Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: MortMan
Do a search on any recent articles about this topic. I don't have exact references to court decisions, but every article I've read has said this California approach is legitimate under IRS rules and court decisions:

Washington Examiner

CNN Money

61 posted on 01/05/2018 7:58:58 AM PST by Alberta's Child ("Tell them to stand!" -- President Trump, 9/23/2017)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies ]


To: Alberta's Child
From the CNN piece:

Expanding this type of benefit to state income taxes might raise legal questions if the charitable contribution is viewed as being made expressly for the purpose of reducing one's tax bill, according to Max Behlke, director of budget and tax at the National Conference of State Legislatures.

The basic issue is that the original example they use is a "conservation" donation, as opposed to a levied amount due being paid by a "charitable" donation for the express purpose of lowering the federal tax bill. To this layman's eyes, there is no way for such a scheme to be legal - the contribution in question is not made for a charitable purpose at all, simply to reduce the amount of federal taxes owed.

Charity hinges on serving a non-fiduciary purpose (at least marginally).

65 posted on 01/05/2018 8:05:15 AM PST by MortMan (Irony is the opposite of wrinkly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson