3 ms·

We should get rid of all charitable tax deductions, and then these funds would simply cease to exist, because they only exist to capture these tax deductions wh

We should get rid of all charitable tax deductions, and then these funds would simply cease to exist, because they only exist to capture these tax deductions while preserving the donors' power. I don't have any beef with the foundations, I have a beef with our tax policy.

bilbo0s 8y ago
>because they only exist to capture these tax deductions while preserving the donors' power... That's just not the case. The reasons that a donor might choose a DAF are legion. Again, I won't go into them all, but let's take an example that is more common than people realize. A donor who has passed on. Sometimes in life, a couple's children need encouragement to be kindly and generous. Let's put it that way. DAFs are part of a somewhat complicated legal framework that can have the effect of actually obliging heirs to share the family's resources. And of course there are a million other reasons that one might be motivated to use a DAF. Point being, DAFs are not solely used as a tax dodge. And the donors are not seeing the benefits from the tax dodge in any case, the vast majority of that benefit is going to the charities and the financial industry. (Heck, many of the donors have even passed on, so of course they don't care about any tax benefit. They made those arrangements for other reasons.)
- Eridrus 8y ago
  I don't really believe that these other reasons are a major driver, but it also doesn't matter one way or the other, we can get rid of the tax benefits and let people keep the rest if they want. I agree that the benefit is largely not accruing to the people claiming the tax deduction, but it is a subsidy coming out of the public purse that we should get rid of. [EDIT]: Actually, I take that back, once you take into account the fact that the amount people donate is not significantly impacted by the tax situation, it seems clearer that the people getting the deduction are the ones getting the benefit/subsidy.
  - zip1234 8y ago
    It's not coming out of the public purse. Those are not the public's funds to begin with. The law was democratically decided to allow charitable donations.
    - Eridrus 8y ago
      And we can democratically repeal the tax deductions.

bilbo0s 8y ago

>because they only exist to capture these tax deductions while preserving the donors' power... That's just not the case. The reasons that a donor might choose a DAF are legion. Again, I won't go into them all, but let's take an example that is more common than people realize. A donor who has passed on. Sometimes in life, a couple's children need encouragement to be kindly and generous. Let's put it that way. DAFs are part of a somewhat complicated legal framework that can have the effect of actually obliging heirs to share the family's resources. And of course there are a million other reasons that one might be motivated to use a DAF. Point being, DAFs are not solely used as a tax dodge. And the donors are not seeing the benefits from the tax dodge in any case, the vast majority of that benefit is going to the charities and the financial industry. (Heck, many of the donors have even passed on, so of course they don't care about any tax benefit. They made those arrangements for other reasons.)

Eridrus 8y ago
I don't really believe that these other reasons are a major driver, but it also doesn't matter one way or the other, we can get rid of the tax benefits and let people keep the rest if they want. I agree that the benefit is largely not accruing to the people claiming the tax deduction, but it is a subsidy coming out of the public purse that we should get rid of. [EDIT]: Actually, I take that back, once you take into account the fact that the amount people donate is not significantly impacted by the tax situation, it seems clearer that the people getting the deduction are the ones getting the benefit/subsidy.
- zip1234 8y ago
  It's not coming out of the public purse. Those are not the public's funds to begin with. The law was democratically decided to allow charitable donations.
  - Eridrus 8y ago
    And we can democratically repeal the tax deductions.