Charitable Giving

WHO IS REALLY RUNNING THE NEW YORK CITY OPERA?

DATELINE: June 21, 2009, Chicago


Robin Pogrebin of the New York Times did a bang-up job this past week when she reported on the New York City Opera’s perilous financial condition.  City Opera Tries to Hold Off the Ultimate Finale (June 17, 2009).  Her in-depth article deserves to be read by everyone who is interested in nonprofit governance.  


Quite the Mess.  The New York City Opera is in a financial mess. Pogrebin reports that the company’s endowment has dropped from $57 million in 2003 to...

Continue reading "WHO IS REALLY RUNNING THE NEW YORK CITY OPERA?" »

CAN’T EVEN PREDICT THE FUTURE FIVE YEARS OUT: SALVATION ARMY SHOULD HAVE GONE TO COURT

DATELINE: June 15, 2009, Chicago


Over the years, we have examined a number of restricted gifts.  While we always acknowledge the right of donors to make the gifts, we also have always questioned whether such gifts are wise.  Donors are lousy at predicting the future, as we have seen time and again.  Stephanie Strom offers up Exhibit A in Plan for Dozens of Salvation Army Centers Falters (June 14, 2009).


Joan Kroc, the widow of Ray, the founder of McDonald’s, left $1.8 billion to the Salvation Army at her death in 2003.  The Salvation was instructed to go on a spending and building spree.  Kroc required the Salvation Army to build...

Continue reading "CAN’T EVEN PREDICT THE FUTURE FIVE YEARS OUT: SALVATION ARMY SHOULD HAVE GONE TO COURT" »

BRANDEIS UNIVERSITY IS ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF DISPUTE WITH DONOR’S DESCENDANT

DATELINE: May 12, 2009, Chicago


One thing is for sure, Brandies general counsel Judith R. Sizer is certainly earning her salary this year.  Sumner Kalman, the great nephew of Julius Kalman, has filed suit in Suffolk County probate court in Boston claiming that Brandeis is not honoring the terms of a gift made by Julius Kalman circa 1956.  John Hechinger, Brandeis Plan to Raze Building Sparks Donor Suit, Wall Street Journal (May 13, 2009). At the time, Brandeis built a science building and named it after Mr. Kalman, who bequeathed the funds for the building.


As happens with the passage of time, the building...

Continue reading "BRANDEIS UNIVERSITY IS ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF DISPUTE WITH DONOR’S DESCENDANT" »

A RECURRING PROBLEM: DONOR ALLEGEDLY FAILS TO SATISFY PLEDGE IN TOUGH ECONOMY

DATELINE:  April 27, 2009, Chicago


We certainly have enjoyed many events at Jazz at Lincoln Center (JLC), including  Marcus Roberts multiple times (at Dizzy’s and the Allen Room), a Gil Evans tribute in the concert hall, and most recently Roseanne Cash and Rodney Crowell in the Allen Room.  You certainly can’t beat the views and the music ain’t bad either, which is why we were sad to read in today’s New York Post that JLC’s board is  suing a member of its board...


Continue reading "A RECURRING PROBLEM: DONOR ALLEGEDLY FAILS TO SATISFY PLEDGE IN TOUGH ECONOMY" »

WARNING: CHARITABLE LEAD TRUSTS ARE COMPLICATED DEVICES; DESPITE POTENTIAL TAX BENEFITS, PIECE OF MIND MAY BE WORTH MORE

DATELINE: February 11, 2009, Chicago

Yesterday’s Wall Street Journal has an article extolling the benefits of charitable lead trusts, an estate planning device that balances charitable motivations, family wealth transfers, and reductions in estate and gift taxes.  Mike Spector, Giving Smarter While Helping Your Estate: Bear Market Provides Boost to Little-Known Strategy (Feb. 10, 2009).  It is a great planning device when fully understood and used properly. Structurally, the donor makes a gift to a trust.  The charitable beneficiary receives payments during the term of the trust.  On termination of the trust, whatever remains is paid to the donor, her chidlren, or other named beneficiaries.  It derives its name based on the charity’s relative position to the beneficiaries who receive the trust's assets upon termination.  The charity is in the lead--it receives the first payments.  A charitable remainder trust is just the opposite.  The charity receives what is left following termination of the trust, with the children or other named beneficiaries receiving the annual payments.  Charitable lead trusts can be created during an individual's lifetime (inter vivos) time or following an individual's death as part of the estate plan (testamentary).

There are two basic types of charitable lead trusts.  The first pays the charity a fixed annual amount (a charitable annuity trust).  The second pays the charity an annual amount based on a percentage of asset value (a charitable unitrust).  It is worth noting that the payments to the charity can be made at shorter intervals (e.g., semi-annually or quarterly), with the calculations adjusted to reflect that fact.   The more popular form is the annuity trust, in part because it avoids the need to value the assets annually. 

Lead trusts can be further divided between grantor or non-grantor trusts.  If the trust is structured as a grantor trust, the grantor receives an immediate income tax deduction, but must include the income from the trust assets in her annual income.  Because the grantor will be paying tax on income that is paid to the charity, the trust is often funded with assets that produce income that is tax-advantaged such as tax-exempt bonds. The grantor is typically the recipient of the assets when the trust terminates, but it is possible to have someone other than the grantor receive the remainder interest--referred to as a nonreversionary grantor charitable lead trust.  See Private Letter Rulings 9224029 and 9247024.  These trusts look a lot like nonreversionary non-grantor lead trusts, but achieve grantor trust status through a drafting trick that takes advantage of the grantor trust rules.  The grantor retains the right to require the trust's property by substituting property with an equivalent value.   

The trust also can be structured as a non-grantor trust, in which case the person funding the trust does not receive an income tax deduction at the time of funding, but she  does not have to pay include the trust's annual income in her income for tax purposes.  Instead, the trust files its own tax return, pays the tax on the income, and receives a charitable contribution deduction.  The decision whether the trust is structured as a grantor or non-grantor trust often turns on the funder’s income tax rates at the time the trust is funded.  If the funder is in a high marginal tax rate in the year of funding, but expects to be in a lower bracket in later years, the funder may opt for a charitable lead grantor trust.  The overall goal with the more popular non-grantor trusts is to...

Continue reading "WARNING: CHARITABLE LEAD TRUSTS ARE COMPLICATED DEVICES; DESPITE POTENTIAL TAX BENEFITS, PIECE OF MIND MAY BE WORTH MORE" »

THE ROBERTSON FAMILY TAKES A PAGE OUT OF HILLARY CLINTON’S PLAYBOOK

DATELINE: December 11, 2008, New York City

When we learned yesterday from CNBC that the Robertson Family lawsuit against Princeton University had settled, we jumped on a plane to the East Coast so that we could bask in the zeitgeist.  Our conclusion after learning the terms of the settlement:  The Robertson Family took a page out of Hillary Clinton’s playbook.  First, spend a fortune kicking the...

Continue reading "THE ROBERTSON FAMILY TAKES A PAGE OUT OF HILLARY CLINTON’S PLAYBOOK" »

“THERE’S JUST NO POINT IN DOING IT:” CALLS TO PERVERT THE LAW SHOULD BE IGNORED

DATELINE: July 24, 2008, Chicago

"There's just no point in doing it," claims Jon Shirley, who together with his wife, has donated major works of art to the Seattle Art Museum. In A Portrait of Art as a Tax Deduction, Wall Street Journal reporter Mike Spector explains why. Prior to the enactment of the Pension Protection Act (PPA) in 2006, rich art lovers could give their works to art museums in what were highly tax-favored transactions. To illustrate, assume Tom Collector owns a Jackson Pollock valued at $10 million. He paid $2 million for it. The tax law said that if Tom gave it to the Art Institute of Chicago, he could claim a $10 million deduction for it, even though he paid $2 million for the painting. That means his $8 million gain escaped tax, but he received credit for the gain in calculating the amount of his tax deduction.

Now, let's consider a plumber who has bills at $150 per hour. He donates 20 hours of his time to the Art Institute of Chicago to...

Continue reading "“THERE’S JUST NO POINT IN DOING IT:” CALLS TO PERVERT THE LAW SHOULD BE IGNORED" »

FASB SHOULD WAKE UP AND SMELL THE COFFEE: MASSACHUSETTS TAX ON ENDOWMENTS

DATELINE: May 12, 2008, Chicago

As regular readers know, we are dissatisfied with proposed FSP 117-a, a rather obscure proposal being considered by the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB). It would extend current accounting principles to the financial statements of charities operating in states that have adopted the Uniform Prudent Management of Institutional Funds Act (UPMIFA). UPMIFA is spreading like wildfire, with at least 20 states enacting versions of it.

To make a long story short, FSP 117-a will continue the accounting profession's practice of overstating the amount of a charity's assets that are freely spenadable. For institutions with large endowments, this means that to donors and legislators, much of endowment looks like it is available for current expenditure despite legal restrictions which prohibit the institution's board from spending the funds. As our Jack Siegel pointed out in his recent article, FASB Puts Infinity Up on Trial: Accounting for Endowments, 60 EOTR 23 (April 2008), the inaccurate reporting mandated by FASB will pose serious problems for colleges and universities. For example, rising tuition and related costs...

Continue reading "FASB SHOULD WAKE UP AND SMELL THE COFFEE: MASSACHUSETTS TAX ON ENDOWMENTS" »

WHAT ARE THE INTERNATIONAL RELIEF ORGANIZATIONS DOING ABOUT MYANMAR AND WHAT ARE YOU DOING ABOUT IT?

DATELINE: May 7, 2008, Chicago

We suspect that the established disaster relief organizations are not receiving an outpouring of donations following Cyclone Nargis' direct hit on Myanmar. Many people don't know where Myanmar is, and those that do, are likely to be put off by the military government, particularly following the crackdown several months ago on Buddhist monks. Nevertheless, there probably are more than a few people who still want to do something. After all, those who...

Continue reading "WHAT ARE THE INTERNATIONAL RELIEF ORGANIZATIONS DOING ABOUT MYANMAR AND WHAT ARE YOU DOING ABOUT IT?" »

BUILD IT AND THEY WILL FUND IT: WRONG

DATELINE: May 6, 2008, Chicago

The Museum of Broadcast Communications was located in the Chicago Cultural Center, a temporary location, for many years.  Over the last several years, the museum has been constructing a new museum on Chicago's State Street. The museum archives hold over 85,000 hours of broadcast and radio programming.

We hadn't been actively following the construction's progress, but we did notice when we walked past the facility that it was taking what seemed to be a...

Continue reading "BUILD IT AND THEY WILL FUND IT: WRONG" »