Charity Governance

THE PAKISTANI FLOODS: IS U.S. GOVERNMENT POLICY ON CHARITY AND TERRORISM THWARTING RELIEF EFFORTS?

DATELINE:  August 20, 2010, Chicago

Over the last decade, we have heard plenty of complaining by United States lawyers and charities that the anti-terrorism rules, as implemented by the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control and other agencies of the government, have had a chilling effect on efforts of well-known and well-intentioned disaster relief and international aid organizations working in developing nations.  Clearly given the regulatory environment, any relief organization entering Pakistan to provide aid to victims of the recent floods must be cautious. 

The media has been reporting for the last several days that terrorists and those sympathetic to them are using the floods to destabilize the Pakistani government.  While aid organizations should be encouraged to counter those efforts as a matter of U.S. foreign policy, the fact remains that to do that, they often must work with local groups, which opens up the possibility of inadvertently aiding  terrorists. 

We are unable to say whether the aid response is slower than warranted or in adequate, but the reports that we have heard suggest the level of aid flowing in is not on par with the aid that followed this year’s earthquake in Haiti or the South Asian tsunamis several years back, among other major disasters that have occurred around the world.  Is this evidence that the time has come for the United States government to modify its anti-terrorism rules, as applied to charitable and humanitarian activities  that are conducted by private organizations, by making the regulations more realistic and less draconian?  Sometimes absolutes are not the best solution.

Internal Revenue Service - Circular 230 Disclosure: As provided for in Treasury regulations, any advice (but none is intended) relating to federal taxes that is contained in this communication is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (1) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (2) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any plan or arrangement addressed herein.

THE FOREGOING IS NOT AND SHOULD NOT BE TAKEN AS LEGAL ADVICE. IF LEGAL ADVICE IS REQUIRED, THE NONPROFIT OR OTHER PARTY IN QUESTION SHOULD SEEK THE ADVICE OF QUALIFIED LEGAL COUNSEL. If you liked this post, please visit http://www.charitygovernance.com for a description of our training and consulting services. You will also want to acquire a copy of Jack Siegel's book, A Desktop Guide for Nonprofit Directors, Officers, and Advisors: Avoiding Trouble While Doing Good." Copyright 2010, Charity Governance Consulting LLC. All Rights Reserved. You may not copy any portion of this post to a computer "clipboard" for re-posting anywhere or e-mailing, or otherwise reproduce this post. If you want others to review this post, you may provide them with a link to this web blog. Any use of the material or ideas in this post by reporters or other publishers shall make reference to Jack Siegel, author of "A Guide for Non-Profit Directors, Officers and Advisors: Avoiding Trouble While Doing Good" and this web blog. For additional information call 773-325-2124

ARROGANCE, NOT A MISUNDERSTANDING—NO HALO IN HAITI

Dateline: February 4, 2010, Chicago

We have been watching the story about the imprisoned Baptist missionaries who were detained for allegedly trying to remove 33 Haitian children from Haiti.  The ten missionaries were charged today by Haitian authorities with abduction and criminal association.  Mark Lacey, Abduction Charges for Americans in Haiti, N.Y. Times (February 4, 2010).  While we suspect these missionaries will be returned to the United States shortly, we have no sympathy for their plight. 

These folks apparently assumed that their efforts to do good would not only shield them from legal liability, but serve as justification for ignoring the laws of another country and the rights of Haitian parents who might still be alive.  In their view, the opportunity to live in the United States apparently justifies any action needed to achieve that result.

The lesson in this story should be obvious and applies to matters that extend far beyond disaster relief, children, and adoption:...

GOOD FOR THE ACLU: REPORT ON CHILLING EFFECT OF OFAC

DATELINE: June 16, 2009, Chicago

Mainstream charities have been upset since President George Bush (43) first began his efforts to identify and shut down charities that finance terrorist activities.  Everyone acknowledges that some charities have been used as fronts to finance terrorism.  Nobody disputes the need to shut those charities down.

What has troubled many U.S. charitable organizations that make foreign grants, provide disaster relief, and provide aid to third world nations has been the...