I think that a sponsor should be able to set separate taxes on their associates. It only makes sense being that the associate does make money for the sponsor. The reason being is that, if a CL sets taxes to zero, then the Sponsor will in turn not make any money from their associate. I think the Sponsor should be able to set taxes at their own level that has nothing to do with Crew Taxes.

I don't know how much sense that made but it's 10AM and I haven't been to sleep yet. Just now getting sober.

Would love for any ides to be added to this, pros, cons, anything at all.

Have to say, provided that an associate is fully answerable to their sponsor (forgive the ignorance, not totally clear on this relationship yet), then I see nothing wrong with the sponsor making a little money from the enterprise. I would, however, place a cap on this tax so that the associate is still given some wiggle room for getting a foothold financially.

Doesnt the sponsor get a small percentage of what an associate earns already. I believe it to be a very small percentage, but its a percentage.

"Doesnt the sponsor get a small percentage of what an associate earns already. I believe it to be a very small percentage, but its a percentage."


Yes, Hurley the sponsor does get a percentage, only if the entire Crew's taxes are on. But if a CL turns taxes off for the entire family, the sponsor doesn't make anything from his associate.


Lola, yes I do think that if a sponsor is giving the ability to set his own taxes for his associates then it should be capped to a max so the associate can make reasonable money and not be stripped of all their cash.