Fritz Schumacher published “Small is Beautiful – Economics as if People Mattered” in 1973. According to The Times Literary Supplement, it is among the 100 most influential books published since World War II and rightfully so.
For the last 60 years or so our way of life has been based on the premise that so long as there is demand there will always be supply. Schumacher wisely challenges these assumptions when he writes that sustainability is an impossibility when we are, “assuming all the time that a man who consumes more is ‘better off’ than a man who consumes less”, in an environment with finite resources.
E. F. Schumacher is clear about what economics can do and what it can’t do. Mainstream economists divide humans into producers and consumers. As consumers, consuming more will always be in our self-interest. As producers, efficiency is to be desired above all else. This breaks down, Schumacher says, as soon as we realize that producers and consumers are the same people with the same desires.
Yes, the rumors are true. CharityLawyer has formed her own law firm. My theme for 2010 is “Small is Beautiful” (which happens to be the title of the next book review). I started my career at a big four accounting firm with thousands of tax professionals, moved down the food chain to a national law firm of only 400 lawyers, and then to a regional law firm with a mere 200 lawyers. So, to continue the trend, I have started my own boutique law firm specializing in representing nonprofit and tax-exempt organizations. The firm is located in Phoenix, Arizona but will represent clients with respect to exempt organizations matters nationwide.
It appears that Congress will adjourn this year without reaching an agreement on transfer tax legislation. This means that a one-year repeal of estate and generation-skipping transfer (GST) taxes is scheduled to begin on January 1. The one-year repeal results from provisions in the 2001 tax act that reduced estate and GST taxes from 2001 through 2009, culminating in complete repeal in 2010. The provisions in the 2001 act are scheduled to “sunset” in 2011, meaning that estate and GST tax rates and exemptions will return to pre-2001 levels on January 1, 2011.
Individuals and businesses making contributions to charity should keep in mind several important tax law provisions that have taken effect in recent years. Some of these changes include the following:
The joint Department of Treasury/Internal Revenue Service priority guidance plan for 2009-2010 contains the following items of interest to tax-exempt organizations:Revenue procedure to provide terms for hosts of Cyber Assistant software (used to generate Form 1023 exemption applications eligible for reduced user fee).
The Internal Revenue Service is at it again. The IRS recently released a Governance Check Sheet that its examination agents will use when examining charitable organizations (other than private foundations), along with a Guide Sheet providing instructions on how to use the Check Sheet. According to the IRS’s webpage for exempt organization governance issues, the Check Sheet “will be used by IRS’ Exempt Organizations Examination agents to capture data about governance practices and the related internal controls of organizations being examined. The data will be included in a long-term study to gain a better understanding of the intersection between governance practices and tax compliance.” These materials are in addition to the governance training materials previously released by the IRS.
In the last decade or so, directors and officers have faced an increased exposure to personal liability. While the bulk of legal actions have been against directors and officers of for profit corporations, judgments against and settlements by directors and officers of nonprofit corporations are increasing.
There are 28 different exemptions under Code Section 501, the most popular of which is Section 501(c)(3). If the corporation plans to qualify for tax-exemption under Section 501(c)(3), the articles must limit the corporation’s activities to tax-exempt purposes. Tax exempt purposes include:
testing for public safety,
to foster national or international amateur sports competition, or
promote the arts, or for the prevention of cruelty to children or animals.
A listing of the IRS and Treasury Department’s joint priority guidance plan for the 2009-2010 tax year.
Ellis Carter and Deanna Rader will be co-presenting a webinar on December 15th at 4:00 pm as part of the Arizona Charter School Association’s Charter Starter program. One of the first sessions that the program will offer is a webinar on the legal aspects of starting an Arizona charter school.
In my practice representing nonprofit and tax-exempt organizations, there are often themes that emerge. Over the last few weeks I have had a spate of calls from would be nonprofits that paid either a nonprofit start-up “consultant” or a document preparation company to form their nonprofit and handle their IRS filings. In each case, the work product that made it to my office required substantially more work to fix than it would have taken to do properly the first time around. You get what you pay for, and sometimes, you pay dearly for what you get. Before hiring someone to help you with the legal and tax aspects of starting a nonprofit, make sure they are licensed to provide the type of assistance they are offering, have specific experience representing nonprofits, and are in fact representing you rather than helping you to commit malpractice on yourself.
The private inurement rule and private benefit rules exist to ensure that charitable assets are preserved for the benefit of the public and not diverted to private use. This is a fundamental concept that distinguishes tax-exempt organizations from for-profits.
The rules originate in the language of Code Section 501(c)(3). Code Section 501(c)(3) contains the specific requirement that:
[N]o part of the net earnings of [the exempt organization] inures to the benefit of any private shareholder or individual . . . .
In addition, under the regulations, an organization is not treated as organized and operated for exclusively exempt purposes “unless it serves a public rather than a private interest,” Based on this provision, tax exempt status is not available to any organization if its net earnings inure to the benefit of private individuals “in whole or in part.”
In practice, the law distinguishes between different degrees of inurement depending upon who is being benefitted. The two types of inurement are referred to as “private inurement” and “public benefit.”
Forty-one U.S. states as well as the District of Columbia and many local jurisdictions require some type of registration for charities trying to solicit funds. These laws create a patchwork of largely inconsistent laws that nonprofits must contend with. To add to the confusion, the jurisdictions that require registration have different definitions and standards regarding who must register, which documents are required, whether nonprofits must renew their registrations, and which government agencies process the registrations.
Sometimes no good deed goes unpunished. In this case, the board and staff of both nonprofits did a great job of putting their mission and beneficiaries first, only to be ambushed by their lack of stakeholder communication and buy-in.
Often, in an effort to save money, clients come to their attorneys with a plan and simply ask them to “draft X.” Frequently, X isn’t the most appropriate solution. This case was one of those. The deal started out as an acquisition with the lawyer (me!) being kept at arm’s length when in fact more involvment early on would have quickly identified that this program was not a candidate for an acquisition, but rather a simple management arrangement.
Sometimes collaborations do not go smoothly. This post summarizes some of the pitfalls and lessons learned when a nonprofit tried to acquire a struggling nonprofit for all the right reasons, but the effort ended up being more trouble than it was worth.
Case study of successes, disappointments and lessons learned from a successful merger of two human service organizations.
The well-meaning have been advising exempt organizations to “operate like a business” for years. If the organization is a Section 501(c)(3) organization, operating too much like a business can cost it its tax-exempt status due to the “Commerciality Doctrine.” Practically, the issue of commerciality usually arises when a tax-exempt organization engages in any endeavor for which a clear for-profit counterpart exists in the marketplace. Typical examples include publishing, consulting and sales of arts and crafts. Today, the Commerciality Doctrine is a threat to the increasingly popular movement toward social enterprises. Those that choose to organize as Section 501(c)(3) organizations should only do so after a thorough review of the Commerciality Doctrine.
Here’s a tip for nonprofits planning to apply for tax exempt status: submit the application for exemption in 2009, before […]
In Ripples from Zambezi, the author, Ernesto Sirolli, turns the top down model of grand economic development on its head. Instead, his focus is on nurturing the passion and creativity of individuals.
The title comes from Sirolli’s early experiments in economic development in rural Africa, where he worked as a foreign aid worker for the Italian government. The beginning of the book details his experiences in Africa and the ideas that those failed experiments planted in his mind.
From that experience, he learned firsthand the damage traditional top down development models could do and made it his life’s work to find a better way to build local economies. He later discovered that the ideas that germinated in Africa applied to Western economies, too.
Sirolli’s approach builds on the theories of E.F. Schumacher, A.H. Maslow, Carl Rogers and others. The fundamental concepts underpinning Sirolli’s work include:
– A belief in the intrinsic goodness of human nature.
– If people don’t ask for help, leave them alone.
– There is no good or bad technology to carry out a task – only an appropriate or inappropriate one. Something big, modern, and expensive is not necessarily best; it all depends on the circumstances.