Posted on 12/03/2015 10:29:05 AM PST by Brad from Tennessee
Mark Zuckerberg did not donate $45 billion to charity. You may have heard that, but that was wrong. From Our Advertisers
Here’s what happened instead: Mr. Zuckerberg created an investment vehicle.
Sorry for the slightly less sexy headline.
Mr. Zuckerberg is a co-founder of Facebook and a youthful mega-billionaire. In announcing the birth of his daughter, he and his wife, Priscilla Chan, declared they would donate 99 percent of their worth, the vast majority of which is tied up in Facebook stock valued at $45 billion today.
In doing so, Mr. Zuckerberg and Ms. Chan did not set up a charitable foundation, which has nonprofit status. He created a limited liability company, one that has already reaped enormous benefits as public relations coup for himself. His P.R. return-on-investment dwarfs that of his Facebook stock. Mr. Zuckerberg was depicted in breathless, glowing terms for having, in essence, moved money from one pocket to the other.
An L.L.C. can invest in for-profit companies (perhaps these will be characterized as societally responsible companies, but lots of companies claim the mantle of societal responsibility). An L.L.C. can make political donations. It can lobby for changes in the law. He remains completely free to do as he wishes with his money. That’s what America is all about. But as a society, we don’t generally call these types of activities “charity.â€
What’s more, a charitable foundation is subject to rules and oversight. It has to allocate a certain percentage of its assets every year. The new Zuckerberg L.L.C. won’t be subject to those rules and won’t have any transparency requirements. . .
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
It made Scott Pelley feel all warm and fuzzy.
I am kind of surprised that the NYT is calling out this liberal dirtbag.
* Clinton Crime Syndicate
I’m sure Hussein is busy taking notes.
Is this the NYT we know and hate actually calling out one of their own? It must be quite cold in hell.
Is this the NYT we know and hate actually calling out one of their own? It must be quite cold in hell.
I imagine that the world runs out of ways to satisfy the material whims of those with a net worth of more than a few hundred million dollars, say. What to do with all the extra money?
The only personal value of wealth beyond that would be to influence the behavior and attitudes of groups of people, politicians, governments, i.e. to project power and influence history. A charitable foundation would be an excellent vehicle for that purpose.
he can award grants to anyone he wants to for any reason he chooses.
And so what? It’s a (somewhat) free country.
Love the oxymoron, “altruism” (selflessness) helping “self”. NYSlimes and the doublethink.
Would be nice if he had not earned his fortune with a website that blows-up marriages and families, facilitates terrorists, increases the severity of mental illness, and gets people killed.
Did I read this wrong or was the jist that he should give the government the money so they can decide where it goes?
And it’s his money. If he wants to buy a box of gold plated cigars and light the rest of the money on fire... It’s his damn money.
mega-billionaire
how about ‘multi’?
As others have pointed out - an LLC, instead of a 501C, can do all the political lobbying and contributions it wants.
I believe a million billions is a brazilian.
i use to date a gal with a bazillion but she wasn’t rich.
Me too.
I personally believe that these types of foundations should be outlawed. I have no problem with foundations being set up but I do have a problem with those setting up the foundations and there progeny having access to the money. I look at it as them setting up a inherited title and creating there own aristocracy.
Wow! NYT calling out a fellow traveler! What’s up with that?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.