Law Commons^™

Keep Charitable Oversight In The Irs, Philip Hackney

Articles

Critics are increasingly calling for Congress to remove charity regulation from the IRS. The critics are wrong. Congress should maintain charity regulation in the IRS. What is at stake is balancing power between the state, charity as civil society, and the economic order. In a well-balanced democracy, civil society maintains its independence from the state and the economic order. Removing charitable jurisdiction from the IRS would blind the IRS to dollars placed in the charitable sector increasing tax and political shelters and wealthy dominance of charities as civil society. A new agency without understanding of, or jurisdiction over, tax cannot …

Nonprofits, Taxes, And Speech, Lloyd H. Mayer

Journal Articles

Federal tax law is of two minds when it comes to speech by nonprofits. The tax benefits provided to nonprofits are justified in significant part because they provide nonprofits great discretion in choosing the specific ends and means to pursue, thereby promoting diversity and pluralism. But current law withholds some of these tax benefits if a nonprofit engages in certain types of political speech. Legislators have also repeatedly, if unsuccessfully, sought to expand these political speech restrictions in various ways. And some commentators have proposed denying tax benefits to groups engaged in other types of disfavored speech, including hate speech …

Brief Of Amici Curiae Scholars Of The Law Of Non-Profit Organizations In Support Of Respondent: Americans For Prosperity Foundation V. Matthew Rodriguez, Nos. 19-251 & 19-255, Ellen P. Aprill, Roger Colinvaux, Sean Delany, James Fishman, Brian D. Galle, Philip Hackney, Jill R. Horwitz, Cindy Lott, Ray D. Madoff, Jill S. Manny, Nancy A. Mclaughlin, Richard Schmalbeck

Amici Briefs

The twelve individuals filing this amicus brief are professors and scholars of the law of nonprofit organizations. No party in this case represents all three of charity’s key stakeholders: charities, states, and taxpayers who underwrite the charities’ funding. Amici are participating in this litigation in order to aid the Court in understanding how these three interests depend on one another. They also attempt to provide a clearer understanding of state supervision of charities and how that supervision related to federal tax law.

The 1969 Tax Reform Act And Charities: Fifty Years Later, Philip Hackney

Articles

Fifty years ago, Congress enacted the Tax Reform Act of 1969 to regulate charitable activity of the rich. Congress constricted the influence of the wealthy on private foundations and hindered the abuse of dollars put into charitable solution through income tax rules. Concerned that the likes of the Mellons, the Rockefellers, and the Fords were putting substantial wealth into foundations for huge tax breaks while continuing to control those funds for their own private ends, Congress revamped the tax rules to force charitable foundations created and controlled by the wealthy to pay out charitable dollars annually and avoid self-dealing. Today, …

Reforming The Regulation Of Political Advocacy By Charities: From Charity Under Siege To Charity Under Rescue?, Adam Parachin

Adam Parachin

A newly elected liberal federal government in Canada has pledged to reform the legal distinction between charity and politics. This paper provides context to this reform initiative, linking it to a controversial political activities audit program funded by the former conservative federal government. It identifies three distorting ideas about charity—that charity can be understood as a tax expenditure, economic or neutral concept—that should be eschewed in the reform process. It also identifies three characteristics of charity—the capacity of charities for thought leadership, the pervasiveness of messaging in charitable programming and the distinctiveness of charity and government—that should guide reformers.

Donor Intent, Disaster Relief, Education, And Policy, Marian Conway Ph.D.

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Rejecting Charity: Why The Irs Denies Tax Exemption To 501(C)(3) Applicants, Terri Lynn Helge

Terri L. Helge

New charitable organizations generally must file an application for exemption (Form 1023) and await approval from the Internal Revenue Service. Unfortunately, the criteria the Internal Revenue Service uses to evaluate applications has not always been transparent. If an application is approved, the Internal Revenue Service determination letter and the application for exemption are required to be made publicly available and can be requested from the Internal Revenue Service or the organization itself. Prior to 2004, in the case of denials, neither the application nor the Internal Revenue Service’s correspondence setting forth its rationale for the denial were made publicly available. …

Charitable Subsidies And Nonprofit Governance: Comparing The Charitable Deduction With The Exemption For Endowment Income, David M. Schizer

Faculty Scholarship

Charitable subsidies are supposed to encourage positive externalities from charity. In principle, the government can pursue this goal by evaluating specific charitable initiatives and deciding how much each should receive. Although the government sometimes makes this sort of fine-grained judgment, this Article focuses on two income tax rules that leave the government essentially no discretion about which charities to fund: the deduction for donations to charity ("the deduction") and the exemption of a charity's investment income ("the exemption"). With each subsidy, federal dollars flow automatically as long as charities satisfy very general criteria.

As a result, these subsidies are especially …

A Strange Distinction: Charitable Immunity And Clergy Sexual Abuse In Picher V. Roman Catholic Bishop Of Portland, Matthew Cobb

Maine Law Review

In 2009, the Maine Supreme Judicial Court, sitting as the Law Court, decided Picher v. Roman Catholic Bishop of Portland, a case that presented an issue of first impression in Maine: whether the doctrine of charitable immunity protected charitable organizations from liability for intentional torts. The court ultimately held that charitable immunity was not a defense to intentional torts, but that it did bar negligence claims based on the sexual abuse of a minor. In Picher, a majority of the Law Court partly vacated the trial court’s grant of summary judgment for the Roman Catholic Bishop of Portland (Bishop) and …

Rejecting Charity: Why The Irs Denies Tax Exemption To 501(C)(3) Applicants, Terri Lynn Helge

Faculty Scholarship

New charitable organizations generally must file an application for exemption (Form 1023) and await approval from the Internal Revenue Service. Unfortunately, the criteria the Internal Revenue Service uses to evaluate applications has not always been transparent. If an application is approved, the Internal Revenue Service determination letter and the application for exemption are required to be made publicly available and can be requested from the Internal Revenue Service or the organization itself. Prior to 2004, in the case of denials, neither the application nor the Internal Revenue Service’s correspondence setting forth its rationale for the denial were made publicly available. …

Social Technology & The Origins Of Popular Philanthropy, Brian L. Frye

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

The prevailing theory of charity law holds that the charitable contribution deduction is justified because it solves market and government failures in charitable goods by compensating for free riding on charitable contributions. This Article argues that many market and government failures in charitable goods are actually caused by transaction costs, and that social technology can solve those market and government failures by reducing transaction costs. Specifically, it shows that in the early twentieth century, the social technology of charity chain letters solved market and government failures in charitable contributions and facilitated the emergence of popular philanthropy.

Video: Charities For Fun & Profit: Serving & Representing Them, Adam Scott Goldberg

NSU Law Seminar Series

Registration & Continental Breakfast:

7:30 to 7:55 am

Atrium & Lecture Room

Welcome & Introduction:

7:55 to 8:00 am

Elena Rose Minicucci, J.D., Director of Alumni Relations, NSU Shepard Broad Law Center

• Welcome
• Introduce Adam Scott Goldberg, J.D., LL.M. of Krause & Goldberg, PA Weston, Florida.

Seminar Presentation

8:00 am to 9:30 am

Adam Scott Goldberg, J.D., LL.M.

I. Introduction

1. What is the difference between Tax Exempt and Not-For-Profit?

2. Why is the difference between a Calendar Year and a Fiscal Year?

A. Many Charitable Organizations use July 1st to June 30th

B. Tax returns are due 4.5 months …

The Charity Commission For England And Wales: A Fine Example Or Another Fine Mess?, Debra Morris

Chicago-Kent Law Review

The ability of the Charity Commission for England and Wales to regulate the charitable sector effectively has been repeatedly called into question in recent years. At the same time, public sector funding cuts have led to its budget being almost halved in real terms since 2007/08. Numerous official reviews and inquiries into its effectiveness have highlighted its weaknesses and raised concerns about it failing to take sufficient action to prevent abuses of charitable status. In response to the Commission’s claims that it lacks sufficient legal powers to deal with such abuse, new legislation has been passed which will fill some …

Australia – Two Political Narratives And One Charity Regulator Caught In The Middle, Myles Mcgregor-Lowndes

Chicago-Kent Law Review

After two decades of debate about the regulation of the nonprofit sector, Australia established a national charity regulator in December 2012. The creation of the Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission (“ACNC”) had as one of its objectives to reduce red tape, and to increase clarity by enacting a statutory definition of charity. Less than two years later, a new government proposed to abolish the ACNC, also in the name of reducing red tape. There appears to be a paradox—or at least diametrically opposed views about red tape reduction and how it can be achieved. With the government nearly two-thirds through …

Copyright As Charity, Brian L. Frye

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

Copyright and charity law are generally considered distinct and unrelated bodies of law. But they are actually quite similar and complement each other. Both copyright and charity law are intended to increase social welfare by solving market and government failures in public goods caused by free riding. Copyright solves market and government failures in works of authorship by providing an indirect subsidy to marginal authors, and charity law solves market and government failures in charitable goods by providing an indirect subsidy to marginal donors. Copyright and charity law complement each other by solving market and government failures in works of …

Reforming The Regulation Of Political Advocacy By Charities: From Charity Under Siege To Charity Under Rescue?, Adam Parachin

Chicago-Kent Law Review

A newly elected liberal federal government in Canada has pledged to reform the legal distinction between charity and politics. This paper provides context to this reform initiative, linking it to a controversial political activities audit program funded by the former conservative federal government. It identifies three distorting ideas about charity—that charity can be understood as a tax expenditure, economic or neutral concept—that should be eschewed in the reform process. It also identifies three characteristics of charity—the capacity of charities for thought leadership, the pervasiveness of messaging in charitable programming and the distinctiveness of charity and government—that should guide reformers.

Sunshine, Stakeholders, And Executive Pay: A Regression-Discontinuity Approach, Brian D. Galle, David I. Walker

Faculty Scholarship

We evaluate the effect of highly salient disclosure of private college and university president compensation on subsequent donations using a quasi-experimental research design. Using a differences-in-discontinuities approach to compare institutions that are highlighted in the Chronicle of Higher Education’s annual "top 10" list of most highly-compensated presidents against similar others, we find that appearing on a top 10 list is associated with reduced average donations of approximately 4.5 million dollars in the first full fiscal year following disclosure, despite greater fundraising efforts at "top 10" schools. We also find some evidence that top 10 appearances slow the growth of compensation, …

Foundations And The Patman Committee Report, John E. Riecker

Michigan Law Review

It is the purpose of this article to evaluate the major points of the first, and main, installment of Congressman Patman's Report in the light of existing Internal Revenue Code provisions, Treasury regulations, and the more significant federal court decisions and Internal Revenue Service rulings. While the Report itself is more inclusive, space limitations dictate that this article be confined to section 501(c)(3) organizations-chiefly foundations, tax-exempt funds, and charitable trusts. Although the writer will strive to be objective, it is difficult to avoid some of the political gloss in which the Report is cast and impossible to discuss the ramifications …

Taxation - Federal Estate Tax - Deductibility Of Contingent Bequests To Charity, Jack G. Armstrong S.Ed.

Michigan Law Review

Testator bequeathed a remainder interest to charitable organizations which was contingent upon her sister, age eighty-two, predeceasing two other women, ages sixty-seven and sixty-eight. The Commissioner disallowed a deduction for this bequest on the ground that it was not certain that charity would receive any benefit. In the district court the parties stipulated that there was an eleven to one chance that charity would receive the bequest. On the basis of this stipulation the district court found for the taxpayer. On appeal, held, reversed. In order for a deduction to be allowed the possibility that charity will not take …