Versions Compared

Old Version 6

changes.mady.by.user Peter Szegedi

Saved on

compared with

New Version Current

changes.mady.by.user Nicole Harris

Saved on

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

Time and Place

11 12:00 - 1314:00 CET.  Amsterdam Board Meeting Room 2 or task-force-SIG room on Lifesize: https://call.lifesizecloud.com/call/2573142.

...

Aims

  • To look at some of the challenges we face serving communities outside the core GÉANT membership.
  • To look at solutions that we have in place.
  • To see if we can identify any solutions / partnerships / approaches in the short, medium and long term.

Agenda

TimeItemNotes
1112:00 - 1112:10Arrive, get connected, fix the camera etc.                                                                                           
1112:10 - 1112:30Quick round table - where are we running projects that serve communities outside the core membership
1112:30 - 1213:00What challenges do we face? (see table below)
1213:00 - 1314:00What solutions exist now / might be possible in the future?

...

Issue (I've filled in some examples - feel free to add more before the meeting)Current SolutionFuture Ideas
Not able to charge for events in many countries as we are not VAT registered.  Impacts TRANSITS, TNC and expanding training opportunities. Only run training in certain countries.

ACTION: Annabel to gather some use cases from other companies. 

ACTION: Nicole to ask Irina for an update from training perspective. 

Check with finance what the current scenario is. 

The 80 / 20 rule is now pretty well understood in the company and a necessary requirement to support procurement processes for our members, but we don't necessarily understand the priorities for the 20%.Ad hoc  - rely on being told if new ideas are not eligible. 

Can we "cascade" the 80/20 downwards and apply to all projects - e.g. we only take something forward if 80% is for our members?

ACTION: Klaas to raise prioritization direction for the 20% from Exec team.

According to the latest Dutch Tax Authority (DTA) ruling, GLIF is considered an independent organization that is not a separate legal entity (no VAT registration) but has a governance independent from GÉANT. It has two practical implications:

  • GÉANT cannot sign agreements directly with the GLIF Sponsors and GÉANT cannot invoice them either using GÉANT's VAT number. GLIF (as a virtual org) must have an agreement with the sponsors and GLIF should invoice the sponsors, so:

      • due to the lack of VAT registration, GLIF cannot provide a EU VAT number to sponsors. This is problematic for CESNET and PSNC.
      • due to the lack of legal entity, GLIF cannot full fill out the W8 BEN E form required by US public law. This is problematic for Indiana Uni and FIU.
  • On the other hand, GLIF must pay 21% Dutch VAT to GÉANT for providing the Secretariat services. This VAT cannot be reimbursed - there is a "VAT leakage" in the system - that is a pure loss.

Same for REFEDS. 

There is a GLIF branded Sponsorship Agreement for those EU sponsors who need it.

CESNET and PSNC presumably loose their VAT (reverse-charged but cannot be reimbursed due to lack of EU VAT number provided by GLIF)

GLIF Sponsors all together loose the 21% Dutch VAT that GLIF pays to GÉANT for the Secretariat service.

I have no idea how particular US organizations can sponsor GLIF without a W8 BEN E form?

We all know that the DTA ruling in fundamentally wrong. Something that Bert negotiated in the past. GLIF should be positioned as project, and not as an independent organization.

GÉANT must challenge the current DTA ruling about GLIF. There was a promise from finance that we'll consult with EY on this. TBC?

This item is parked to be reconsidered after the full merger. 

GLIF Secretariat is a service provided by GÉANT following an outsourcing model to a third-party company. There is involvement from all three parties in here:

  • GLIF Co-Chairs and GOV WG that governs GLIF
  • GÉANT finance (Alex) and contract management (Peter) that looks after some Secretariat functions
  • The outsourced Secretariat (Kevin).

 Information flow and transparency among these parties is problematic. 

Plenty of emails back and forth, lots of delays in invoicing and collecting payments.
When IR members get an inquiry from partners outside Europe regarding GÉANT services, what is the process internally to ensure effective follow-up.ad hoc;

a clearer process would be good.  This is something we can resolve quickly with the IR and PR teams. 

Also define what we want to promote internationally. 

ACTION: support a shared wiki space for International Relations and Partner Relations. 

Unclear status Volunteer Agreements for providing community services - e.g. are they now 'mandated' for GÉANT projects where volunteer trainers are used, are the boilerplates now usable, are they accepted by volunteers etc? They were being introduced when I needed volunteers in Nov 2017 and were not yet fit for purpose.  I hear there were issues with reimbursements of other volunteers recently....

Volunteer agreements that are mutually acceptable for GÉANT project auditing and volunteers, or DIY permitted to continue by projects.

Communication from the procurement team on the volunteer agreements.

ACTION: Nicole to request an email explanation from the procurement team to all staff.

Not clear which parts of GÉANT's Service Portfolio are available to non-Member communities.ad hoc exploration

Produce a non-Member community GÉANT product portfolio. 

ACTION: for discussion in NA3 meeting?

Unclear if/under what conditions non-Members outside of the EU are allowed to become Members of GÉANT.??

Clearer GÉANT membership policy and guidelines.  Can we offer membership to organisations that are not EU NRENs? 

Can we use the membership to collect other funding for projects (e.g. REFEDS).

Can we look at different sorts of membership, working with regional organisations (WACREN, TEIN etc). 

Where do members of our members fall?

How do we support "pre" members  / emerging NRENs. 

This item is parked but flagged as an idea for future direction. 

Can external people attend EC project events (and can we feed them). 

Can we have a clear process on this from finance. 

ACTION: request clear directions from finance on ability to pay and support non-project people at events. 

How to manage things that have grown and been successful but now can be seen as not a direct fit for GÉANT - e.g. TF-CSIRT.
Need a process for managing our successes. 
GDPR issues and collecting personal data. 
Standard forms will be put in place - this can be considered resolved.
How can we offer services to non-members?  e.g. Can we run AAI services for a research collaboration. 

Unclear, ad hoc decisions. 

 - Some contracts with consultancy (ESA). 
 - ESnet.
 - Training. 

Clearer definition of who services can be offered to. 

Looking at maybe setting up another company. 

This item is parked - Klaas will track discussions on separate legal entities.