Some of the points seem to solve themselves.

I mean Syria is getting off US and EU [1] sanctions lists and all it took was a regime change. Perhaps something the others on those lists should consider? just a thought.

:)


[1] https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2025/05/28/syria-eu-adopts-legal-acts-to-lift-economic-sanctions-on-syria-enacting-recent-political-agreement/

Kaj

Sent from my iPad

From: Denys Fedoryshchenko <nuclearcat@nuclearcat.com>
Sent: Saturday, May 31, 2025 3:35 PM
To: members-discuss@ripe.net <members-discuss@ripe.net>
Subject: [members-discuss] Re: Reminder that Charging Scheme Task Force comments are open until the end of the month
 
Daniel,

The obstacles you list do more than complicate a tiered-fee
discussion—they question the wisdom of keeping the RIPE NCC
incorporated in the Netherlands at all:

    Physical access – Visa barriers exclude members from GM
participation.

    Geopolitical neutrality – The host state has used armed force
against several member economies.

    Sanctions exposure – EU measures already restrict Russian, Iranian,
Syrian and other members.

    Tax rigidity – Dutch rules are cited as blocking a usage-based
charging model adopted by every other RIR.

If the legal and fiscal climate in the Netherlands cannot accommodate a
cost-causation fee structure, we should assess jurisdictions that can.
Comparable non-profit registries in Germany (DENIC), France (AFNIC),
the UK (Nominet) and Canada (CIRA) all combine member-governed models
with per-resource charging—without losing tax-exempt status.

Maybe we should expect action: launch a formal study on relocating the
RIPE NCC to a legally neutral venue that:
- Allows tiered/usage-based fees under clear non-profit rules.
- Offers visa-light access for all members.
- Minimises sanctions entanglements.
- Preserves the community’s oversight and surplus-reinvestment
principles.

Continuing with a flat-fee model in a restrictive jurisdiction leaves a
growing share of the membership disenfranchised and subsidising the
heaviest resource users. Let us evaluate relocation now, before
governance credibility erodes further.

P.S. All four operate under EU or OECD tax codes, none lose their non-
profit status (or equivalent), and each successfully allocates cost in
proportion to resource usage.


Nominet UK (Private company limited by guarantee—surpluses reinvested
for public benefit (no shareholders, no dividends)
£ 58.6 m (£41.1 m registry, £15.3 m cyber-security, £2.2 m investment
income)
Membership fee:
£400 + VAT one-off joining
£100 + VAT annual renewal (prorated £50 if joining after 1 Feb)
Other fees:
- Domain Availability Checker: £25 / yr
- Searchable WHOIS: £400 / yr
- Domain Lock: £90 per name / yr
- Wholesale registry fee: £3.90 per .uk-year

CIRA (Canada) (Incorporated as a not-for-profit organisation under
Canadian federal law. )
C$ 34.3 m total revenue (C$ 29.6 m domain-registry; C$ 4.7 m cyber-
security & other)
Membership fee:
NONE
Other fees:
- Wholesale registry fee

DENIC eG (.de) (Private, not-for-profit co-operative (~300 member
companies))
€ 51.3 m total income; gross earnings € 15.9 m; annual surplus € 0.04 m
Membership fee:
€595 processing (DE) / €500 (non-DE)
€1 000 admission (one-off)
€1 500 capital share per unit (min 1, max 3). No published recurring
dues; the share remains on the books while a member.
Other fees:
- Wholesale registry fee
- Training, escrow, etc. charged separately.

AFNIC (.fr) (Non-profit association governed by French law. )
€ 22.0 m turnover (of which € 20.45 m from .fr)
Annual dues by college (calendar year):
- Companies & Registrars: €190
- Individuals: €50
- Students: €20
Other fees:
- Registrar accreditation: €500 / yr
- Create / renew / transfer / restore: €4.56 per domain-year (2024
tariff).




On Sat, 2025-05-31 at 09:36 +0200, Daniel Suchy via members-discuss
wrote:
> I never said that the layered model would ruin RIPE. That's your
> personal lie.
>
> If we want to compare with other RIRs, we should not cherry-pick just
> some aspects.  In a similar comparison, we must also take into
> account
> the size of the budget and what the money is spent on and where. It's
> not just about implementing a layered model and problem is solved.
>
> It is also true that each RIR lives in a slightly different legal
> environment. And among other things, the tax implications of the
> tiered
> model must also be well evaluated.
>
> In our legal environment, tax authorities may assess the tiered model
> as
> a provision of a service. Besides, it was an argument at a time when
> the
> tiered model was abandoned in RIPE (which many have already
> forgotten).
>
> The argument that they have it that way in the US or Africa probably
> won't hold up at all before the European (Dutch) tax office. Non-
> profit
> organizations usually have some tax breaks. But if the tax office
> determines that it is a regular service, the tax breaks will
> disappear.
>
> And from my perspective, a better solution is for the money to stay
> in
> the community. Not in some government budget.
>
> - Daniel
>
>
> On 5/31/25 9:19 AM, Jean Salim wrote:
> > Please open an IPv6 transition thread and stop the disinformation
> > in this
> > thread.
> > Speaking of which, as pointed out hundred of times, all other RIRs
> > have
> > successfully implemented tiered charging schemes, some of them with
> > weighted voting power, others not.
> > So stop misleading people by saying that tiered charging will ruin
> > RIPE
> > when it's been working fine at other RIRs.
> >
> -----
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list or change your subscription
> options, please visit:
> https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmailman.ripe.net%2Fmailman3%2Flists%2Fmembers-discuss.ripe.net%2F&data=05%7C02%7C%7C5b5e1547e9d14061b10008dda03f900c%7Cd0b71c570f9b4acc923b81d0b26b55b3%7C0%7C0%7C638842917076566654%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C4000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=e0F%2FDQBkH%2FDYxV1CdpiH%2BcYpnrbOOgxAreD%2FVPffZ5k%3D&reserved=0
> As we have migrated to Mailman 3, you will need to create an account
> with the email matching your subscription before you can change your
> settings.
> More details at:
> https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ripe.net%2Fmembership%2Fmail%2Fmailman-3-migration%2F&data=05%7C02%7C%7C5b5e1547e9d14061b10008dda03f900c%7Cd0b71c570f9b4acc923b81d0b26b55b3%7C0%7C0%7C638842917076588256%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C4000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=HCrhRhsfyK5yiB%2FmSmTHiVfdbmZP1w4laUIySQHz2Q0%3D&reserved=0

-----
To unsubscribe from this mailing list or change your subscription options, please visit: https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fmailman.ripe.net%2Fmailman3%2Flists%2Fmembers-discuss.ripe.net%2F&data=05%7C02%7C%7C5b5e1547e9d14061b10008dda03f900c%7Cd0b71c570f9b4acc923b81d0b26b55b3%7C0%7C0%7C638842917076603049%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C4000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=EyHDK1YxIOhCawPUST2mUjJHLaUq0%2F3D5GxrnWQ7gOY%3D&reserved=0
As we have migrated to Mailman 3, you will need to create an account with the email matching your subscription before you can change your settings.
More details at: https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ripe.net%2Fmembership%2Fmail%2Fmailman-3-migration%2F&data=05%7C02%7C%7C5b5e1547e9d14061b10008dda03f900c%7Cd0b71c570f9b4acc923b81d0b26b55b3%7C0%7C0%7C638842917076621153%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C4000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=qviHNMe0WDZ1%2BT1XOD592Nd4vlS1ezYZ8oW7sdA3dYo%3D&reserved=0