Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 6 of 6

Full-Text Articles in Law

Preventing Tax-Exempt Propaganda: The Case For Defining The Second Prong Of The Methodology Test, Jordanne Miller Jan 2019

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 …


Failed Charity: Taking State Tax Benefits Into Account For Purposes Of The Charitable Deduction, Roger Colinvaux Aug 2018

Failed Charity: Taking State Tax Benefits Into Account For Purposes Of The Charitable Deduction, Roger Colinvaux

Buffalo Law Review

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) substantially limited the ability of individuals to deduct state and local taxes (SALT) on their federal income tax returns. Some states are advancing schemes to allow taxpayers a state tax credit for contributions to a charity controlled by the state. The issue is whether state tax benefits are deductible as a charitable contribution for purposes of the federal income tax. Under a general rule of prior law—the full deduction rule—state tax benefits were ignored for purposes of the charitable deduction. If the full deduction rule is applied to the state workaround schemes, then …


Economic Recovery Tax Act Of 1981, Merlin G. Briner Jul 2015

Economic Recovery Tax Act Of 1981, Merlin G. Briner

Akron Law Review

In essence this Act and the results it either produces or fails to produce will be a test of our free enterprise system. The Act, coupled with the administration's policy of deregulation and relaxing government controls of business, provides the opportunity business leaders have been looking for.

A key to future economic health is the reduction of federal expenditures. If these cannot be curtailed, the combined effect of expenditures and reduced tax revenues on inflation will be disastrous. If expenditures cannot be controlled, then taxes will have to be increased substantially in the not too distant future.


Increase In Standard Mileage Rate For Certain Charitable Work May 2012

Increase In Standard Mileage Rate For Certain Charitable Work

The Contemporary Tax Journal

No abstract provided.


What Leona Helmsley Can Teach Us About The Charitable Deduction, Ray D. Madoff Jun 2010

What Leona Helmsley Can Teach Us About The Charitable Deduction, Ray D. Madoff

Chicago-Kent Law Review

Leona Helmsley named a number of beneficiaries under her will (both human and canine), but among the unnamed beneficiaries are scholars interested in studying the role of philanthropy in the United States. By directing that an estimated $8 billion be used for the benefit of dogs, Mrs. Helmsley brought in to high relief policy issues regarding the appropriateness of the unlimited charitable deduction. I argue that these concerns are equally applicable, albeit less obvious, when it comes to more traditional charitable bequests. In this paper I will discuss the appropriateness of the unlimited estate tax deduction (particularly in light of …


Respecting Foundation And Charity Autonomy: How Public Is Private Philanthropy?, Evelyn Brody, John Tyler Apr 2010

Respecting Foundation And Charity Autonomy: How Public Is Private Philanthropy?, Evelyn Brody, John Tyler

Chicago-Kent Law Review

Recent years have seen a disturbing increase in legal proposals by the public and government officials to interfere with the governance, missions, strategies, and decision-making of foundations and other charities. Underlying much of these debates is the premise—stated or merely presumed—that foundation and charity assets are "public money" and that such entities therefore are subject to various public mandates or standards about their structure, operations, and policies. The authors' experiences and research reveal three "myths" that, singly or collectively, underlie claims that charitable assets are public money. The first myth conceives of charities as shadow governments due to the requirement …