Forcing foundations to pay excise taxes punishes organizations that see spikes in donations ? making it difficult for foundations to pay out more money when society's needs are most pressing. Steuerle proposes reforming taxes to allow foundations to optimize their work.
Evamay Lawson, IKEA Sustainability Manager, joins John Hodge and Tony Navarino of the Stephen Siller Tunnel to Towers Foundation to announce this month in Staten Island, NY, that IKEA will be donating home furnishings to help Hurricane Sandy victims. Foundations can only maximize their ability to help those in need if taxes on charitable organizations are reformed, Steuerle argues.
Diane Bondareff/Invision/AP/File
EnlargeCharitable organizations form a vital part of America?s safety net. Ideally, foundations would be able to make greater payouts in hard economic times when needs are greatest. Unfortunately, the design of today?s excise tax on foundations undermines and in fact discourages such efficiency.
Skip to next paragraph TaxVoxThe Tax Policy Center is a joint venture of the Urban Institute and Brookings Institution. The Center is made up of nationally recognized experts in tax, budget, and social policy who have served at the highest levels of government. TaxVox is the Tax Policy Center's tax and budget policy blog.
Recent posts
' +
google_ads[0].line2 + '
' +
google_ads[0].line3 + '
Subscribe Today to the Monitor
Under current law, private foundations are required to pay an excise tax on their net investment income. The tax rate is 2 percent, but it can be reduced to 1 percent if the foundation satisfies a minimum distribution requirement. The dual-rate structure and distribution requirements obviously introduce complexity. The stated purpose of the tax in legislative history?to finance IRS activities in monitoring the charitable sector?has never been fulfilled.
In the recent recession, the impact of the excise tax was especially pernicious, as it penalized those that maintained their level of grantmaking.
How?? As Martin Sullivan and I first described in 1995, the excise tax penalizes spikes in giving; under the current formula, a temporarily higher payout results in a higher excise tax when payouts fall back to previous levels. A foundation that reduced its grantmaking during the last recession would not be subject to an increased excise tax because the amount the foundation paid out would be measured as a share of current net worth.
One proposal would replace the excise tax with a single-rate tax yielding the same amount of revenue. While a flat-rate tax would remove the disincentive to raise grantmaking in bad times, it still raises taxes for some foundations and not others.
A related law applying to foundations is the required payout rate, now set at 5 percentage points. Many experts have debated how high that rate should be. The current rate is believed to approximate the long-term real rate of return on a foundation?s balanced portfolio of assets. However, if foundations follow a strict rule of paying out the minimum 5 percent every year, they, too, will be operating procyclically, paying out more in good times when stock markets are high and less in bad times.
If we wish foundations to operate more countercyclically?to pay out more when needs are greater?we need to address both the excise tax and the natural tendency, reinforced by a minimum payout requirement, to make grants and payouts as a fixed percentage of each year?s net worth.
The Christian Science Monitor has assembled a diverse group of the best economy-related bloggers out there. Our guest bloggers are not employed or directed by the Monitor and the views expressed are the bloggers' own, as is responsibility for the content of their blogs. To contact us about a blogger, click here. To add or view a comment on a guest blog, please go to the blogger's own site by clicking on taxvox.taxpolicycenter.org.
john boehner HGTV Dream Home 2013 eric cantor eric cantor HGTV Sugar Bowl 2013 chick fil a
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.