Shared sacrifice?

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

I'd have some reservations about it, because it might put some legitimate 501(c)3’s out of business. For example, consider philanthropic organizations that work for social change in impoverished countries. This is work that is pretty expensive and takes years to bear fruit, if it bears fruit at all. The expenses for these types of philanthropic organizations would be relatively high, but the expenses would be "legit." How would your proposed revision deal with such organizations?

Isn't philanthropy about altruism as opposed to tax deductions?

Should contributors to a charitable organization that spends 60% on overhead derive the same tax benefits as one that spends 5%? I take it you're aware of the salary scandals associated with the United Way, not to mention the amount of money spent by the Catholic Church fighting/compensating for pedophilia charges. Should the American taxpayer subsidize United Way officials earning millions or the Church paying damages to victims of sexual assault.

http://www.wsoctv.com/news/news/unit...ompensa/nG4kp/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William...Scandal_begins

[whell]

Originally Posted by finnbow

Isn't philanthropy about altruism as opposed to tax deductions?

Should contributors to a charitable organization that spends 60% on overhead derive the same tax benefits as one that spends 5%? I take it you're aware of the salary scandals associated with the United Way, not to mention the amount of money spent by the Catholic Church fighting/compensating for pedophilia charges. Should the American taxpayer subsidize United Way officials earning millions or the Church paying damages to victims of sexual assault.

http://www.wsoctv.com/news/news/unit...ompensa/nG4kp/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William...Scandal_begins

Well, Finn, you asked what I though was an honest question and I gave an honest answer. I then asked you an honest question, and I got lead into the briar patch, so I'll assume that was your intent when you asked your question. However, I'll respond. Sure giving is about altruism, but tax code does impact human behavior. Such a change, per my response, would create an uneven playing field and make some charities more desirable to donate to than others.

Now, let's get out of the briar patch and address both of our concerns in the process: kick the current tax code to the curb in its entirety, and simply adopt a flat tax system.

[d-ray657]

Actually, the deduction for charitable contributions provides no benefit to many lower income folks, even those who tithe. Lower income folks are less likely to be homeowners, meaning that they don't have mortgage interest as a deduction. Lets say they have $40,000 income - not poverty level, but low enough to struggle to support a family. Even with a ten percent tithe, their $4,000 tax deduction would not be more than the standard deduction. Unless they have significant medical expenses or unreimbursed employment expenses, or they are home-owners with a mortgage interest deduction, they are very unlikely to see anything but the slightest tax benefit from their charity.

Regards,

D-Ray

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by whell

Well, Finn, you asked what I though was an honest question and I gave an honest answer. I then asked you an honest question, and I got lead into the briar patch, so I'll assume that was your intent when you asked your question. However, I'll respond. Sure giving is about altruism, but tax code does impact human behavior. Such a change, per my response, would create an uneven playing field and make some charities more desirable to donate to than others.

Now, let's get out of the briar patch and address both of our concerns in the process: kick the current tax code to the curb in its entirety, and simply adopt a flat tax system.

I suppose that's what I find attractive about it (i.e., compelling reduced overhead costs for charities (just as we desire for the government, BTW)).