Law Commons^™

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.

Basis And Bargain Sales: Income Tax And Other Concerns, Bridget J. Crawford, Jonathan G. Blattmachr

Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications

In this article, the authors explain the income tax consequences of the sale during lifetime and at death of property for less than fair market value. The authors focus in particular on the tax consequences of a bargain sale by a transferor who wishes to confer some financial benefit on a family member, but leave the rest of her estate to charity. Generally speaking, death-time bargain sales may be preferable to similar transactions during lifetime, if the assets have a low basis pre-death, because of the step up in income tax basis under section 1014. The authors also discuss in …

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, …

Preventing Tax-Exempt Propaganda: The Case For Defining The Second Prong Of The Methodology Test, Jordanne Miller

Catholic University Law Review

Under current Treasury Regulations, various propaganda groups throughout the United States are exempt from paying federal income tax. This is so because the current test used by the IRS to determine tax-exempt eligibility, the methodology test, is incapable of separating wild propaganda from viewpoints supported by facts.

The IRS created the methodology test in the late 1970s/early 1980s. Since then, groups denied tax-exempt status have repeatedly challenged its validity. The IRS has responded, and the test has evolved. However, the second prong of the test remains undefined—it is still unclear what it means for facts to be “distorted.” This Comment …

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. …

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. …

Compromising The Safety Net: How Limiting Tax Deductions For High-Income Donors Could Undermine Charitable Organizations, Patrick Tolan

Patrick E. Tolan Jr.

President Obama’s recent budget proposals have contemplated reducing the top rate for charitable deductions (and all itemized deductions) to twenty-eight percent. Because America’s largest donors are those in the highest marginal tax brackets, efforts to limit deductibility of charitable donations could have a chilling effect on charitable giving.

In this article the author looks at motivations for charitable donations and specifically at the impact of tax deductibility as a motivating factor. It takes a historical look at the philanthropic surveys and econometric models and examines empirical data concerning impacts of significant changes to the tax code in the 1980s that …

The Ubit: Leveling An Uneven Playing Field Or Tilting A Level One?, Michael S. Knoll

All Faculty Scholarship

After grateful alumni acquired the Mueller Spaghetti Company on behalf of New York University, and the courts held that the university did not have to pay tax on the pasta maker’s income, Mueller’s competitors cried foul. Congress responded to their pleas and enacted the unrelated business income tax (UBIT). The UBIT subjects an otherwise tax-exempt entity, such as a charitable institution or a religious organization, to tax on its income from a trade or business that is not substantially related to the organization’s tax-exempt purpose. The UBIT is widely viewed as leveling the playing field between taxable for-profit businesses and …

Remapping The Charitable Deduction, David Pozen

Faculty Scholarship

If charity begins at home, scholarship on the charitable deduction has stayed at home. In the vast legal literature, few authors have engaged the distinction between charitable contributions that are meant to be used within the United States and charitable contributions that are meant to be used abroad. Yet these two types of contributions are treated very differently in the Code and raise very different policy issues. As Americans' giving patterns and the U.S. nonprofit sector grow increasingly international, the distinction will only become more salient.

This Article offers the first exploration of how theories of the charitable deduction apply …

Initial Impressions Of The Treasury Report On Foundations, Marcus Schoenfeld

Cleveland State Law Review

Very recently in the United States Treasury Department submitted its study of private foundations to Congress. This is the most recent development in an attempt to delineate the proper role of foundations and their donors in our society, and more particularly their proper tax treatment. Although it is much too soon to predict the effect of the Treasury Report, since Congress itself asked for the study, it is quite likely that some more restrictive legislation will result.

Taxation-Federal Income Tax-Strike Benefits May Be Gifts, Christopher Cobb

Michigan Law Review

Taxpayer received assistance from a labor union while he was participating in a strike called by the union. The area in which he lived had become a distressed area as a consequence of the strike, and the union had established a general program of aid for strikers with no other source of income. Both before and after he joined the union payments were made to taxpayer under this program. Taxpayer sued for a refund of the income tax he payed on the value of the assistance so received, and the jury returned a verdict in his favor, finding the payments …