I think when most people say unspent, they mean something like “payment for labor not yet performed or for expenses that can be avoided.”
I think the observation that non-profits are selling a service to the grantor and should be treated the same as for-profits actually leads to the conclusion that unspent/unearned funds should be returned. Let’s take the various stadium-naming and similar deals as an example, and let’s assume that FTX had transferred all the money for those deals upfront. Would it be reasonable and ethical for the stadium authorities, sports teams, etc. to keep all the money if they are ready and willing to perform the services for which they had been contracted (whether continued performance would be of any value to the bankruptcy estate / creditors or not?)
Although I feel bad for the grantees, I can’t find any way to distinguish them from any other vendor who was paid in advance.
I think when most people say unspent, they mean something like “payment for labor not yet performed or for expenses that can be avoided.”
I think the observation that non-profits are selling a service to the grantor and should be treated the same as for-profits actually leads to the conclusion that unspent/unearned funds should be returned. Let’s take the various stadium-naming and similar deals as an example, and let’s assume that FTX had transferred all the money for those deals upfront. Would it be reasonable and ethical for the stadium authorities, sports teams, etc. to keep all the money if they are ready and willing to perform the services for which they had been contracted (whether continued performance would be of any value to the bankruptcy estate / creditors or not?)
Although I feel bad for the grantees, I can’t find any way to distinguish them from any other vendor who was paid in advance.