Posted on 03/24/2005 3:25:36 AM PST by billorites
And it is tax deductible. Imus is a big time huckster who is constantly promoting his products (Imus Ranch tortilla chips, salsa, jackets, etc.), his investments (Viacom), and himself. His charitable works are just part of image burnishing, which is not unlike those of many Hollywood and media types.
I will give Imus credit for creativity in coming up with this scam and suckering in so many people. Listening to him on a daily basis selling pieces of the ranch to various donors was hilarious. Currently, he spends about 3 to 4 months at the ranch, 10 weeks with the kids and two to four weeks for XMAS and Easter, etc. He rides his horses, many of them donated, drives his donated SUVs, and teaches his son Wyatt about how to be a cowboy. The Imus foundation bears most of the ranch's operating costs and maintenance of its lavish furnishings.
Why is he flying them in from all over the globe? This points out the profligate and superficial nature of this enterprise. I wonder who are these international partcipants and why they were selected. You can bet there is some sort of quid pro quo going on.
Frank's a Northeastern jerk who likely doesn't do a damned thing for terminally ill kids. Do you?
What do I have to do with it? I am not in competition with Imus or his wife nor am I a multimillionarie. I give my fair share of contributions to a variety of charities.
Well, I'm impressed without the sarcasm.
When I read the article, "The ranch's expenses totaled $2.6 million last year, while it hosted only about 100 kids", I was initially under the impression that the money funded year-round care for 100 kids.
Looking at the ranch as a business, I am willing to bet he is right--a majority of the alleged expenses is a result of accrual based depreciation. It would be best if he summarized a cash income statement, a cash flow statement and an assets determination.
All he has to do to correct this matter is when there are no children at the ranch, pay some nominal sum for his own stay at the ranch.
In the meantime, the money is privately obtained, it is a charity and who the hell cares?
Finally, Imus may lack humility but no one ever accused a newspaper reporter as lacking in "envy" when it came to debunking real or imagined celebrities.
I don't believe half the stuff he says. He is totally self-absorbed. It would be interesting to learn exactly how much time he spends at the ranch. Since it is a tax exempt operation, there are limits to how much time he can be there legally for tax purposes in much the same way a landlord is limited in spending time in his rental property. It affects depreciation and other deductions.
Slight clarification: "Other people's" money.
bttt
If he actuallys says that, he lies.
The operative word is charity, which means that it enjoys tax advantages. If the charity was created as the veneer for Imus to enjoy a lavish vacation home, then as a taxpayer, I care.
Imus has a 4,000 acre working ranch in northern New Mexico, which is used ten weeks a year to give 100 kids a one week "cowboy" experience. 4,000 acres!!! 640 acres equals a square mile so Mr. Imus' ranch is over 6 square miles.
Michael Jackson's personal theme park probably handles (pun inteneded) more kids a year at less cost and is not a charity.
Why all the animosity toward the reporter and the WSJ?
If the government is investigating any celebrity it is news, big news.
"Don Imus's Ranch For Sick Children Draws Scrutiny: Charity Spent $2.6 Million Last Year on 100 Kids"
If the government had the 2.6M for those kids, how much of the 2.6M would get spent on those kids? How much would go to the beaurocracy it would require to administer those dollars? I'm not trying to defend lavish lifestyles but without celebs like Imus or Paul Newman many of those sick kids could only dream of such a program. I've got some issues with Imus but this is not one of them.
Those were my thoughts. He is doing good with the ranch but coincidently this ranch might offer all kinds of tax advantages. This makes his motivations cloudy. The tax advantages?
Who owns the ranch? My guess is the charity does and gets some great tax breaks and that the charity is obligated to sell the ranch to Imus 10 years from now for one dollar. Or that Imus's son inherits the ranch via a one dollar sale when Imus dies
For 2.6 million all kinds of improvements are being made on this 4,000 acre ranch property that his charity owns. And that this charity is obligated by contract to sell the ranch, or most of the ranch, to Imus for one dollar in year 2012.
** my speculation
Just one more reason to go to a flat retail tax.
"I will give Imus credit for creativity in coming up with this scam and suckering in so many people. Listening to him on a daily basis selling pieces of the ranch to various donors was hilarious. Currently, he spends about 3 to 4 months at the ranch, 10 weeks with the kids and two to four weeks for XMAS and Easter, etc. He rides his horses, many of them donated, drives his donated SUVs, and teaches his son Wyatt about how to be a cowboy. The Imus foundation bears most of the ranch's operating costs and maintenance of its lavish furnishings. "
Well this is another lie that Imus has been caught in.
Today, he stated today that he only spends limited time at the ranch. He states that he must take medication in order to breath while at the ranch, so he avoids the place.
"Imus told the newspaper that he and his wife ran the charity from New York and spent time at the ranch primarily when children were there to participate in the charity programs. "
"I've got a penthouse apartment in New York and a mansion in Westport (Conn.). Why would I go someplace that I can't breathe," said Imus, referring to medications he takes to help with breathing while he's at the ranch."
Source: http://www.westportnow.com/archives/011104.htm
Gee, a BIG, BIG suprise. Imus is an out and out phony who lives on the gullible.
NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - Radio host Don Imus is facing criticism from the Wall Street Journal Thursday for the costs incurred by his charity that brings sick children to his ranch for visits.
The paper, quoting the filings of Imus' charity, reports that it spent $2.6 million in 2003 and $2.7 million in 2002 to bring 100 children to the ranch each year. That works out to just under $3,000 per night per child, which the paper reports is far more than spent by other charities.
It said that Camp Starfish, another well-known charity for children, hosts over 150 kids a summer on a budget of $360,000 a year, while actor Paul Newman's charity, The Hole in the Wall Gang Fund, has a budget that's more than twice as large as the Imus Ranch but hosts 10 times as many kids at its summer camp.
The paper also said the charity is supposed to account for or be compensated for the personal use of the ranch by Imus and his wife, but hasn't done so.
On his radio show Thursday, Imus attacked the story as a hatchet job. He said that he and his wife work for the charity, both raising money and doing chores during the children's stay at the ranch, all without compensation.
"Why don't you do a survey about other foundations this size and see what they pay their chief executives? Most charities spend 50 cents to raise a dollar," he said. He also called "insane" the notion that he uses the ranch for private use, saying that when he takes vacations he goes elsewhere than the ranch.
"I've got a penthouse apartment in New York and a mansion in Westport (Conn.). Why would I go someplace that I can't breathe," said Imus, referring to medications he takes to help with breathing while he's at the ranch.
He also says that about $800,000 of the reported annual expenses for the ranch are for depreciation, and that the charity does not raise money to cover that expense. But he said that it is expensive to provide the facility for children because the cost of the running the ranch year round.
"Am I spending too much money per child? If you believe that, don't give money to the ranch," he said.
The Journal said New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer inquired about the charity earlier this year, but that the review isn't an investigation, according to sources in Spitzer's office, and was prompted by the ranch's delayed filing of its financial statements.
Imus said Thursday that Spitzer's office wasn't aware that he had been granted an extension for the filing. He pointed out that he has endorsed Spitzer's run for New York governor and that he did so before he was contacted by Spitzer's office.
I am not knocking celebrities who give charitable donations and set up foundations to assist the needy. In the case of Imus, he is personally and transparently benefitting from this enterprise. The Architectural Digest article is unintentionally revealing about how lavish an operation this is. The ranch is a showpiece, which caters more to the egos of the Imus family then to the needs of kids.
but I agree that the amount does sound very very excessive......
and don't we have enough sick, poor children in our own country to entertain for a week?.....why does he have to go to other countries....
all in all, ultra rich people are full of themselves...
the basic freeper probably gives a higher percentage of his or her money to charitable causes then and Imus, Soros, or Turner.......IMO.....
sure does. He has skinned everyone who ever invested with him or lent him money.
a god guy to stay away from
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.