What's this red nose thing. Every time I see one I change the channel...
Due diligence is all well and good, but what about vulnerable people like my elderly mother, who can't seem to grasp that some people are capable of this sort of thing? She has been manipulated by scammers countless times and it's up to her children to try to intervene and protect her. She can't even use a computer, so Charity Navigator doesn't help in her case (as wonderful a resource as it may be for the rest of us). "Buyer beware" has its limits.
Many of the "tea party" groups clamoring for 501(c)(4) exemption letters from the IRS (as well as "progressive" groups, too) are scams like this, taking money from gullible contributors and using it to pay the organizers exorbitant salaries with minimal expenditures for program activities. These political groups are as bad as, or even worse than, fake charities because the law doesn't allow tax exemptions for primarily political activities. Congress cuts funding for the IRS and at the same time bashes the IRS for trying to do its job.
2
All you need to know is found at the so-called Clinton Foundation, filled with foreign money from governments currying favor with past and future Presidents (maybe). The Clintons, of course, are paid better than any CEO in America, but little whining about those compensation levels pouring out of tax-exempt entities meaning that you (if a taxpayer) are subsidizing the salaries.
2
Many (genuine) non-profits do wonderful work with humanitarian, environmental, and animal-protection causes, to name just a few!
Tarring them all by implication with the same brush because of the blatant theft and corruption of a particular crook like Reynolds is a serious disservice, both to legitimate charities and presentation of the news. And of course, it reduces everything to the same 'everyone is a crook so why bother with any regulations' truisms that are corroding our nation.
What's needed is strong regulation, serious criminal penalties, and vigorous prosecutions of malefactors like Reynolds. Only then will the Augean Stable be cleaned out.
Pretty much the same thing as needed for our financial "system"! (More and better regulation--not less!)
Tarring them all by implication with the same brush because of the blatant theft and corruption of a particular crook like Reynolds is a serious disservice, both to legitimate charities and presentation of the news. And of course, it reduces everything to the same 'everyone is a crook so why bother with any regulations' truisms that are corroding our nation.
What's needed is strong regulation, serious criminal penalties, and vigorous prosecutions of malefactors like Reynolds. Only then will the Augean Stable be cleaned out.
Pretty much the same thing as needed for our financial "system"! (More and better regulation--not less!)
3
I travel frugally by public transportation in several Central American countries with high murder rates, alone and unarmed. The news reports are lazy and inaccurate as although the stats are real, the violence is localized and primarily gang on gang. Since 2011 I have made 6, month long+ trips (one I lived in a private house, alone, for several months) in El Salvador, Honduras, Guatemala, Nicaragua and México, I've never even had a hard look. The people are friendly and hardworking and deserve better than these "drive-by" news reports, always single-mindedly focused on gang violence. The US embassy has little idea of how people live (evidenced by the State Department advisories) as I have never seen any Americans in the field).
However, I can always spot an NGO by the extraordinary complexes that stand out in the middle of the communities, surrounded by 20' walls with concertina wire, anb the passing on the road of the new, black SUVs, the archtype of the NGO. Yet the lot of the people is unmoved.
There are approximately 10,000 NGOs operating in Haiti, a country of 4 million people! Yet the Haitian people continue to live in squalor.
I'm reminded here of the Clinton Foundation more known for taking money from all sources while paying enormous salaries to Clinton political hacks and supporting the lasvish lifestyles of the Clintons, tax-free. Studies have shown that CF has paid out only 10% on charitable endeavors! This is not atypical.
However, I can always spot an NGO by the extraordinary complexes that stand out in the middle of the communities, surrounded by 20' walls with concertina wire, anb the passing on the road of the new, black SUVs, the archtype of the NGO. Yet the lot of the people is unmoved.
There are approximately 10,000 NGOs operating in Haiti, a country of 4 million people! Yet the Haitian people continue to live in squalor.
I'm reminded here of the Clinton Foundation more known for taking money from all sources while paying enormous salaries to Clinton political hacks and supporting the lasvish lifestyles of the Clintons, tax-free. Studies have shown that CF has paid out only 10% on charitable endeavors! This is not atypical.
7
I got a phone call from one of Reynolds' so-called charities. While they were on the phone with me, I quickly looked them up on Charity Navigator. With that information in hand, I innocently asked what percent of charitable dollars were used in fund raising. Needless to day, the caller hung up and I was never bothered again.
6
I have learned never to give my money to ANY of these so-called charities. They all spend too much money on themselves, and on raising more money. I have restricted my donation to my community, homeless shelter, animal shelters, schools, food pantry. I can see how my donations are being used to help those in need.
8
As reported by CharityNavigator, the President of the North Shore Animal League earned $346,356 in 2012 ( the most recent year reported) so I hope the local animal shelter you donate to spends more on the animals and less on its executives.
1
Good idea. Also of value is to give of your time and pay your own expenses when doing so. That is the best charity of all.
1
Non-profits for Medical Research are notorious for being bale to raise funds but then completely drop the ball when allocating funds for "peer review" studies. The Scientific Review Board is stacked with conflict-of-interest and ofter use their position to dictate their wishes elsewhere, such as who publishes where, promotion, etc.
Many non-profits have now opted for professional fund raisers, having created a deal with the Chair of the Foundation.
Do not provide funds unless it's clear that the academic projects are indeed fulfilling your wishes. Targeted, well-defined drug development vs a fishing expedition.
NIH study sections are also compromised terribly and this is why after 20 million plus publications and many new "Institutes" at NIH, there is still little movement forward to actually solve.
Many non-profits have now opted for professional fund raisers, having created a deal with the Chair of the Foundation.
Do not provide funds unless it's clear that the academic projects are indeed fulfilling your wishes. Targeted, well-defined drug development vs a fishing expedition.
NIH study sections are also compromised terribly and this is why after 20 million plus publications and many new "Institutes" at NIH, there is still little movement forward to actually solve.
1
Patchwork Oversight Allows Dubious Charities to Operate
==================
Yes, like the Clinton Foundation, that spends 85% of its donations on its own salaries and expenses.
==================
Yes, like the Clinton Foundation, that spends 85% of its donations on its own salaries and expenses.
6
LOL. That's what Fox News, Rash Limbo and the NY Post say, and it's garbage. 85% goes to the work of the foundation--which mind you, isn't great. But when you make ridiculous claims you shatter your respectability and any influence you might have on honest discussion.
LOL. That's what Fox News, Rash Limbo and the NY Post say,
==================
Um, no, that's what Clinton Foundation documents filed with the IRS say: 15% for programmatic grants and 85% for expenses. You can click though this article and look at them yourself here.
http://thefederalist.com/2015/03/02/the-u-s-constitution-actually-bans-h...
==================
Um, no, that's what Clinton Foundation documents filed with the IRS say: 15% for programmatic grants and 85% for expenses. You can click though this article and look at them yourself here.
http://thefederalist.com/2015/03/02/the-u-s-constitution-actually-bans-h...
There should be no tax exempt non-profits and no charitable deduction for any contribution, including and especially religious institutions.
The cost of contributing to charity should be borne by contributors, not the taxpayers, who make up the difference in the public coffers, thereby forcing them to subsidize charities and non-profits.
And, in the case of the religious charitable deduction, this is clearly in violation of the First Amendment.
The cost of contributing to charity should be borne by contributors, not the taxpayers, who make up the difference in the public coffers, thereby forcing them to subsidize charities and non-profits.
And, in the case of the religious charitable deduction, this is clearly in violation of the First Amendment.
6
The problem with your second paragraph is that many good charities result in community improvements, whether working directly for the community or for individuals. This effect also benefits those who do not contribute to charity.
The pink ribbon people ought to get audited some day too. What a huge charity machine they've turned into.
And I wish they'd stop asking me in commercial store transactions to donate a dollar, every time I make a purchase. There should be a direct charity jar for these underpaid cashiers for their health insurance that they and their families don't get because they're considered part time workers.
It's pathetic to make them shill for a charity.
I am truly disgusted with all of these 'nonprofit' locusts.
And I wish they'd stop asking me in commercial store transactions to donate a dollar, every time I make a purchase. There should be a direct charity jar for these underpaid cashiers for their health insurance that they and their families don't get because they're considered part time workers.
It's pathetic to make them shill for a charity.
I am truly disgusted with all of these 'nonprofit' locusts.
8
Follow this link to find a list of the 50 worst charities in the US. http://www.tampabay.com/americas-worst-charities/ The key fact is how much money ultimately ends up being used to help others. In many cases, it's "ZERO." Be aware of who you give to, and never respond to telephone solicitations. Ask them to send you something in writing - and then research who they are. The BBB's Wise Giving Guide and Charity Navigator are good sources.
1
Does everything under the Sun have to be regulated? If people are so stupid as to give money to a charity that they've done no research on, it's their own fault. Creating another huge government bureaucracy to keep watch over charities will just drain more money from taxpayers that could have gone to legitimate charities. We can't force people to use their brains.
1
the charities are claiming tax exemptions. That's why they need to be regulated. Fake charities are essentially stealing from the government.
2
Good grief, this is exactly what government is for, for heaven's sake. How well can a society run when we accept fraud as the cost of doing business? Of course this needs to be regulated. And no one is creating anything - did you read the article?
Well, there you have it. Let's get Government, all of which is always bad by definition, out of our lives. Let's get ripped off by bogus charities, poisoned by polluted water and air, killed on crumbling bridges and highways, and so on and so on. No more taxes, we're all free to live as we please. We have our own guns, no need for police and if our house burns down, well too bad, we've eliminated the fire department, it was too expensive. We get what we deserve and we deserve this.
5
"“Fraud involving charities is viewed as a junior-league crime,” said Dean A. Zerbe, a former staff member for Senator Charles E. Grassley, Republican of Iowa, who worked on legislation related to charities." That's okay Chuck, congress has also ignored major league crime, Wall Street bankers.
4
Exuse me, but why aren't these guys being prosecuted for fraud, theft, embezzlement, or whatever someone who's, like, actually a prosecutor can come up with?
4
Because they're not black and they don't wear hoodies.
Before giving consult Charity Navigator:
http://www.charitynavigator.org/
http://www.charitynavigator.org/
Sorry but these flashy appeals to "give" in TV ads and internet look like a scam every. single. time. I see them. It is crafted and exploitative advertising in both theory and action. Give your personal time if it matters.
4
My personal "contribution" to resisting phony charities is an absolute refusal to respond to telephone solicitations except by offering to review written material if sent. If a charity is unwilling to give me the time to review written information (paper or electronic) I am unwilling to give. It is interesting to see how many "charities" just go away rather than permit me time to consider their requests.
All of my charitable contributions are made to local agencies that I visit. I know my money is being put to good use.
4
Buyer beware!!! Americans really have to do due diligence before they donate any hard-earned money. There is little information on viable worthwhile charitable organizations. Recently, for-profit, publicly traded, entities have developed that are supposed to rate charities. But would you ever use a for-profit group to make that decision? Can you honestly accept the idea that Tea Party organizations that focus on pushing the conservative agenda are actually non-profit designed to help others? My biggest dismay are police fraternal organizations. They are constantly calling, but when you drill down on who they are what you find are groups that distribute virtually nothing of what they collect to the needed, and spend all of it on paying salaries of retired police personnel. Any non-profit entity that farms out it's collection activities to third-parties should never be considered tax exempt. And consider the millions in tax revenues that are lost by designating organizations like Tea Party groups and police fraternal organizations as non-profit. The focus of the IRS and Congress should be on lost tax revenue.
2
I've worked (and volunteered) in the non-profit "industry" for 20+ years, and have three main comments: 1) please don't forget the wonderful, important services that the vast, vast majority of charities accomplish. When cleaning things up, don't throw the baby out with the bath water. 2) the donor should do diligence, and research a charity's staff salaries, expenses, etc. as reported to the IRS (remembering those records are not judged by the IRS but merely filed with.) The free public records in GuideStar are wonderful. And lastly, 3) yes, I think many non-profit definitions need to be overhauled and then effectively regulated. Half-million dollar+ salaries are NOT "non-profit" for that individual, even if they are an MD/PhD, oversee a staff of 500+ people and a multi-million dollar budget and "have to comfortably rub elbows with monied people". Yes, those are all 'excuses' in the reasonings I've heard for high salaries. So what? Where's the integrity in that? Where is the line? I don't know, but it is a good conversation to have.
3
Couldn't the National Institute of Health solicit taxpayer donations for cancer research in addition to direct government funding?
2
Susan, "Churches are exempt" not for "no reasons" but for bad reasoning. The separation of church and state has long been misinterpreted to allow churches to be above the law. Why should a church not contribute to the upkeep of local police and fire departments that protect them or maintenance of roads and other municipal services necessary to their existence, let alone contribute to the maintenance of state ad federal government services, including the courts and the military, that make their way of life possible? Churches are also a scam, allowed to be scofflaws by the longstanding prejudices of US culture.
6
AMEN!
Mr. Reynolds charities are an example of american goodwill and serve a very important purpose. Yes, they raise awareness for health issues! There is an overwhelming canon of clinical evidence that demonstrates awareness as a highly effective treatment for cancer, especially childhood cancers. Why are we persecuting american goodwill? As they say no good deed goes unpunished.
The pendulum has swung too far away from professionalism and efficiency in government because of mostly bogus claims that government is the problem. This has been a clever scam by Republican operatives who just game the system by creating a false narrative and philosophy that is then slowly and inexorably implemented in every branch and at every level of government. The most egregious example is a present day Congress filled with people who have no expertise and no training to run a huge country effectively for the overall benefit of its citizens. They spend their "work" day clamoring for wars and pandering to the already obscenely rich whose pet greed projects for advantaging one religion over another or further raping natural resources
Gets implemented into one law or another. What needs to happen instead, in part, is to wean ourselves from the tax exemption status granted to charities and religious organizations. This could provide much needed revenue to start cleaning house on a bigger scale, such as correcting our grossly unfair taxing structure.
Gets implemented into one law or another. What needs to happen instead, in part, is to wean ourselves from the tax exemption status granted to charities and religious organizations. This could provide much needed revenue to start cleaning house on a bigger scale, such as correcting our grossly unfair taxing structure.
3
Can you find anything, anything at all, that the Republican congress hasn't made worse or actually caused the problem, Anything!!!!!!!!!
1
I have recently been distressed at all the"charities" that are asking for money, even at the checkout at the local grocery store, for our military "heroes". Since when did these men and women become a charity? Why is not the government who sent these people to "save" our democracy not caring for its citizen some of whom have made the ultimate sacrifice.
The National Do Not Call registry now allows any charity to call me at home at anytime of the night or day and ask for a donation. I will not give a cent or any personal information to a stranger on the phone no matter who they claim to be or represent. Nor will I allow myself to be polled by phone. I have always treated people with a certain degree of respect but now I routinely just hang up the phone when I hear the boiler room chatter in the background. Signed: On the Hit List.
The National Do Not Call registry now allows any charity to call me at home at anytime of the night or day and ask for a donation. I will not give a cent or any personal information to a stranger on the phone no matter who they claim to be or represent. Nor will I allow myself to be polled by phone. I have always treated people with a certain degree of respect but now I routinely just hang up the phone when I hear the boiler room chatter in the background. Signed: On the Hit List.
5
A great step forwards would be if all respectable charities voluntarily embraced transparency.
Right now, most of them don't:
http://www.transparify.org/blog/2014/12/4/five-stars-for-our-fellow-tran...
Right now, most of them don't:
http://www.transparify.org/blog/2014/12/4/five-stars-for-our-fellow-tran...
3
Our USA democracy and all its institutions are crumbling.
Everyday actually, it is heartening to see the lies and deceits being exposed.
We are in the midst of massive breakdown. NO ONE knows what to do, let's face the
truth about that.
But, I believe that the winds of change are strongly behind the 99% and see a new type of structure for our country in the next five to ten years.
In fact we are in the midst of a revolution of people consciousness, as we see all over the globe.
People fighting for their natural right of freedom.
We are seeing that we no longer need others to "lead" us.
When we come out of this we will be a nation more democratic run be "the people" probably without the middle man bidding (lying, cheating etc) and not truly representing their constituents.
Everyday actually, it is heartening to see the lies and deceits being exposed.
We are in the midst of massive breakdown. NO ONE knows what to do, let's face the
truth about that.
But, I believe that the winds of change are strongly behind the 99% and see a new type of structure for our country in the next five to ten years.
In fact we are in the midst of a revolution of people consciousness, as we see all over the globe.
People fighting for their natural right of freedom.
We are seeing that we no longer need others to "lead" us.
When we come out of this we will be a nation more democratic run be "the people" probably without the middle man bidding (lying, cheating etc) and not truly representing their constituents.
Wow
Just like banks
Just like hard rock mining companies
Just like oil drilling
Just like food processors
Just like police departments
Just like election laws
Just like election financing
Shocking I tell you......
Just like banks
Just like hard rock mining companies
Just like oil drilling
Just like food processors
Just like police departments
Just like election laws
Just like election financing
Shocking I tell you......
Usual practice. Many so-called charitable foundations are laundering money. They work together with IRS. IRS gets their kickbacks, charity get tax breaks and tax preferences. Many SuperPacs work practically the same way. Their advantage is lack of limit of sources and amounts of contributions. So, we get uncontrolled multibillion-election campaigns. Everything is interconnected.
2
Clinton Foundation.
1
Where are the board members exercising their fiduciary responsibilities at these "charities"? They can't all be cronies who are in on the cheat.
A board member's primary role is to solicit donations, not to oversee.
If a charity spends over 25% of its revenue on fundraising, it should lose its tax-exempt status. That would be a start.
2
No criminal charges for stealing millions? A lifetime ban from setting up another charity sham?
Try stealing a loaf of bread; you'll find all about criminal charges.
Disgusting.
Try stealing a loaf of bread; you'll find all about criminal charges.
Disgusting.
7
Here is an idea. Don't give money at all. Volunteer your time instead.
3
It's interesting this article has been positioned in the Business section. I expect that next we'll find these same people selling stock in their charitable solicitation venture, if they're not already doing so.
The IRS? People don't give to charities because the IRS exists, but because someone is asking for help. I am quite certain I am one of many who do not take income tax deductions for our charitable donations.
Surely these fine folks broke the law. How is it they haven't been criminally charged - only a civil settlement?
3
Congress' deregulation of the IRS investigating businesses like Reynold's bogus cancer charities for tax exempt status is responsible for this debacle. Reynold's alleged theft of $187 million of charitable donations from rank and file Americans is nothing less than disgusting.
When is the majority in Congress going to hold hearings on this particular matter and legislate to protect the rest of us, other than their special interests, political cronies and their own families? Federal and state law enforcement officials should have the necessary tools to protect the rest of us, for a change. Reynolds et al, and his ilk should be prosecuted, convicted and sent to jail. Like everything else, Congress has sanctioned what is tantamount to another loophole.
How about taking care of the rest of us, including those poor souls with cancer who were supposed to be the recipients of the subject, private donations, and doing what is right!
When is the majority in Congress going to hold hearings on this particular matter and legislate to protect the rest of us, other than their special interests, political cronies and their own families? Federal and state law enforcement officials should have the necessary tools to protect the rest of us, for a change. Reynolds et al, and his ilk should be prosecuted, convicted and sent to jail. Like everything else, Congress has sanctioned what is tantamount to another loophole.
How about taking care of the rest of us, including those poor souls with cancer who were supposed to be the recipients of the subject, private donations, and doing what is right!
24
How it is that Mr Reynolds Sr.,his son, James T. Reynolds II, and associates agreed to lifetime bans from the charity industry? Wouldn't prison sentences be the better way to help these swindlers keep their agreements?
45
Yes it would, especially as they were never in the charity business. They were engaged in fraud. One would think that they violated many states' and US laws, yet they are being treated like a bank. "Pay a fine and promise not to do it again," won't work. If Reynolds, et al, start up a new scam, they won't have violated their agreement as they would not be engaged in charity work.
This is an example of how Republicans & Libertarians are damaging U.S. infrastructure. Infrastructure is necessary for our survival. We all fund our infrastructure by paying taxes. Republicans reduced funding for government organizations that protect us from harm. The organizations include E.P.A. (environment), F.D.A. (food), N.A.S.A. (global climate change among other things), I.R.S. (oversight responsibility for charities, & funding the infrastructure itself). Business only cares about making a profit for owners and stockholders.
For decades the rich have been using their wealth to spread propaganda lies that paying taxes is a useless burden for us all. The truth is our government can do nothing if it is not funded through all of us paying taxes proportional to our income. Those who should be paying the most taxes--the 1% are instead paying millions to lawyers, lobbyists such as the so-called Chamber of Commerce, and of course our elected representatives so they can pay [zero] taxes. The truth is the 1% has no real reed for the fair share of tax money they do not pay. The rich are protected from explaining why they don’t pay proportional taxes to help fund our government. The rich can afford to pay our elected representatives, and many others to make deceitful speeches using the ideals of freedom, and liberty. Money is ruling our country. Unless there is a change to truth, compassion and empathy “we the people” are merely running a maze arranged by the rich and powerful.
For decades the rich have been using their wealth to spread propaganda lies that paying taxes is a useless burden for us all. The truth is our government can do nothing if it is not funded through all of us paying taxes proportional to our income. Those who should be paying the most taxes--the 1% are instead paying millions to lawyers, lobbyists such as the so-called Chamber of Commerce, and of course our elected representatives so they can pay [zero] taxes. The truth is the 1% has no real reed for the fair share of tax money they do not pay. The rich are protected from explaining why they don’t pay proportional taxes to help fund our government. The rich can afford to pay our elected representatives, and many others to make deceitful speeches using the ideals of freedom, and liberty. Money is ruling our country. Unless there is a change to truth, compassion and empathy “we the people” are merely running a maze arranged by the rich and powerful.
67
Your comment is nonsensical considering the top 5% of filers pay 47% of the entire total. I'm not sure once you accept that fact as truth how you can make your point at all? The reverse of that is that if 40% of filers (who get a check back no less!) paid something then maybe they would have some skin in the game.
You want some 'power'? Pay some taxes.
You want some 'power'? Pay some taxes.
1
Did the Reynolds' charities spend ANY of the money they collected for the causes they purported to support? Did they keep everything for their own use? That would still not excuse the fraud. I just wonder if any of the donors' intentions were fulfilled or if anyone was helped other that the criminals, who should indeed be in jail.
17
Dodgy charities? Nothing new here, and it's hardly confined to small operations. Remember, from over 20 years ago, United Way and its sweetheart of a chief named William Aramony (rhymes with 'alimony', for an additional little clue)? Only the biggest charity rip-off in history. What made it even worse was the way it raised the vast majority of its funds - workplace 'solicitation', which, in this country with its unique feature called 'Employment at Will', was often just a polite term for legalised extortion. Yes, Mr Aramony had to pay back a chunk of change, but that was nothing compared to the typical fate of workers who expressed reluctance to pony up and ended up labeled as 'non-team players', which in the Wonderful World of Work does you almost as much good as convictions for molestation and murder.
Which leads me to this modest (ahem!) proposal - if we really want to clip these vultures' wings, let's have a Federal law banning all workplace charity solicitations. After all, we like to pride ourselves on giving by free will, but how free are you when the boss is looking over your shoulder?
Which leads me to this modest (ahem!) proposal - if we really want to clip these vultures' wings, let's have a Federal law banning all workplace charity solicitations. After all, we like to pride ourselves on giving by free will, but how free are you when the boss is looking over your shoulder?
42
Very accurate comments. Virtually every Company I worked for pressured workers to donate to United Way. Despite this I never did. However they frowned on me for not doing so.
1
A federal law banning the sale of Girl Scout cookies? Really? This is a matter meriting federal intervention? Our food supply is poisonous, insurance company profiteers determine what medical care your doctor can prescribe, the bridge you drive over to get home today is laced with rust, but heaven forbid we're forced to negotiate the awkwardness of declining to purchase scented candles to support the soccer team or glee club.
Good idea, but the federal government should start by cleaning up its own backyard. When I was a government employee we had something called the Combined Federal Campaign for which employees were aggressively solicited.
1
More than a call for IRS oversight, this should be a warning for all of us to check the charity before we write a check. It's appalling that swindlers take money from well-meaning donors, and thereby divert much needed funds from the poor and other worthy causes. Even if it had more funding, however, the IRS is unlike to shut down all the deceptive "charities." Better deterrence is through other methods, such as laws, which many states have, that require each mailing disclose the percentage of budge spent on fundraising. Also, the public needs to be reminded to check-- before donating --what percentage of its funds a charity actually donates to its cause. Full financial reports that show salaries of executives-- Form 990's-- are public and available on the net. And investigative journalists should write on scam charities, so that when person Googles the charity's name, revealing articles appear.
14
I was in the 6th Special Forces Group at Fort Bragg in the late 60s. The county, which ran the United Way campaign deemed our group as not donating it's 'fair share'. The group commander was chewed out by General Flanagan, the commander of the JFK Special Warfare Center, and we had 6am formations every day until everyone ponied up.
"Charity industry"? Maybe that's part of the problem?
23
Yeah industry is a stupid word.
It's clear the NY Times doesn't like charity except for those charities that it supports. All other charities are corrupt apparently.
Some context in an article like this would be nice. This activity is fraud. I think prison time is warranted. But this represents .00001% or less of nonprofits.
But that's not as fun to point that out.
It's clear the NY Times doesn't like charity except for those charities that it supports. All other charities are corrupt apparently.
Some context in an article like this would be nice. This activity is fraud. I think prison time is warranted. But this represents .00001% or less of nonprofits.
But that's not as fun to point that out.
Had a somewhat antisocial roommate years ago who spent four hours day doing telephone solicitation for the "Martin Luther King Scholarship Fund." There really was such a thing, but the outfit my roommate worked for took 85% of the contributions; the MLKSF got 15%. CBS's "60 Minutes" exposed his employer a few years later. This stuff has been going on for eons. My recommendation? Only give to the charity itself. Never give via phone solicitors or the Internet.
15
Well, you take in 187 million and your only punishment consists of "lifetime bans from the charity industry." Well, what a sweet deal!!! Oh, and were these ill-gained millions taken away from these corrupt folk? Nope, still enjoying their mansions.
Why would anyone do actual work, build industries, and earn a living through honest work when the only thing that you can get, by committing one of the awfullest crimes possible --to steal from well-meaning ordinary hardworking Americans the money that would otherwise literally cure cancer patients-- is a bit of sorry publicity.
Indeed the game is rigged, but in favor of corrupting Americaninto a grand playground for kleptocrats and thievery, for folks without morality, and with brazen intentions and depravity that stinks to high heaven.
If the poor get a few months of jail for stealing a Twinkie, let's throw these folks one year in prison for stealing each $10,000 of the millions they helped themselves to --that is a lot of Twinkies and punishment should fit the crime!
Why would anyone do actual work, build industries, and earn a living through honest work when the only thing that you can get, by committing one of the awfullest crimes possible --to steal from well-meaning ordinary hardworking Americans the money that would otherwise literally cure cancer patients-- is a bit of sorry publicity.
Indeed the game is rigged, but in favor of corrupting Americaninto a grand playground for kleptocrats and thievery, for folks without morality, and with brazen intentions and depravity that stinks to high heaven.
If the poor get a few months of jail for stealing a Twinkie, let's throw these folks one year in prison for stealing each $10,000 of the millions they helped themselves to --that is a lot of Twinkies and punishment should fit the crime!
40
Good thing Republicans want to cripple the IRS even further than the $1 billion and 13,000 jobs already lost in the last 5 years. And remember folks, according to them, charities, not the government, will help you need a hand. I sure hope the one you choose is a good one! Cross those fingers!
29
And a good thing the Obama Justice Department, now under Attorney General Lynch, continues to refuse to indict the people at the big banks for their ongoing criminal behavior.
Well yes, JH. That's also bad, if not germane.
Nothing new here. See Miles Wortman, The Road to HELP: The Revolution in Charity, Philanthropy and International Development (2014) that examines the vague and frequently perverse operations and campaigns of faux- and near-faux charities and foundations in both politics and the non-profit world.
4
Some of these charities in NYS which claim to be contributing to the welfare of police and their retirement are completely phony, even if they meet all of the IRS "nonprofit" rules. The police already have a great pension system, and these charities use all of their money for the staff of the so-called charity. The public often donates, whether from authentic concern or from fear ("what happens to me if I do not contribute?"), but the money goes into the pockets of the scammers.
14
Yeah, don't you love those deep-voice, manly men (all fake, of course) who call for those scams.
Libertarians, Republicans, even Democrats and Independents are wary of government for all kinds of reasons.
But if you allow people to behave poorly, they will. It's just a bigger classroom out there, but not much different than fourth grade.
If communities are powerless to rebind the frayed moral fiber of a once great nation themselves, then we need to put a cop on the beat.
The problem across the spectrum, philanthropy, business, academia, the political class, is there is no punishment for bad behavior. The only way to restore the meritocracy is by abandoning political correctness and setting some rules, and punishment when the rules are ignored.
It seems that when there were repercussions for dishonesty, not the least of which was the shame of a damaged reputation, the nation functioned better, certainly more equally.
But if you allow people to behave poorly, they will. It's just a bigger classroom out there, but not much different than fourth grade.
If communities are powerless to rebind the frayed moral fiber of a once great nation themselves, then we need to put a cop on the beat.
The problem across the spectrum, philanthropy, business, academia, the political class, is there is no punishment for bad behavior. The only way to restore the meritocracy is by abandoning political correctness and setting some rules, and punishment when the rules are ignored.
It seems that when there were repercussions for dishonesty, not the least of which was the shame of a damaged reputation, the nation functioned better, certainly more equally.
16
"Efforts to tighten oversight of charities have largely failed because of regulatory indifference, political lobbying or lack of political will."
Just call it what it is: government corruption. Our government is broken, and not just a little. It no longer works for the American people. Unfortunately, things will have to get excruciatingly worse before the American people get off their butts and do anything about it.
Just call it what it is: government corruption. Our government is broken, and not just a little. It no longer works for the American people. Unfortunately, things will have to get excruciatingly worse before the American people get off their butts and do anything about it.
19
Even the government loving NYTs has said on many occasions that "government is always inefficient and often corrupt".
1
It's easy to figure out why there is no political oversight or interest in catching the scammers. Tax exempt groups include those with religious affiliations. Evangelicals represent a substantial voting block for the Republics. Also a lot of that tax exempt money will find it's way to the campaign coffers, thus - the leave them alone/ look the other way rationale.
20
Like it's any difference with the Democrats. Please! Both parties are to blame!
It would be nice if the Federal Trade Commission has prosecutorial powers; unfortunately, it does not. Some other federal agencies should also have the same powers It seems DOJ cares more about flash than bang.
3
What is the point of bringing the charities to their knees while allowing the perpetrators to walk free with a slap on their collective wrists? The leader has a history of doing this, and this isn't his first visit to the hollow halls of justice. Maybe a vigilante needs to step in and do what the system seems unable/unwilling to do.
11
My concern is less someone grafting a few bucks and more Koch Industries setting up holding companies and PACs to funnel money to their selfish causes. Corrupt lobbying is the greatest scandal of the past four years and it could literally destroy in the republic in short order.
9
How many charities would remain if they were all required to spend a certain percent of donations on their stated causes?
10
Most of them, I'd be willing to bet. Most of them are trying to do a good job.
“It really took a coordinated effort to bring these four charities to their knees.—The charity paid a $250,000 settlement (in Hawaii)"—This after collectively "cheating donors of more than $187 million" Ouch! That must have been really painful.
I would suspect that if serious jail time were meted out this would help solve the problem. At present, these people were forced to return what money was left and not allowed to run charities anymore. This is Justice? In the mean time, the couple who had sex on a public beach in Florida are looking at 10–15 years in jail. Now that's putting our priorities in order...
Maybe sometime in the distant future we will figure out what justice is, and how to minister it correctly. In the mean time the moneyed few will never see the inside of a jail...
I would suspect that if serious jail time were meted out this would help solve the problem. At present, these people were forced to return what money was left and not allowed to run charities anymore. This is Justice? In the mean time, the couple who had sex on a public beach in Florida are looking at 10–15 years in jail. Now that's putting our priorities in order...
Maybe sometime in the distant future we will figure out what justice is, and how to minister it correctly. In the mean time the moneyed few will never see the inside of a jail...
33
The number one category of tax fraud other than unreported income is claimed charitable contributions to churches that never happened. Matching claims against church records would not be especially difficult.
Non-profits and charity organizations are actively involved in politics as well as self-enrichment. Its unlikely that Congress will act to rein in charity and election fraud.
But Americans could have an impact by simply not sending money to phony charities. There are several watchdog organizations that flag bad charities. These cancer charities were well known bad actors.
Save your money for a few reputable charities instead of responding to appeals in the mail or TV.
Non-profits and charity organizations are actively involved in politics as well as self-enrichment. Its unlikely that Congress will act to rein in charity and election fraud.
But Americans could have an impact by simply not sending money to phony charities. There are several watchdog organizations that flag bad charities. These cancer charities were well known bad actors.
Save your money for a few reputable charities instead of responding to appeals in the mail or TV.
26
Matching claims against church records would not be especially difficult.
===================
It would for cash donations
===================
It would for cash donations
the only reasons these "charities" succeed is because the donor fails to do due diligence before making a contribution. I give very little to charities but what I do give is to agencies with which I am familiar. Last time I checked, most of us are able to google for information on anything of interest. Five minutes of your time can make a huge difference in your decision to contribute.
20
Not everyone knows how to use the internet, or has internet access. Unfortunately the people probably most likely to fall for these scam charities - the elderly, the lower middle class - often fall into these categories.
1
This story applies to charities of all kinds; from the small town community / workplace fundraising charities to the national ones. Never a day goes by when there are stories across the country about small town nonprofits and causes misusing donations. Charity fundraising is the new "industry" for "A list wanna-bes" looking to use other people's donated money to garner fame and fortune for themselves.
14
Not true. The vast majority of charities aim to be good stewards of donors money. Try to understand that charities include organizations such as a food pantries, art museums, community foundations, health clinics, and legal services to the poor.
We can address fraud and still honor good work that helps support a Democracy. These articles inevitably bring out the cranks who claim that the charitable sector is corrupt. Even if you don't believe in charity, that is simply false.
We can address fraud and still honor good work that helps support a Democracy. These articles inevitably bring out the cranks who claim that the charitable sector is corrupt. Even if you don't believe in charity, that is simply false.
When it comes to donating to non-profits, like anything else, due diligence is very important.
It's good to use Charity Navigator, GuideStar or Charity Watch. These organizations do a very thorough analysis and produce rankings based on a number of factors; including fundraising efficiency, administrative expenses, transparency, working capital ratio, audited financials, CEO salary, etc.
It's good to use Charity Navigator, GuideStar or Charity Watch. These organizations do a very thorough analysis and produce rankings based on a number of factors; including fundraising efficiency, administrative expenses, transparency, working capital ratio, audited financials, CEO salary, etc.
30
Not to forget the Better Business Bureau.
4
I'm not impressed by the BBB, arm twisting business cronies.
FYI: The BBB is bought and paid for by the businesses that knuckle under to their constant pressure for membership (read dues). Believe me.
The BBB is better than nothing but not much.
The BBB is better than nothing but not much.
No jail, no justice. People died from a lack of care. This is more than just fraud.
30
With blessings of the political bigwigs and lawmakers, and in some cases their direct involvement, who is going to check the illegal activities of money laundering and tax evasions indulged in by millions of the charities, mostly the dubious Ones?
14
Sounds like we should investigate the Clinton Foundation - only 10% to charity and paying Huma and Sid Blumenthal!
14
Most only disperse 5% of their funds. And lots are in the Bush family network. So spare us the partisan rhetoric. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/06/opinion/a-better-way-to-encourage-char...
6
Sorry – but spare us this knee jerk, partisan nonsense.
4
And then there are charities which serve a valid function but do so in a querstionable manner. Take for example Onebllood, an organzation which does blood collection in Floridca and other locations in the soutd. heast USA. According to its 2013 IRS Form 990, its President and CEO, Donald D. Doddridge took in more than $2,000,000 in compensation that year. Certainly Oneblood was very charitable to Mr. Doddridge.
43
A truly despicable act by these players, but lets also call it what it really is - theft! This sentence is troubling - "F.T.C. officials said three defendants...had settled the civil complaint and agreed to lifetime bans from the charity industry." Anything short of a prison sentence is part of the continuing travesty.
88
But did they pay back every dime they stole? Or, like many rich criminals, have they been allowed to keep their mansions and overflowing bank accounts?
What's the big deal? We don't go after how the uberwealthy make their wealth, why go after these small fry? We've got rich folks willing to lie a country into war over and over and over again, why should anyone have any morals?
If the game is rigged, anything goes.
If the game is rigged, anything goes.
18
If these charities fleeced contributors of $187 million, they fleeced taxpayers of about 25% of that amount, depending on the filing status and tax bracket of the contributors.
It's about time that we looked more critically at the fiscal and policy effects of the charitable deduction. When most people think of charities, they think of the charities they choose to support and they are grateful that their contributions are supported by other taxpayers.
But,if the IRS and states are not willing to examine the tax-exempt status of the charities we as taxpayers support, maybe the only solution is to eliminate the charitable deduction.
It's about time that we looked more critically at the fiscal and policy effects of the charitable deduction. When most people think of charities, they think of the charities they choose to support and they are grateful that their contributions are supported by other taxpayers.
But,if the IRS and states are not willing to examine the tax-exempt status of the charities we as taxpayers support, maybe the only solution is to eliminate the charitable deduction.
47
Aw, leave these guys alone. They are no worse than most of the U.N. agencies that the U.S. taxpayer throws money at that gets rerouted to pockets of bureaucrats and their cronies. And just look at the aid that the U.S. taxpayer sends overseas - places like Afghanistan where the last presidents illiterate brother was able to by several million dollars worth of property in Dubai. Money well spent I suppose
5
UN agencies and NGO's are not licensed by the state and most Americans don't give them any money, but every "charitable" organization begins its life as a not-for-profit corporation granted a charter to do business in a particular state and they gets lots of our money which we are led to beleive goes for good purposes. In addition to federal tax filings they have to file state tax forms. At least that's the case in New York.
In addition to these outright scams are the so called charities that operate as tax dodges rather than doing legitimate charitable work. These so called charities acquire substantial assets, hire staff and pay salaries and buy goods and services. Upon close examination you might discover that the founders wife and kids are the staff, their cars belong to the charity and numerous travel expenses including vacations just happen to be taken by these family members. In reality they simply run a family business, but one that's tax exempt. Other foundations or charities take in lots of money but give out very little but still shelter their funds from taxes.
All this needs to stop and oversight and investigation should start at the state level in our respective AG's offices. And don't just settle for fines. Go after jail time. This is the only thing that will change this culture.
In addition to these outright scams are the so called charities that operate as tax dodges rather than doing legitimate charitable work. These so called charities acquire substantial assets, hire staff and pay salaries and buy goods and services. Upon close examination you might discover that the founders wife and kids are the staff, their cars belong to the charity and numerous travel expenses including vacations just happen to be taken by these family members. In reality they simply run a family business, but one that's tax exempt. Other foundations or charities take in lots of money but give out very little but still shelter their funds from taxes.
All this needs to stop and oversight and investigation should start at the state level in our respective AG's offices. And don't just settle for fines. Go after jail time. This is the only thing that will change this culture.
1
Some of the oversight is being provided by outfits like Charity Navigator who rate charities on a variety of measures. If you do want to find out more about a particular charity you surely can. I'm amazed though, that there are people who give to charities that advertise extensively, there are a few with billboards across NYC. Surely those funds would serve a better purpose if put towards their programs.
31
Yes, Charity Navigator - the organization that has put the Clinton Foundation on its Watch List and refuses to rate it
A million charities nationwide? A million? Maybe there wouldn't be so many "charitable organizations" if charities were taxed. The whole not-for-profit model is a joke. And while we're at it, lets start taxing churches, too.
110
There are actually charities that serve a valid purpose, though. For instance, many churches and charities focus on mental health, something that the government has been completely negligent in funding. They're certainly not going to start just because those charities are being taxed.
There should absolutely be far more oversight, but taxing charities isn't the answer. And the idea of taxing churches is nothing but a pipe dream.
There should absolutely be far more oversight, but taxing charities isn't the answer. And the idea of taxing churches is nothing but a pipe dream.
3
Why would you say the "whole not-for-profit model is a joke"? As someone who has been involved with non-profits in some way my entire life (participant as a child and employee as an adult), I can't disagree more strongly. Where would many of our neighbors be without the local food bank? or Boys and Girls Club? or Rebuilding Together which helps low-income homeowners who are elderly, disabled or vets to remain in their homes by fixing health and safety issues? or numerous veterans organizations offering assistance in a variety of ways? or or or . . . For most of the small, local ones (even if they are affiliated with a national network), taxes would be the end of the services they offer.
Yes, there are unscrupulous people involved with non-profits, but having seen no evidence to the contrary, I would guess they are no worse nor more prevalent than in society in general. And compared to the really big guys - banks for instance - this is such small potatoes! Priorities, folks, priorities!
Regarding Charity Navigator and GuideStar: the basic services are free. You can look at the Form 990 for most organizations (churches are exempt for some reason) and get LOTS of information, including key salaries, income and expenditures, etc, etc.
Yes, there are unscrupulous people involved with non-profits, but having seen no evidence to the contrary, I would guess they are no worse nor more prevalent than in society in general. And compared to the really big guys - banks for instance - this is such small potatoes! Priorities, folks, priorities!
Regarding Charity Navigator and GuideStar: the basic services are free. You can look at the Form 990 for most organizations (churches are exempt for some reason) and get LOTS of information, including key salaries, income and expenditures, etc, etc.
13
Many, probably most, of those charities are "private" ones, that is, set up to benefit a small group of people.
4
No matter what your take on the IRS , it provides the life's blood of revenue that allows this country to function.
For the last 35 years, the GOP has taken it upon itself to denigrate the government as being a dysfunctional monolith that needs to be pared down to the barest of essentials.
Everything should be privatized except for the military. Regulatory agencies should be abolished with Wall Street and the corporate structure trusted to police themselves in providing for the commonwealth needs of our citizens.
This republican pipe dream has been structured solely to accommodate that very small portion of citizens that comprise less than five per cent of the populace. With the collaboration of a Supreme Court majority that has extended the Bill of Rights to the corporate oligarchy , declared wealth to be free speech, and decimated populist access to the polls by declaring racism a thing of the past. Within minutes, every red state in sight took advantage of this daft opinion and enacted restrictive voting laws .
Health care, education, and our country's infrastructure have been sacrificed to the altar of avarice that has been erected by GOP legislation that has gutted IRS funding to the point that our tax collectors are crippled. Neither the IRS nor Social Security has insufficient funding to root out the endemic cheating and misappropriation of funds that goes on.
The choice is anarchy , with only the very wealthy succeeding , or a government by and for the people.
For the last 35 years, the GOP has taken it upon itself to denigrate the government as being a dysfunctional monolith that needs to be pared down to the barest of essentials.
Everything should be privatized except for the military. Regulatory agencies should be abolished with Wall Street and the corporate structure trusted to police themselves in providing for the commonwealth needs of our citizens.
This republican pipe dream has been structured solely to accommodate that very small portion of citizens that comprise less than five per cent of the populace. With the collaboration of a Supreme Court majority that has extended the Bill of Rights to the corporate oligarchy , declared wealth to be free speech, and decimated populist access to the polls by declaring racism a thing of the past. Within minutes, every red state in sight took advantage of this daft opinion and enacted restrictive voting laws .
Health care, education, and our country's infrastructure have been sacrificed to the altar of avarice that has been erected by GOP legislation that has gutted IRS funding to the point that our tax collectors are crippled. Neither the IRS nor Social Security has insufficient funding to root out the endemic cheating and misappropriation of funds that goes on.
The choice is anarchy , with only the very wealthy succeeding , or a government by and for the people.
115
Devoid of cash and unhappy?
Just create a sham charity,
Show your contempt
Get tax exempt
And gobble scads of cash,
And if its found you've crossed the line
At most you'll pay a feeble fine,
Cease and desist
More theft resist
Eschew raw robbing rash!
Just create a sham charity,
Show your contempt
Get tax exempt
And gobble scads of cash,
And if its found you've crossed the line
At most you'll pay a feeble fine,
Cease and desist
More theft resist
Eschew raw robbing rash!
37
I don't give to incorporated charities. Ever.
Corporations, as "people", have all the rights and privileges of citizenship, but none of the responsibilities.
And corporate charities are no difference from for-profit corporations.
It's all about the money.
Corporations, as "people", have all the rights and privileges of citizenship, but none of the responsibilities.
And corporate charities are no difference from for-profit corporations.
It's all about the money.
53
This has been going on for years. The main difference between nonprofit organizations and for profit organizations is that nonprofits don't have to pay taxes.
60
In banking, finance and charity industries, if you use money from other people, you are subject to rigorous scrutiny and regulation, in order to protect the interests of those clients and donors.
Once the situation is phrased in that manner, anyone who argues against regulation exposes his real object: enriching himself. And yes, I include churches in the roll call of charities.
Any quibbling raises more questions about the quibbler than about the proposal.