Today, Joe Meehan pointed me toward’s the article in the Chronicle of Philanthropy about President Obama’s new bill limiting charitable deductions.
As expected the outcry was fast and strong.
At the risk of being a bit controversial: Who cares if deductions are limited?
I mean, really. Are nonprofits just another special interest, complaining about government debt but crying foul when attempts at fiscal management impact us? For crying out loud, haven’t we had enough of that already? The unions and big business spend millions whining and complaining. And still the people we serve suffer.
Is your cause really that weak?
Is your cause so weak that people will stop giving if they don’t get a tax deduction? If it is, you have many more systemic problems then what the federal government may or may not do.
Most people are charitable at some level. Giving has been happening for millenia, long before charitable tax deductions.
So rather than being another pain in the butt, complaining special interest, why not turn this into a season of deepening the relationship with your supporters?
Good thoughts, Marc. Particularly on the point you raise about systemic problems to blame for lack of funding, not tax breaks. I was thinking along a similar line when I wrote this post: http://socialphilanthropy.wordpress.com/2011/09/14/focus-on-charitable-deductions-is-misplaced/
Amen.
Seriously, a-freaking-men.
Thanks so much you guys!
Good points are made here but not all charities/nonprofits are “causes.” For example, donations of appreciated securities are important sources of revenue for foundations and that is affected by tax policy. The deduction provision for charitable giving is one of the oldest deduction provisions in the tax laws. It is too simplistic to state “if your organization depends on tax incentives you have bigger issues…” These incentives unquestionably play an important role in American society.
Interesting comment, Lenny.
I do see that securities would be harder to get gifted. There’d be no advantage to gifting them vs. simply cashing them out.
Simplistic it was. But the point was whether your donors only give because of tax advantages. (Studies consistently show that’s not the reason people donate.)
Here is some more of the back in forth as reported in the Chronicle of Philanthropy: http://philanthropy.com/blogs/government-and-politics/white-house-and-gop-trade-charges-on-charity-write-offs/29171?sid=pt&utm_source=pt&utm_medium=en