If the donor receives or expects to receive a financial or economic benefit as a result of making a contribution to a qualified charitable organization, the donor cannot deduct the part of the contribution that represents the value of the benefit the donor receives.
Being able to attend mass in a church as a donor has no financial or economic benefit because the church is open to all. It's not like paying for a charitable auction to get Superbowl tickets, the Superbowl tickets have a financial/economic benefit to the person who won the auction. He or she can sell those tickets or they don't have to see those tickets because they have an intrinsic value. You cannot enter the Superbowl stadium without those tickets. You can enter a church to attend a mass service for free.
I totally agree. Thank you for this. I have had the same idea rolling around in my head and couldn't get the words out.
I think you just don't like religion, v. That's OK, but own it.
Your parsing of this really makes no sense.
I wear my dislike of religion on my sleeve
But really, it is that I don't think that things you get in return constitute charity -- whether that's a weekly religious service, or attendance at a fabulous benefit, or a trip to the museum, or a CD or a calendar or whatever.
I also don't really consider our donations to our alma maters charity, and I :heart: education.
How about 1/2 the amount that you budget for luxuries for yourself ? I am of the opinion that if you have more than you need, you have a moral obligation to help someone in need.
If the donor receives or expects to receive a financial or economic benefit as a result of making a contribution to a qualified charitable organization, the donor cannot deduct the part of the contribution that represents the value of the benefit the donor receives.
Being able to attend mass in a church as a donor has no financial or economic benefit because the church is open to all. It's not like paying for a charitable auction to get Superbowl tickets, the Superbowl tickets have a financial/economic benefit to the person who won the auction. He or she can sell those tickets or they don't have to see those tickets because they have an intrinsic value. You cannot enter the Superbowl stadium without those tickets. You can enter a church to attend a mass service for free.
Thank you for wording this much better than I did. My examples didn't correlate with my point, which you made well.
I think you just don't like religion, v. That's OK, but own it.
Your parsing of this really makes no sense.
I wear my dislike of religion on my sleeve
But really, it is that I don't think that things you get in return constitute charity -- whether that's a weekly religious service, or attendance at a fabulous benefit, or a trip to the museum, or a CD or a calendar or whatever.
I also don't really consider our donations to our alma maters charity, and I education.
So what does constitute as charity? Provide examples, if possible. I'm curious.
Speaking of the cd, the value of it wasn't subtracted from the amount I donated. The letter I says I can deduct the entire value of my donation. Is there anything I have to do tax-wise because of this? I knew I'd be getting it if I made $x donation (way higher than the value of the cd).
Post by daydreamer on Dec 21, 2012 12:17:16 GMT -5
I'd say that a good amount equals enough that you notice the loss of the money for personal use. I think it's important to practice generosity and that a donation isn't particularly generous if whatever it is you are giving away isn't something of value to you.
But really, it is that I don't think that things you get in return constitute charity -- whether that's a weekly religious service, or attendance at a fabulous benefit, or a trip to the museum, or a CD or a calendar or whatever.
I also don't really consider our donations to our alma maters charity, and I education.
So what does constitute as charity? Provide examples, if possible. I'm curious.
Giving money, services or goods (through legitimate organizations) to help others = charity
To the extent that money, services or goods are given to me in return, that =/= charity to me
What if you at some point use the benefits of that charity? Such as austism awareness charities, or health charities? Does you needing it later erase your charity before? Couldn't you say that the warm fuzzies you get by donating means you're getting something?
I have to say, V, your definition is pretty silly and restrictive. I'm sure most charities would rather people give to them, even if you "get something" in return, versus not give at all because it might not "count" by some ridiculous standard.
I think a more fair percentage would be that of a person's discretionary income. To say you should contribute x% of your net income is unfair because you don't know what their expenses are like.
If someone's got a lot of slush money left over after all the bills are paid, then yeah... maybe they should consider giving more to charity. Unfortunately, that isn't the case with a lot of people.
Except that people choose how to set up their financial lives. By setting their lifestyle at a point where they have little discretionary funds, they are saying that they value whatever they are spending their money on over charitable giving. This is fine, of course.
I'm with V that church giving shouldn't be counted as charity giving...I think churches get away with too much re: not needing to pay taxes on contributions because they have been categorized as a 503c charity. But I get that other people don't feel the same way, so I see why it is considered giving for many people.
I don't really care what individuals do with their money. What is a necessity to me isn't to someone else, so I am ok admitting that what I don't see as giving, someone else would.
What if you at some point use the benefits of that charity? Such as austism awareness charities, or health charities? Does you needing it later erase your charity before? Couldn't you say that the warm fuzzies you get by donating means you're getting something?
I have to say, V, your definition is pretty silly and restrictive. I'm sure most charities would rather people give to them, even if you "get something" in return, versus not give at all because it might not "count" by some ridiculous standard.
I'm not saying that people shouldn't give money generously to whoever and whatever they want, whether it is the most selfless and altruistic cause imaginable or if it is something that will benefit them immensely. I mean, as I said above, I give donations that I don't think are pure charity. I'm just saying that to me, some giving is different from other giving. And that applies to my own giving as well.
I just don't really see the point of a distinction between charity and whatever churches, schools, etc are categorized into. If everyone is cool with donating to them, because it's nice, then why do we care if it's "charity?"
I'd say that a good amount equals enough that you notice the loss of the money for personal use. I think it's important to practice generosity and that a donation isn't particularly generous if whatever it is you are giving away isn't something of value to you.
This is how h and I have defined charity in our budget. We could do a lot with the money we give away. However, we feel that the money we give goes infinitely further than it would if we were just padding our savings or paying off our student loans faster.
I'm not about to dictate a certain percentage for everyone, but I would encourage everyone to try, at least for a while, to give enough that its noticeable in your budget. That it hurts a little. No matter how poor we may be by North American standards, we are infinitely more wealthy than many people in this world.
I think budget posts (or month to month or even year to year snapshots) are not always the best representation of people's commitment to giving. Some people give less and save more early in life so they can be generous on a larger scale later on.
Thank you for raising this point. I certainly hope/plan to make significant contributions later in life when I know more that my needs and those of my children/sister/parents have been met. I do not want to leave a large inheritance for my children - I think they should be self-sufficient. I would much rather give a large bequest to charity.
Also, I think maybe some of this thread was inspired by my budget post. I now feel obligated to explain more about our situation. We do volunteer and give money at other times out of our "fun" money. We do also try to make ethical decisions about our purchases, so I feel we indirectly give in that way (ex: we try to buy made in North America whenever possible, we don't buy reams of plastic crap from China, we try to minimize gas consumption, etc - I feel the effects of these decisions a lot more sharply than our gifted money). However, the line item in the budget is more to remind us to at least give regularly to the organizations we care about.
I have to acknowledge that I am largely with v on her points, too. We are atheists and it drives me nuts when a charity pushes their religion as part of their "gift." It has been a huge turnoff to me for many charities. I do weigh carefully how much of our contribution is actually going to "the cause" also.
I didn't take the time to read 3 pages of responses... I don't think there is a right or wrong answer to how much people should be giving. We have weekly donations taken out of our paychecks for United Way and then we give throughout the year to random organizations. We also give at church when we attend. There is no set % we try to give each year though. I think it depends on your family and situation.
I do not feel like we give enough, but it is one of the few financial things I will not judge in others. Giving your money away is pretty personal stuff.
Post by LoveTrains on Dec 21, 2012 21:12:54 GMT -5
Yeah I haven't read the while thread but - and I am drunk - but I am all rule up at V right now.
Sure ppl that give to the church help keep the lights on. So do alumni and patent who give to higher Ed or independent schools.
I can't even get into the rest bc I am annoyed but there are strict IRS guidelines about the benefits you can get from a gift. Admission to the museum is a $0 benefit which is why membership to the art mauseum is fully deductible. Don't tell me you are advocating for eliminating that "tax loophole"? Because then we can't be Internet friends anymore.
Speaking of the cd, the value of it wasn't subtracted from the amount I donated. The letter I says I can deduct the entire value of my donation. Is there anything I have to do tax-wise because of this? I knew I'd be getting it if I made $x donation (way higher than the value of the cd).
How does NPR/PBS get around doing this?
The charity is allowed to give gifts to donors. It has to cost less than $X each year. I think this year it is $10 or something. You can look it up on the google. Also there is a minimum gift size.
Post by statlerwaldorf on Dec 21, 2012 21:31:20 GMT -5
I don't think there is a magical percentage. There are way too many factors that come into play such as cost of living, medical costs, etc. that can greatly change the amount leftover after necessary expenses.
To be honest, we don't give a lot financially right now. We aren't spending a lot of money on frivolous things or really much for ourselves. Everything left over is going to our IVF savings.
I know I'm late and in agreement with most of you, but the argument that tithing =\= charity is dumb. I donate to NPR not to get a free cd, but so I can listen year round to the radio.
I donate to the nonprofit I work at, bc a) they provide my salary and b) I will use my work to get free housing counseling in the future. My sister donates to where I work, because she bought a house from us.
My point is, you should expect a service back from whatever nonprofit you donate to. If not right now, then in case of X. I donate to our church and the food pantry out of it, because who knows when I'll need it?
I don't judge people on their giving. I do get mildly annoyed when people are gung Ho help the poor and needy but don't give anything.
Post by liveintheville on Dec 22, 2012 8:31:26 GMT -5
I kind of see where V is coming from. Personally we group contributions into 2 categories. We give to causes we believe in or support. Then we are members of several nonprofits because we utilize their services and want to give to them. I know this isn't very clear but for instance, we give to WGBH (pbs), WBUR (npr), NE Aquarium, Museum of Science. All tax deductible but not necessarily what I'd consider a "charity." And we are members of all 4 because we utilize their services. Then we give to 2 women's shelters, 2 homeless shelters/food kitchens, 3 medical clinics, and a couple international charities. I'm not knocking anyone who categorizes differently. Just saying that personally we do separate them.
Your membership dollars to all of these places helps to fund their programming for everyone. So because you are a member of the aquarium they can do school programs for low income areas/children, etc.
Your membership dollars to all of these places helps to fund their programming for everyone. So because you are a member of the aquarium they can do school programs for low income areas/children, etc.
Very true. It just seems self serving since a membership is cheaper than 3 visits to the aquarium and that is why we joined Not to say we don't deduct it though
My point is, you should expect a service back from whatever nonprofit you donate to. If not right now, then in case of X. I donate to our church and the food pantry out of it, because who knows when I'll need it?
That is not true at all.
I do expect services out of museums that I join (that's precisely WHY I join), and I do receive services from my alma maters (and alum donations could in theory improve the schools and therefore strengthen their value on my resume), but the animal shelter in Boston that we donate to on a monthly basis? Since I do not plan to ever live in Boston (and have spent approximately 24 hours of my life in that city), I do not expect to receive services in exchange, ever. I just like what they do. The money we gave this year to charities helping hurricane victims? I do not expect anything from them, ever. When I have clothes to donate, we give them to an organization that runs thrift shops that benefit people with HIV/AIDS. I sure as hell hope to never receive any benefit from that. And there are many, many examples of other charities that people give to with no expectation of anything other than warm and fuzzy feelings in return.
Your membership dollars to all of these places helps to fund their programming for everyone. So because you are a member of the aquarium they can do school programs for low income areas/children, etc.
Very true. It just seems self serving since a membership is cheaper than 3 visits to the aquarium and that is why we joined Not to say we don't deduct it though
I don't go to the Met nearly as often now that it is an hour away rather than 10 minutes away, but I will fully admit that I joined because when I paid for admissions for me and 2 friends with my credit card, I was told that because the receipt was for more than what an annual membership costs, I could turn it in for an annual membership (and could then deduct it from my taxes). So my membership this year was essentially free AND has a tax benefit to it.
I am not advocating for closing "tax loopholes" -- I never said that there *were* tax loopholes? And hey -- if the government gives you a tax deduction I'm a firm believer that you're welcome to take it. All I said is that in my mind, donations made from which I expect to take a benefit (and that, perhaps, I make BECAUSE I expect a benefit) are a little different from ones that I make solely to help others. And I don't consider the part of a donation that constitutes my benefit to be charitable.
Very true. It just seems self serving since a membership is cheaper than 3 visits to the aquarium and that is why we joined Not to say we don't deduct it though
I don't go to the Met nearly as often now that it is an hour away rather than 10 minutes away, but I will fully admit that I joined because when I paid for admissions for me and 2 friends with my credit card, I was told that because the receipt was for more than what an annual membership costs, I could turn it in for an annual membership (and could then deduct it from my taxes). So my membership this year was essentially free AND has a tax benefit to it.
I am not advocating for closing "tax loopholes" -- I never said that there *were* tax loopholes? And hey -- if the government gives you a tax deduction I'm a firm believer that you're welcome to take it. All I said is that in my mind, donations made from which I expect to take a benefit (and that, perhaps, I make BECAUSE I expect a benefit) are a little different from ones that I make solely to help others. And I don't consider the part of a donation that constitutes my benefit to be charitable.
Oh I completely agree. Which is why when people ask which charities do you donate to, I don't answer, "give to the aquarium!" I might say that we do, but the main part of our giving that I consider "charities" are more the homeless shelters, fenway clinic, etc.