Why Do Profit Organizations Offer Tax Deductions On Charitable Donations?

George is addressing the important issue of the perception of poverty in the United States at this time. She brings up many valid points about the perceptions of poverty in the United States and how nonprofit organizations perpetuate this narrow view of what poverty is in order to elicit contributions (676). Moreover, George is able to show how Habitat for Humanity while helping many people in need. Also gives the false idea that people living in poverty merely need some volunteers to build them a home and then they will be able to work their way right out of poverty (678). Given these points, Prof. George explains, the idea that people in the United States living poverty all live in squalor or are homeless does nothing but limit people’s knowledge of what true people in need actually look like (682). By the same token, when it comes to the actual individuals in need, many of them might not even realize or want to admit that they are in need themselves (682-683). One limiting factor of Prof. George’s article is that she narrowly focuses on one nonprofit organization to show how the majority of nonprofit organizations portray people in

In "Changing the Face of Poverty: Nonprofits and the Problem of Representation" Diana George explains how positively changing the way poor people are represented in the world throughout every aspect of life is a huge progression that challenges everyone to look at the face of poverty a different way, and will not be able to turn away.

Diana George’s article “Changing the Face of Poverty: Nonprofits and the Problem of Representation” focuses on the relation between the society and the issue of poverty. She starts by mentioning that a holiday was approaching, Thanksgiving, “...Thanksgiving is near.” (235) and that some nonprofit organizations will publicise ads to collect money from people. They will send ads via the mailbox and this is an effective way for them to communicate. She addresses some publications and the rise of poverty over the years. She presents the occurrence of poverty throughout the city of London and New York, including photographs that depict the disaster of the Great Depression.

It might come as a surprise to learn that the government is subsidizing what Robert Reich has called a “plutocratic bias” in the charitable sector at a steep cost to the national treasury. This is in large part because the charitable tax deduction, which serves as the charitable sector’s primary financing mechanism, creates tax incentive structures for donors that are steeply regressive. In 2012, tax subsidies to the charitable sector cost the government more than $50 billion in lost tax revenue. Given the billions of dollars in government subsidies and donations, it seems only reasonable to ask if this sector actually supports “charity” by meeting the needs of the most disadvantaged in our society, which is what we have historically

their funding and instead support private charities. They promote the reduction of taxes for the

I think this change in the standard accounting process for nonprofits is very beneficial. Although it is difficult to compare nonprofits, it is beneficial for the purposes

In July 2014, Steven Nardizzi wrote an article, “Measuring Charity Effectiveness: Manage Your Mission, Not Your Rating” for Huffington Post, in which he stated “furthering our mission and broadening our impact was only possible by ignoring conventional wisdom about how nonprofits should be run” (Nardizzi, 2014). Nardizzi went on to state that nonprofits should disregard the pressure that ratings organizations generate for charities to decrease expenditures relating to fundraising and administrative costs. Instead, Nardizzi shared, WWP had chosen to appropriate funding to its efforts relating programs, staff, and infrastructure and fundraising. By doing so, WWP warranted that it could continue to develop in a manner that accomplished its mission while meeting the needs of its various constituents. Nardizzi did acknowledge that they could improve within certain areas such as “measuring and reporting our impact, holding ourselves and our industry to the highest of ethics and profession, informing government officials about the appropriate ways to measure charity effectiveness, and starting a public dialogue about these issues” (Nardizzi, 2014). Nardizzi’s position on the complaints did not acknowledge any misdoings on the part of WWP. Instead, he defended the organization’s choice to disregard charity rating systems—describing them as schemes that do not work. While it is true that nonprofits must endeavor to advance their missions and strengthen their impact, those who provide financial or other types of support should examine external, independent sources of information, and not as Nardizzi suggests, rely up information exclusively form the

There are millions of not-for-profit (NFP) organizations. Each organization has their own definitive set of rules on handling donor gifts. Every time a donor gift is made to a NFP; determination is needed on whether or not the gift needs to be restricted or unrestricted. There are times that gift donations are made at the end of the year so that the donor is able to file on their taxes. The NFP organization needs to have a certified public accountant (CPA) that can get involved in how the donation is given. The direct pupose of this paper is set up to explain the different acconting processes of NFP organizations.

As we approach election day, both front runners; Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton have proposed their policies if they were to take office. Hillary Clinton is advocating to increase tax on the top one percent, while Donald Trump wishes to cut tax (especially for the wealthy and middle class). Trumps policy mirrors the trickle down system; where we cut tax on the rich, leaving them with more money in which we assume they will invest. Yet, we have seen this to be a failure since the rich do not invest their money, rather, they save it. Trump's proposal is more of a tax relief when compared to Secretary Clinton's plan, however, Trump's proposal could cause more problems to rise.

charities did not amount for all of the poor families hardships and were basically given to

In the last decade, tax exempt institutions have been expanding in New England cities, particularly in education, healthcare, and social services, while the manufacturing and financial services sectors are shrinking (“PILOT Program,” 2014). In Worcester, a city with a large nonprofit sector, tax-exempt properties would have generated $20 million in property taxes in fiscal year 2012 (“How Worcester Loses Out on $20 Million in Property Taxes Annually”, 2012). In order to deal with these fiscal deficits Worcester must implement a voluntary Payment In Lieu of Taxes program. A PILOT agreement is one in which an organization that is otherwise exempt from property taxation under local and state law, agrees to voluntarily make payments in lieu of taxes to a municipality (“PILOT Program,” 2014). Such payments are voluntary because municipalities are prohibited by law from taxing nonprofits. (“PILOT Program,” 2014). In most cases the motivation for tax-exempt organizations to pay PILOTs is scarce. However, when structured PILOT’s are implemented, nonprofit organizations recognize the value of services they receive from the local municipalities and are willing to pay their fair share of those costs.

Chari-ties are small organizations, though with some exceptional attributes. Both the charitable sector and the small business area comprise of an expansive number of little substances. Information from the NSNVO demonstrates that in 2003 there were 161,227 foundations and not-for-profits in Canada. The majority share 54% utilized no paid staff. Just 2% had paid staff of 100 or more. It's a comparative story in the little business part, which is commanded by an expansive number of small firms, by far most of which 98% utilize less than 100 paid staff. Under 2% utilize 100 individuals or more. Both areas are described by noteworthy dangers to achievement and congruity. Hindrances to section are moder-ately low and obstructions to achievement are generally high. In this manner there is a huge rate of passage and way out in both the altruistic and small business segments for an assortment of reasons, including insolvency, ailment, retirement, or the satisfaction of mission. For the small business area, the administration division has included firms more rapidly than the products creating part. In a few years, the rate of weakening in the small business division has been starkly high with respect to sample in the subsidence year 2009. Charities in Canada additionally encounter low boundaries to passage and high ob-structions to achievement. The net result is that every year, the quantity of charities in Canada increments. In 2009, for instance, around 2,100 new charities were enrolled by Revenue Canada while 1,500 charities were disavowed. In the course of recent years, a net increment of approximately 360 charities for each year has been ordinary, prompt-ing a genuinely quick development of the quantity of charities in Canada. This is a characteristic and, from numerous points of view, alluring part of the elements of the economy as more established associations kick the

\footnote{A 2009 report to congress lists top problems for tax-payers, one is relevant information about impacts and needs of nonprofits; accessed March 23, 2014. \url{www.irs.gov/pub/irs-utl/1_09_tas_arc_vol_1_preface_toc_msp.pdf}}

In our great nation, nonprofit organizations have played a critical role in helping people in need by providing education, training, residences, counseling, and in‑kind and cash support. Our nations has called upon nonprofit agencies, to take the leading role in American society in addressing social problems. Their belief in the efficacy of nonprofits combined with the current political and financial constraints on government spending, suggests an even larger service role for nonprofit organizations. We know that politics is complexed in its operating environment. There is a real danger when we choose to ignore the complexity of government and how it