Charities fear tax bill could turn philanthropy into a pursuit only for the rich

[applegrove]

By Todd C. Frankel at the Washington Post

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/charities-fear-tax-bill-could-turn-philanthropy-into-a-pursuit-only-for-the-rich/2017/12/23/38b65eb6-e69a-11e7-9ec2-518810e7d44d_story.html?utm_term=.a993a685b005

"SNIP.........

Many U.S. charities are worried the tax overhaul bill signed by President Trump on Friday could spur a landmark shift in philanthropy, speeding along the decline of middle-class donors and transforming charitable gift-giving into a pursuit largely left to the wealthy.

The source of concern is how the tax bill is expected to sharply reduce the number of taxpayers who qualify for the charitable tax deduction — a big driver of gifts to nonprofits. One study predicts that donations will fall by at least $13 billion, about 4.5 percent, next year. That decline is expected to be concentrated among gifts from the middle of the income scale. The richest Americans will mostly keep their ability to take the tax break.

That could create new winners and losers in philanthropy. Nonprofits have long noticed that the wealthy are more likely to cut big checks to support museums and universities, while smaller donors tend to give to social-service agencies and religious organizations. Charities fear that this shift could change how the public views donating and alter the priorities of nonprofits.

“The tax code is now poised to de-incentivize the heart of civic action in America,” said Dan Cardinali, president of Independent Sector, a public-policy group for charities, foundations and corporate giving programs. “It’s deeply disturbing.”

...........SNIP"

[applegrove]

1. Boy the GOP really resent the less well off.

[roamer65]

2. Unless you are in the top 10 pct, they want you dead.

Especially once you are past 50.

[Cirque du So-What]

3. The 1% give to 'charities' from which they benefit

whether it's in order to ensure admission to a prestigous school for their worthless offspring or seats on the board of directors on a nonprofit.

[applegrove]

4. Some in the 1% give to great charities. But you can be assured that the middle class gives

Last edited Sat Dec 23, 2017, 09:34 PM - Edit history (1)

to organizations that help others not as well off as middle class as a habit.

[LiberalFighter]

7. And the only reason the 1% give to great charities is because

they benefited from tax breaks. Money from those tax breaks should had gone into the government coffers to pay for services and other programs that does more for people.

[applegrove]

8. Some rich people are good people and will not stop because of income

tax implications. There are good folk and bad folk in every group, the 1% included. How do you explain all the millionaires speaking out against the tax cuts.

[LiberalFighter]

11. Those few good people are only some of the total people that are rich.

There are too many that are not good people. And many of them only donate to causes that benefit them more than it benefits people in general.

[renate]

5. "charitable donations" will go towards the kind of thing that rich people can put their names on

You can't slap your name on feeding hungry people, so they're going to be SOL.

[moondust]

6. The tax cuts would appear to

further enrich the psychopaths and sociopaths at the top of the Wall Street/corporate economy--those least likely to feel compassion and donate to charities--at the expense of everybody else. FOR NO GOOD REASON.

I suppose a few charities might get lucky and hit the jackpot by attracting a generous oligarch to their cause, but many may be left hoping for a miracle.

[dembotoz]

9. Maybe if it gets those awful donate ur car commercials off the radio

Would not be all bad

[Igel]

10. That's what happened in the '80s.

When the charitable tax deduction was sharply reduced.

Used to be if you donated $50 to a non-profit they'd give you a receipt and you could deduct that and still take the standard deduction.

That's what I used to do. Then charitable deductions became a thing just for those who donated enough to claim it when they itemized. The provision was allowed to expire in the Tax Reform Act of 1986, sponsored by Rostenkowski. Don't know who provided the text that discontinued small-donor charitable-giving tax deductions.

It was discussed at the time, and what little I remember from the news was that the charitable giving wasn't worth the government's sacrifice of the tax dollars. It was pointed out that most of the recipients were religious organizations, and that just got a shrug. NPR and NPR stations were more concerned about the effect on things like, well, NPR and NPR stations. (I was a volunteer board op for an NPR station and actively involved in on-air fundraising. Board op? Fun. Fundraising? Hell.)