3 ms·

Unless you know of some secret section in the tax code, it's not a "2 for 1 deal" - if Bill Gates donates a billion dollars to a charity, it makes sense that it

Unless you know of some secret section in the tax code, it's not a "2 for 1 deal" - if Bill Gates donates a billion dollars to a charity, it makes sense that it wouldn't be taxable; it's no longer his money. Typically the tax code reduces your income by money for which you don't actually have constructive use. There are certainly other things like 'in-kind' donations which may reduce tax obligations without necessarily providing a commensurate value, but putting money into bona fide charitable works are not among them.

RcouF1uZ4gsC 6y ago
> it's no longer his money. That is one of my contentions. Although it is technically no longer his money, he still has a significant amount of control over how it is spent, and that money increases is political power and influence. And it is not just Bill Gates and a foundation. If I donate $50 to a charity, it is unlikely I have any influence. It is truly not my money. If however, I donate $50,000,000 to a charity, I exert a lot of control with that money. I can have a huge influence on the direction of the charity, and even likely get somebody fired or appointed to the board of directors. I am not saying those donations should be illegal, just that we should see that it is different qualitively from a regular donation and not give it tax advantages.