responsibility for the day-to-day running of the business. This approach is more common in part because most LLCs are small businesses with limited resources and they don’t need a separate management level to operate. Unlike corporations, LLCs have a streamlined organizational structure, without officers or boards of directors. As a result, the LLC form is often chosen by people who want to be directly involved in managing and operating their business.

If you and the other members of your LLC want to run your own business—actually make and sell products, take orders, provide services—then you will want a member-management structure for your LLC. For example, if your LLC is a bakery and all your LLC members want to play an active role in the business — crafting recipes, baking goods, hiring employees, opening and closing the shop — then you will want to operate the LLC as member-managers.

In most states, LLCs are member-managed by default under state law. This means that if you don’t designate a management structure for your LLC either in your formation documents or operating agreement, then it will be considered a member-managed organization.

Manager-Management: Better in Certain Circumstances

In some situations, a manager-management structure may be preferable. The most common example is when some members only want to be passive investors in the business. These owners often feel more comfortable if the LLC delegates management responsibilities to one or more other members (or nonmembers).

Two other situations where LLC owners may prefer a manager-management structure are: (1) when your business or ownership is too large, diverse, or complex to efficiently allow for sharing management among all members; or (2) when some of your members are not particularly skilled at management. (Sometimes, of course, these two situations go together.) Delegating management to a smaller group of people or just one person can be an effective way of balancing the varied skills and interests of multiple LLC members. It can also ensure more competent management of the business.

While LLCs that appoint managers often rely on one or more of their own members to fill the role, you can hire a nonmember as manager.

Document Your Choice

If you choose member-management, you may not be required to formally document this choice anywhere (although many states ask you to state whether your LLC will be member-managed or manager-managed in the articles of organization that you file to form your LLC). Nevertheless, all LLCs should have a written operating agreement that defines the basic rights and responsibilities of the members (and managers, if you have them). In a member-managed LLC, this would include things like member voting rights, additional capital contributions, buy-out provisions, and other important management and operational issues for the owners. Without an operating agreement, you run the risk of finding yourselves in a full-blown crisis when something unexpected arises because basic issues weren’t clearly addressed and agreed to early on.

If you choose manager-management for your LLC, there very likely will be a legal requirement that you clearly spell out this choice somewhere in your LLC’s organizational documents. Typically this is either in the articles of organization that you file with the state or your operating agreement. In addition to the items mentioned above for members that you want to include in an operating agreement, you also will want your agreement to address what authority and responsibilities the manager, or managers, will have. For example, will the managers have sole authority for all hiring decisions? What about equipment purchases? Just like with the member provisions, documenting the extent of the manager’s—or managers’— authority can help avoid problems down the road.

If you fail to create your own operating agreement, then your state’s LLC rules will apply. These are not necessarily the rules that you want for your business so make sure you have your own written agreement for your LLC.

For more details about setting up a manager-managed LLC, see Nolo’s article on manager-management for LLCs.

In: nolo

The Great Transportation Conspiracy – National City Lines and related corporate conspiracies to destroy America’s electrified mass-transit systems from the 1930’s into the present

The BHRA is a non-profit organization, where most of the work is done primarily by volunteers. Although we are a non-profit, we are a real railroad, not just a museum! BHRA is a turn-key engineering organization, certified in electric railroad construction.

Streetcar. Image: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/56/Streetcar_in_New_Orleans%2C_USA1.jpg/1200px-Streetcar_in_New_Orleans%2C_USA1.jpg

National City Lines Conspiracy and Conviction in Federal Court:

“Mass transit didn’t just die, it was murdered”  Kwitny, 1981

“When GM and a few other big companies created a transportation oligopoly for the internal-combustion engine  . . . they did not rely just on the obvious sales pitch.  They conspired.  They broke the law. . . in 1949 a jury convicted the corporations and several executives of criminal antitrust violations for their part in the demise of mass transit.  The convictions were upheld on appeal.”   Kwitny, 1981

The above quotes refer to the infamous anti-mass transit “National City Lines Conspiracy” led by General Motors, Standard Oil and Firestone Tires.  The above quotes by Jonathan Kwitny are taken from page 14 of the Feb 1981 edition of Harper’s Magazine (PDF).  It is a truly exceptional article.

In 1949, National City Lines were convicted in Federal court (and in 1951 the conviction was upheld) for destroying the electrified rail and electric bus transit systems in 44 American cities.  Beginning in 1937, National City Lines embarked on a nationwide campaign to induce cities (by aggressively pushing “an offer you can’t refuse” of G.M. /National City Lines financing – at the height of a 12 year long, world-wide economic depression) to scrap electrically powered streetcars and trolley-buses, which G.M. did not make, and to substitute gasoline powered buses manufactured by G.M., burning Standard Oil gasoline, and rolling on Firestone rubber tires.  When National City Lines would aquire a transit system, the trolley rails would be ripped up, the overhead wires would be cut down, and the system would be converted to buses within 90 days.  It’s noteworthy that New York City’s electrified surface transportation system was National City Lines first victim (see the video “Taken For A Ride”).

Strangely, although the Federal Government won the case against G.M., it never imposed any penalty on the company other than extremely small symbolic fines. Perhaps at the time, the Truman administration felt it needed the undivided assistance of G.M. in fighting the Korean War, and pursuing the “Cold War” against the former Soviet Union, more than it needed a national, privately financed and operated all electric mass transit system.

The National City Lines controversy didn’t just go away:

GM’s role in Monopolizing the Sale of Buses for municipal use:

In 1971, the City Of New York led a class action anti-trust lawsuit of 300 localities against G.M. in federal court (PDF) for price fixing and price gouging in the sale of G.M. buses to municipalities. See NY times article (PDF). 

GM’s role in the destruction of intercity rail, suppression of alternative energies and more:

In 1972, then U.S. Senator Ted Kennedy called for a Federal investigation into G.M.’s alleged conspiratorial destruction of the U.S. rail industry and public mass transit industry, in order to facilitate the sale of automobiles.  (see NY Times article (PDF))

At the time, this subject was brought to the attention of Senator Kennedy by NYC based labor attorney and transportation expert Theodore W. Kheel and Ralph Nader associate Bradford C. Snell (see PDF streetcar conspiracy article by Snell and the video “Taken For A Ride”).  Snell was then a San Francisco based attorney, who worked on NYC’s anti-trust bus lawsuit against G.M.

This led to Senate Bill 1167 of 1974 “The Industrial Reorganization Act” and the now little known Ground Transportation Hearings of April 1974 – which were sidetracked by the resignation of then U.S. President Richard Nixon on August 8, 1974 (Watergate). G.M. was literally “saved by the bell”…

In 1974, during the height of the first “Energy Crisis”, the U.S. Senate re-investigated General Motors for its involvement in not only the intentional destruction of the U.S. Streetcar industry, but also G.M.’s direct involvement in the intentional destruction of the U.S. rail freight and passenger rail industry, the systematic suppression of U.S. alternative energy sources, and energy efficient automobile engines, as well as providing direct material aide to Nazi Germany during WWII in the critical areas of military truck manufacture, and military airplane and jet engine manufacture.

Part 4a through appendix  of 1974 Senate Investigation document can be read here (78mb PDF)
Part 4 of 1974 Senate Investigation document can be read here (40mb PDF)

So is the “Unholy Trinity” of the National City Lines Conspiracy still in effect today?

If so in a current corporate context this Unholy Trinity may include:

G.M. = NovaBus (builds CNG buses at the G.M. bus manufacturing plant in Quebec, Canada)
Standard Oil = Trillium USA (provides CNG bus fuel to nearly every U.S. municipal bus fleet)
Firestone Tire = Cato Institute / Wendell Cox / National Highway Users Alliance

Urban transportation planning and system design, pre-National City Lines conspiracy and decimation:

Before the criminal conspiracy that destroyed America’s mass transit systems, Heavy Rail (subways), electrified streetcars and electric bus lines formed an integrated system.  Such a system can still be found in San Francisco (America’s second densest populated city).  Although such an integrated system no longer exists in New York City, we once had such a system. The Brooklyn-Manhattan Transit Company (BMT) and it’s subsidiary Brooklyn and Queens Transit Company (B&QT) actually pioneered this type of integrated transit system.  A new type of vehicle was even created for this system, the PCC. During the 1920’s NYC transportation engineers and planners developed the following hierarchy of all urban electric transportation modes, as a function of corridor ridership density:

1. Heaviest density corridors to be serviced by subway/elevated
2. Electric Streetcar lines to feed subway/elevated lines
3. Electric Bus lines to feed the Streetcar lines

BHRA feels the best way to improve quality of life in urban communities, and truly get a handle on CO2 emissions in densely populated urban settings, is to return to a truly integrated and sensible mode of transportation planning.  This includes switching mass transit vehicles (along densely populated corridors) back from hydrocarbon combustion (in any form), to electric energy derived from low carbon footprint, renewable electrical generating sources.

A fascinating side note: National City Lines was complicit in maintaining Apartheid (“Jim Crow Laws”) in the American south:

“Rosa Parks was arrested for refusing to move to the back of the bus operated by Montgomery Bus Lines, a subsidiary of a National City Lines on 1 December 1955 which led to the Montgomery Bus Boycott. . . The boycott lasted for just over a year and ended only after a successful ruling by the Supreme Court that allowed black bus passengers to sit anywhere they wanted.” (from: National City Lines and the Montgomery Bus Boycott)

In: brooklynrail.net 

La justicia europea prohíbe llamar ‘leche’ a los derivados de la soja

Denominaciones como ‘nata’, ‘mantequilla’, ‘queso’ o ‘yogur’ están reservadas a los productos de origen animal.

Imagen: http://s2.eestatic.com/2017/03/19/mundo/america/eeuu/Leche-Industria-Estados_Unidos-Donald_Trump-EEUU_201990197_31117788_1024x576.jpg

Denominaciones como ‘leche de soja’, ‘mantequilla de tofu’ o ‘queso vegetal’ tendrán que desaparecer por completo de los supermercados y tiendas bio de toda la Unión Europea. El Tribunal de Justicia de Luxemburgo (TJUE) ha dictaminado este miércoles que los productos puramente vegetales, como la soja o el tofu, no pueden comercializarse como ‘leche’, ‘nata’, ‘mantequilla’, ‘queso’ o ‘yogur’. Estos nombres están reservados, según las reglas de la UE, para productos de origen animal.

La sentencia responde a un litigio que enfrentaba a la empresa alemana TofuTown con una asociación también alemana de defensa de la competencia. TofuTown elabora y distribuye alimentos vegetarianos y veganos y los promociona con las denominaciones ‘mantequilla de tofu Soyatoo’, ‘queso vegetal’, ‘veggie-cheese‘, ‘cream‘ y otros nombres similares. La compañía fue denunciada por infringir la normativa de la UE sobre las denominaciones de la leche y los productos lácteos.

En su defensa, TofuTown alegaba que su publicidad no contraviene las reglas de la UE. A su entender, la forma en que el consumidor comprende estas denominaciones ha cambiado mucho en los últimos años. Además, sostiene que nunca usa estos nombres de manera aislada, sino que siempre los relaciona con términos que hacen alusión al origen vegetal de los productos en cuestión, como por ejemplo ‘mantequilla de tofu’ o ‘rice spray cream’.

RIESGO DE CONFUSIÓN

En su fallo de este miércoles, el Tribunal de Justicia de la UE desestima todos los argumentos de TofuTown. La sentencia señala que, a efectos de la comercialización y la publicidad, la normativa comunitaria “reserva en principio exclusivamente la denominación ‘leche’ a la leche de origen animal”. Lo mismo ocurre con nombres como ‘nata’, ‘chantilly’, ‘mantequilla’, ‘queso’ y ‘yogur’, que sólo pueden utilizarse para productos lácteos, es decir, derivados de la leche.

Las denominaciones enumeradas no pueden ser utilizadas legalmente para designar un producto puramente vegetal, salvo que ese producto aparezca en la lista de excepciones, cosa que no ocurre ni con la soja ni con el tofu”, resalta el fallo. La utilización de menciones que indiquen el origen vegetal del producto en cuestión, como hace TofuTown, “no tiene influencia alguna en esta prohibición” ya que no evitan con certeza el “riesgo de confusión por parte del consumidor”.

“Si no se previese esa limitación, estas denominaciones no permitirían identificar con certeza los productos que poseen las características particulares relacionadas con la composición natural de la leche animal, lo que menoscabaría la protección de los intereses de los consumidores, debido al riesgo de confusión creado”, alega el TJUE.

“Se vería también menoscabado el objetivo de mejora de las condiciones económicas de producción y de comercialización, así como la calidad de la leche y los productos lácteos”, concluye la sentencia.

En: elespanol.com 

Bahrain announces it is cutting all ties with Qatar

Imagen: http://www.arabianbusiness.com/incoming/article643230.ece/ALTERNATES/g3l/Qatar-Bahrain-Saudi-bridge.jpg

Bahrain has announced it is cutting diplomatic ties with Qatar, according to a statement carried on Bahrain News Agency.

The statement on Monday morning said Bahrain decided to sever ties with its neighbor “on the insistence of the State of Qatar to continue destabilizing the security and stability of the Kingdom of Bahrain and to intervene in its affairs”.

The statement also said Qatar’s incitement of the media and supporting of terrorist activities and financing groups linked to Iran were reasons behind the decision.

“(Qatar has) spread chaos in Bahrain in flagrant violation of all agreements and covenants and principles of international law Without regard to values, law or morals or consideration of the principles of good neighborliness or commitment to the constants of Gulf relations and the denial of all previous commitments,” the statement read.

Qatari citizens have 14 days to leave Bahraini territories while Qatari diplomats were given 48 hours to leave the country after being expelled.

Meanwhile, Bahrain has has closed both air and sea borders with Qatar.

(Developing)

Last Update: Monday, 5 June 2017 KSA 05:36 – GMT 02:36
In: alarabiya

China’s approach to eradicating poverty

‘Investing in new business sectors, such as rural tourism, is important’. Image: REUTERS

Poverty is a global issue and poverty eradication must be a common task for those wishing to improve global governance. In Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, the UN says: “We recognize that eradicating poverty in all its forms and dimensions, including extreme poverty, is the greatest global challenge and an indispensable requirement for sustainable development.”

Guan Tzu, an ancient Chinese economist said: “When the granaries are full, they will know propriety and moderation; when their clothing and food are adequate, they will know the distinction between honour and shame.”

Poverty eradication will help reduce inequality and facilitate inclusive growth. If people living in poverty can shake off their plight, it can expand market capacity, enhance the specialized division of labour and facilitate a more efficient and unified large market. Moreover, the resulting strengthening of marginal propensity to consume (MPC) will inject new vigour and energy into economic growth.

As an ancient Chinese proverb goes: “Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.” All sustainable and effective poverty alleviation measures ultimately rely on industrial development. Industrial development in poverty-stricken areas in China is hindered by many restrictions. We must raise the low level of industrial development in these regions and break away from the vicious circle of low-level industrial development, an unattractive investment environment and degrading industrial development.

To encourage self-driven growth and the development of a local market and businesses, it is imperative to introduce external market forces. Regional industrial funds can guide and integrate resources, such as funds, technologies and talent, for investment in market entities in specific regions. Industrial investment funds, which combine the industrial capital and resources of these areas, can improve employment opportunities for people in poverty and financial input in these areas, realizing poverty eradication in a fundamental way.

Efforts can be made to build capital strength for local enterprises and improve their corporate governance structures and management. For industrial development, steps can be taken to: advance the transformation and upgrading of traditional agriculture; cultivate new business sectors in rural areas; promote the integration of primary, secondary and tertiary industries; and bolster competition in rural industries. When it comes to society, endeavors can be made to optimize the investment environment and improve financing for small and medium businesses.

Newly-built residential buildings are seen next to the partially-frozen Songhua River and a bridge in Jilin, Jilin province February 3, 2015. Image: REUTERS/Stringer

To help remove the restrictions hindering the industrial development of poverty-stricken areas, the Chinese government has established two industrial poverty-alleviation funds. With the current total strength of 15 billion Renminbi yuan and the duration of 15 years, the two funds are expected to operate at a larger scale in the future. Both funds, operated and managed by State Development & Investment Corporation (SDIC), will follow market-oriented methods.

It is necessary to go off the beaten track and find innovative investment approaches for fund investment in impoverished areas. These might include integrating upper-stream industry chains with region-specific resources by cooperation with selected leading local enterprises, so that industries with local characteristics can move from disorderly competition towards benign development.

Investing in new business sectors, such as rural tourism, eco-agriculture and rural e-commerce, is also important. Furthermore, employing diverse investment methods, like sub-fund, debt investment and optimized direct investment, can attract more social investment for poverty alleviation and solve the problem of difficult and expensive financing for small and medium enterprises. If funds take advantage of their lengthy duration and low costs; work to support the talent, technological and managing advantages of leading enterprises; and invest in the resources and industries that demonstrate the local characteristics of the area, they can promote the ability of poverty-stricken areas to self-develop.

Poverty eradication is a common cause for all of society. China has developed a unique approach to this challenge by perpetually eliminating poverty through industrial development – a method of great significance for developing countries. Socially responsible enterprises must work together to declare a war on poverty and realize the great goal of “eradicating poverty in all its forms and dimensions” in the world.

Written by: Wang Huisheng, Chairman, State Development & Investment Corporation (SDIC)

In: webforum

El controversial corto del Super Bowl: 84 Lumber Super Bowl Commercial – The Entire Journey

Si pudiste ver el Super Bowl el ultimo domingo, seguramente habras notado un comercial que ha tocado al tema de la inmigracion desde Mexico a los Estados Unidos producido por la empresa maderera “Lumber 84”, la cual, al finalizar, le pedia a los espectadores ir a su website para “completar el viaje”. El tema es que mucha gente penso para que ir al website para terminar un comercial? Transmitanlo completamente! No me hagan trabajar por una companhia de la que nunca he oido hablar!

Lo que paso es que “Lumber 84” habia planeado transmitir todo el comercial pero la cadena televisiva Fox puso el grito en el cielo. El broadcaster considero el comercial como muy “controversial” como para ser transmitido durante el evento televisivo mas visto del pais y por ello “Lumber 84” fue forzado a cortar el comercial y remover parte de la cinta considerada ofensiva.

El comercial es la historia simbolica de una madre y su pequenha hija ralizando un arduo y largo viaje a los Estados Unidos de Norteamerica. En el video que no se pudo ver en el Super Bowl, ellas llegan a la frontera solo para ser recibidas por una gran muralla de concreto. Pero ahi no acaba la cosa.

Esta es un gran corto con un mensaje poderoso y claro: Las oportunidades estan siendo vapuleadas (algo contradictorio en el “pais de las oprtunidades”).

Fox es una empresa con fines de lucro, por lo que tienen el derecho de elegir lo que hacen y no hacen con sus ondas, pero se ve ridículo que la misma red que no dice nada respecto de las gráficas torturas de “24” encuentren la imagen de una pared fronteriza demasiado “polémica”.

Traducido al espanhol de: collider.com

Tildes omitidas intencionalmente.

Make “América” great again (toda)

Siempre la misma discusión acerca del término “America” para los estadounidenses y “América” para los latinoamericanos. Para los primeros es la denominación informal de su país ya que no andan diciendo “I’m from the United States of America”..muy largo, y como tienen fama de prácticos, pues la cortaron solo a “America”: “I’m an American”. Mientras que para los segundos, es la denominación de todo el continente en que se localizan 35 países (incluye Canadá y Estados Unidos de Norteamérica).

Ya que ahora Trump mediante una retórica nacionalista se apropió del término para su campaña política, cerveza Corona emerge con la mejor respuesta al sujeto que, como de broma, salió elegido presidente del país norteño. Hagamos (toda) América grande de nuevo!

https://youtu.be/SuLEu-nwd50

Por su parte, la otra “America”, la de Trump, apela a un argumento populista y victimizador que siempre ha funcionado en política. Ahora saben por qué ganó (aparte del Colegio Electoral):

 

1 2 3