3 ms·
It's more complicated than that, as far as I understand. If you shift your money into a foundation, under some constructions, you can retain a lot of control ov
by okintheory 6y ago
It's more complicated than that, as far as I understand. If you shift your money into a foundation, under some constructions, you can retain a lot of control over how it's spent, while avoiding taxes. Later you can pass control (and hence effectively wealth) along to your kids, this time avoiding inheritance taxes.
- malandrew 6y agoBut the kids still don't get that money. They only get control of a charity. It's not like they can buy a yacht.
- orwin 6y agobut they get the connections with the charity. That's why any vaguely defined charity that organize "events" for donors should be under a lot of scrutiny. people should check if the charityPR and lobbying dpt is working for the charity, the founder, or both.
- malandrew 6y agoI'm okay with scrutiny and oversight as you suggested to prevent fraud from related party transactions, but what's wrong with someone's children getting connections with the charity? One of the reasons I'm working hard and saving money is to provide my family with better opportunities than I had. To say I'm not allowed to better the lives of my family is to deprive me of rights and freedoms to do what I want with what I create.