New Study Says Charities Could Lose Up to $3.2-Billion From Obama Tax Change ow.ly/73szl
Pretty disturbing read… Especially given the tough environment that we are now in, regarding real capital gains being made by our wealthiest benefactors. Only those in the know truly have any appreciation for the “real” 1% Compensation Story… It’s not what it seems, however the bandwagon of discontent mounts daily.
Jobs vs. Jobs, which are of MORE value?
The article above makes reference to “paying for the recent jobs plan”… As a reason to change charitable tax policy for those over the $200/$250k adjusted gross income. Economist “for” the Jobs Plan have grossly underestimated the value of a non-profit job. If in fact their legitimacy of this plan rests in any way on the fact that non-profit jobs are acceptable collateral damage, their economic background ought to be brought into question. They are terribly mistaken.
If we examine closely the “kind” of job that would ultimately replace said non-profit jobs, the question remains who will benefit most, and who will suffer most. Sustainability is of most concern. Aspiring benefactors that want to help us change the world have a philanthropic passion of fire that never goes out. On the other hand, governments take in revenue and without 100% accountability spend revenue, but passion is never the root of government spending. Given the special interest argument, legislative directed spending is mostly self serving.
100% of the time non-profit jobs are more sustainable. They are mostly privately underwritten, passionately supported, and filling voids governments (local & federal) should not be spending our tax dollars on. If the net-net is zero jobs why do it anyway.
Our fiduciary as fundraisers…
As fundraisers and non-profit professionals we have a responsibility to speak up, and more importantly speak out. The “squeaky” wheel always gets the oil in these matters. I’m elated that the current Senate sees these matters our way.
I don’t have a single benefactor whose net worth or earning is below $250k… The one consistent question that I get these days is “How will the University plan for a change in the charitable tax code?”. Because there are too many variables it’s almost impossible to address at this point. Doing nothing seems to lack logic, but with such great uncertainty it’s pretty difficult to pick a broad enough strategy to address the long term concern.
However, what I have done is talk to my benefactors about their long term giving plan as it “might” relate to the change in the tax code. Because the current proposal speaks in very specific terms relative to percentages of adjusted gross income, it’s pretty easy to reverse-calculate the charitable deduction breaking points for those benefactors that are adversely affected by the change. My advice. Lengthen the terms of your commitments to lower the year over year pledge payments.
Here are just a fews ways in which elongating the term creates benefit for non-profits: higher probability that the commitment will be completed, increased stewardship opportunities, ample time for re-gift planning, and last but not least another opportunity to talk about estate planning provisions for your cause.
Speak up… And speak out!
Go IRISH, beat Trojans.