The company is not simply a magic mask I can put on and off at will; it is constrained by the laws of Japan and the United States, particularly with regards to taxes. Both countries are very lenient with regards to necessary business expenses (必須経費 over here). Neither particularly likes arbitrary money moving out of the company; that smacks of unreported income.
The company has books. All money into the company and out of the company is recorded on those books, in a fashion meeting various legal requirements of both countries. If I say "Donation" next to a line item and the NTA reviews it they'll say "Not allowed; adjust this item to be a distribution to yourself, pay income taxes on it, and don't do this again or we'll be very cross with you." If it says "Software license" the 99.999% case is "Seems reasonable" and the 0.001% case is "Random line-item audit: produce the documentation about this", to which I say "Here's an invoice" and they say "Alrighty then."
Sounds like an excuse to not donate
Again, I do not donate. I just send checks for thousands of dollars to OSS projects.
But the question was about getting a company to donate. In the case of "patio11" vs "patio11 llc" maybe his point seems like a polite fiction (though that discounts the value of removing taxing agencies from the transactions and thus generating more cash for the OSS project), but in the case of bigger companies what he's getting at is very important.
I work for a medium sized company with sub 1k employees across many countries and jurisdictions. Knowing when/how/where our company can legally donate to anything is a problem at the intersection of legal, accounting and marketing, groups I have very little influence with and even less interest in embedding myself in. In fact, I assume there is some committee at our company for charitable works, but I don't know anything about who is on it, how to contact it etc. Even if I did, the idea of a) explaining what OSS is and b) trying to argue for using our charitable contributions budget on OSS software vs cancer research, low income literacy, or whatever else we currently support seems down right icky.
Because you see, OSS isn't a charity for us. We use OSS to solve business problems. It provides real business value that I (and my colleagues) are very cognizant of and would be happy to pay for. If an OSS project had an invoice and a credit card form my process for getting them cash looks like this "ME:Hey $manager_type_with_payment_card give me the card, I need to spend $some_value_less_than_payment_card_transaction_max on some software we use all the time. THEM:Why? ME:My time explaining it will cost the company more than $some_value_less_than_payment_card_transaction_max." THEM: Cool, here you go." Contrast that with the above nightmare of meetings and committees and you can understand why I don't even try to get my company to "donate" to OSS.
There is a lesson for SaaS business in there as well. A recurring charge is much like a donation in that it requires me to navigate a lot of hurdles. A one time fee for a time limited license on the other hand falls into the payment card conversation above. So you are much more likely to get me to pay you $500 for 1 year of access to your software and no recurring contract, than you are to get me to pay $5 a month recurring.
The company has books. All money into the company and out of the company is recorded on those books, in a fashion meeting various legal requirements of both countries. If I say "Donation" next to a line item and the NTA reviews it they'll say "Not allowed; adjust this item to be a distribution to yourself, pay income taxes on it, and don't do this again or we'll be very cross with you." If it says "Software license" the 99.999% case is "Seems reasonable" and the 0.001% case is "Random line-item audit: produce the documentation about this", to which I say "Here's an invoice" and they say "Alrighty then."
Sounds like an excuse to not donate
Again, I do not donate. I just send checks for thousands of dollars to OSS projects.