Clarice Feldman ping.
If you'd like to be on or off the Clarice Feldman ping list, drop me a FReepmail.
Posted on 12/11/2016 5:09:35 AM PST by RKV
A few years ago, Mark Steyn sagely observed, “In America today, few activities are as profitable as a ‘nonprofit.’” Nothing warrants changing that assessment now. President-elect Trump has a lot on his plate if he plans to turn around the ship of state. But if it’s not too presumptuous, I’d like to add one more item to his agenda: a substantial rewrite of the laws respecting our tax-exempt sector, reining in private foundations.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Start with NGOs.
Shadow government banking system
At best most “non profits” are benign lazy entities that accomplish a smidgen of what for profit entities do. At worst, they are tax dodging/money raising schemes for con artists.
So true. All they have to do is not make a profit and they just do that by paying family and friends outrageous salaries.
The criminal MO to skim off tax-free money for themselves: The recipient Foundation takes a cut and deposits the rest of the donation offshore for the donor Foundation to use later.......all tax-free.
Makes one wonder if that is the pitch Democrat bundlers were using?
“We can make your campaign donation TAX DEDUCTIBLE! Just wire it in to the Clinton Foundation.”
Yep.
I didn’t know the CFI considered weddings a charitable donation.
And many other use it as a way to get 500k salaries as CEO!
In the private sector executive compensation is between the stockholders and the management. In a situation where the so-called charity enjoys tax exempt status its a different deal. Transparency (as in annual reporting) is not enough. Far as I am concerned we need to just do away with the tax exemptions all together. And while I know some here won’t like it, I’d say ditto for churches. Then they all get their unlimited free speech rights back. YMMV.
More of a tax dodge. Both Gates and Buffet scream for higher taxes on folks like themselves, while withholding all of their assets from taxes. Between the two families and their over $140 billion fortunes, after accounting for capital gains and estate taxes, they will have kept over $60 billion in taxes from the federal government.
I think the Clinton Foundation was actually set up in Canada. If so then they have already found a way around our laws on charitable foundations. I agree with the article, but the Clinton dodge must be accounted for!
I agree.
But how would that work for a non profit disease charity?
What would get taxed? Do they get taxed now?
Seems to me nothing is really non profit if people are on a payroll, some for big bucks.
I'd love to take a look at the fund solicitation letters the Clinton Foundation sent out.
Bc/ if the C/F solicited funds for a so-called "charity" then diverted the monies elsewhere, that is considered mail/electronic fraud.
Agree, Socialist DemoRats have prostituted the very concept of “charity” for elitist power over defenseless good citizens, and Republican have gone along for a cut of the loot.
Andrew Carnegie established his foundation with the objective of building libraries and providing churches with organs. Today the foundation is involved in funding many progressive causes, none of which are related to church organs or libraries in the United States. The foundation still does a small amount of library work in Africa.
One hundred years after most of the Carnegie libraries were constructed 1554 of the original 1681 buildings still exist and 911 are still used as libraries.
Would Carnegie approve of the activities of his foundation today? Do the activities of today’s foundation have the lasting positive impact on the society and culture as Carnegie’s library construction program? Would communities today, particularly small communities, benefit more from the construction or refurbishment of community libraries than the corporation’s current endeavors supporting liberal activist groups.
There is a long history in the US of foundations set up by wealthy philanthropists being taken over by progressive intellectuals who change goals of the organization to support the political and social objectives of the managers instead of the causes for which the philanthropist created the organization. Reform of large non-profits is long overdue. I suggest:
1) A 20 year horizon for non-profit status. At the end of 20 years the organization either liquidates or becomes fully taxable.
2) Income on the sale of merchandise and services by non-profits should be taxed. Goodwill, for example, competes with local merchants by selling donated merchandise. Its non-profit status allows it to avoid taxes on the goods it sells, while its private sector competitors pay for the goods they sell and pay taxes on the income.
3) Non-profits should pay property taxes on real estate and land owned by the non-profit but not used for the organization’s activities. Many large non-profits invest in property to generate streams of tax free rental income. By not having to pay property taxes, these non-profits have an advantage over the private sector landlords with whom they compete.
4) Non-profit status should be conditional on a limit to the amount of funds the organization can spend on overhead (say 5%) to insure the organization’s funds are being employed in the non-profit activity and not being used to pay high salaries.
prime example of this skim was the xlintonista’s russian/uranium deal where donations were funneled though a canadian tax free foundation (w/no FOI) to the xlintonista foundation for $100mm or so.
reality is this allows tax exempt a dangerous competitive advantage compared to standard businesses.
(let’s take out the greasing of the skids by hildabeast state dept to make this illegal transaction possible)
eg: to end up with the same $100mm that was reported about this transaction, a domestic for profit “C” corp wanted to buy the same uranium fields they would have to have a taxable income of about $135,000,000 just to net the $100,000,000 the tax exempt foundation needed.
where the standard “C” may be operating on a net profit of a generous assumption of 10% that means the “C” corp would have to have Gross Income from operations of about $1,350,000,000 to net after tax the same $100mm the tax exempt 501C has.
the real magic is as Liz mentions, one charitable 501C3 can dontate to another 501C3 and deduct the donation.
so to end up with $100mm bottom line, they simply take in tax exempt donations of $100mm.
the beauty of this, in the eyes of the xlintonista regime, is that they reported to the IRS a deduction that they made on a charitable donation of $1 million last year to their own foundation which pays NO taxes,
it actually screwed the US gummit taxpayer out of about $350,000.00 in the process.
I mean the scam is soooo great “the bern” has already set up his own foundation!!
and just by reading the news of obammy family’s $20,000 dresses and $25mm home purchases, I’m sure he’s got his own tax exempt foundation up and running by now.
If you'd like to be on or off the Clarice Feldman ping list, drop me a FReepmail.
har!
the Xlintonistas are much to smart to put any fund solicitation in hard copy letter form.
they emailed um.
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.