Talk:Local exchange trading system

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

See Also[edit]

I feel there should be links to Mutualism (economic theory) and maybe to the Cincinnatti Time Store. Anarchist mutualism advocates a system of credit-free labor transactions very similar to LETS.-- (talk) 05:15, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

This article copies directly from . Has the author of that page released this text under the GNU FDL (or released it into the public domain?) If not, this text is a copyright violation.


And, for that matter, does /that/ author have permission to relicense the material? See here: "Thanks due to everybody involved with SEELETS, esp. Paul Brown for technical help, and Derek Lucas and all the original ?Greenlinks? people for getting the ball rolling in the first place, and to LETSLINK UK, whose leaflets & literature I have freely plagiarised." --KQ 22:43 Aug 31, 2002 (PDT)

I wrote the original article loosely based and adapted from LETS publicity material which were intended for that very purpose :-)

quercus robur 06:34 Sep 1, 2002 (PDT)

Re broken link message 27/12/04- the page refered to is on my website- I had notification from the ISP that provide hosting for that page that they would be doing some maintainance work around late December and thus some pages might be unavailble for a time, so hopefully it will be up and running again within a few days. quercus robur 09:48, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Tax issues?[edit]

My understanding is that at least some barter systems allow participants to avoid paying various taxes. What is the tax treatment of this system? It sounds relatively systematic, so I wouldn't be surprised if it also included some sort of tax reporting process. I think that would be a useful additon to the article. --Rkstafford 17:29, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

In the UK at least, as I understand it, transactions in a LETS scheme can be construed as 'Payment in kind' for tax purposes although I've never heard of anything being enforced. Rpineger (talk) 20:12, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
Following Jill Jordan's submission of her tax returns in Bunya Nuts within the Maleny LETSystem, the issue for a while stayed with the Australian Tax Office. Office of Complex Audits. Eventually a Tax Ruling was released, specifically to govern cases like BarterCard, but applying to LETSystems too. For "personal arrangements, social arrangements, hobbies, or passtimes" there were no tax implications (this applied to over 80% of transactions in most Australian LETSystems). For Tradesmen excertising their trade, retailers or wholsealers selling goods or services, and professional self-employed people, exercising their profession, their taxable income assumed nominal parity between the LETS unit and the Australian dollar, and they were to pay their tax in national currency. In Australian LETSystem transactions as a result, system organisers suggested that people effected pass on the costs in Australian Dollars AUD, to their customers.John D. Croft (talk) 15:27, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
Interesting. Almost certainly false in the United States, (all services for which repayment in kind is expected create taxable income; being "tradesmen" or "professionals" is irrelevant.) I can't say I've heard of it being enforced, either, as in the UK. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 15:24, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

I second what editor Arthur Rubin has written. In the United States, for federal income tax purposes, there is no general exclusion for bartered goods and services. Famspear (talk) 16:07, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

As a follow-up, the section on taxation appears to be largely unsourced original research. Further, general statements in the section don't appear to be helpful; the tax effects of barter transactions could vary greatly from one jurisdiction to another. For example, in the United States, for federal income tax purposes, the text as currently worded is simply incorrect. As noted above, structuring a transaction in the way described in the article does not generally negate liability for U.S. federal income tax. Yes, there are limited exceptions (such as certain "like kind" exchanges) in U.S. federal income tax law, but the complexity of the rules for that kind of transaction is way, way beyond the scope of this article. Perhaps a more prudent approach for the article would be to avoid statements about taxes at all -- except where a specific statement for a specific jurisdiction can be made -- and then only where a reliable, previously published third party source is provided. Famspear (talk) 17:10, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

different from local currency?[edit]

Is LETS basically a kind of Local currency, or is there a fundamental difference? I understand that accounts are used... does this mean that credit is built into the system, in that someone can provide a service in order to gain credit on their own account, even if the "customer" doesn't yet have credit? --Singkong2005 talk 03:12, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Correct. LETS have no scrip and are generated by transactions. It is a system for tracking credit and debit to facilitate indirect trading. I'll try to work on this article at some point to clarify and expand. - N1h1l 13:38, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Gifting LETS credits to another person?[edit]

Is it possible to gift your LETS credits to another person without providing any goods and/or services?--FreedonNadd 01:54, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Depends on the system. But I'd guess that generally the answer is yes. - N1h1l 01:57, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

LETS - Is it newsworthy and current?[edit]

This page requires considerable reworking. Information is very outdated. Does it have credible references? --Darren Mitchell (talk) 02:57, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Hmm? Probably this search would be more relevant (unless there's an acronym collision that got you here, in which case that's a different issue):"Local+exchange+trading+systems" (talk) 21:26, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

I recommend that you write a completely new article[edit]

This is far from good.--Mats33 (talk) 18:18, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

I found the section on "Criticism of LETS" particularly frustrating, with its use of "often have", "many of these", "a number of", etc. It failed my "Why should I believe that?" test. Refer to Wikipedia:Manual of Style for ideas. Mel.gazelle (talk) 03:10, 28 August 2010 (UTC)


I'm afraid my understanding is that, if a person (A) does something for a person (B) with the (reasonable) expectation that A will be repaid, then "A" will owe tax on the value of the services he expects to receive. This has nothing to do with either A or C (the person A receives services from) being a professional. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 15:04, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

See #Tax issues? above. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 15:26, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

new Wordpress plugin[edit]

I've just found new wordpress plugin that has the ability for points exchange and has the ability to connect with buddypress system and make a multi community site for exchange. Stuk88 (talk) 08:10, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

difference between LETS and LETSystem[edit]

The 5 essential criteria define a "LETSystem", the original design of Michael Linton,

  • Cost of service (all costs of opertion must be covered internally)
  • Consent is required at all times
  • Disclosure
  • Equivalence to the national currency
  • no interest

In the beginning LETS was synonymous to LETSystem, however people made up all kinds of variations, so that "LETSystem" became the term to describe the original design and LETS a general term for all of the variations: — Preceding unsigned comment added by M.artti (talkcontribs) 10:18, 29 August 2017 (UTC)