Charitable status: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
(no, it is per country, not just "in the US" - in Canada and Australia the same rules apply. noting politics of charitable status) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
For a [[non-profit organization]] to have '''charitable status''' under the law means that a [[donation]] to that organization results in the issue of a [[tax receipt]] - that is, a [[receipt]] that entitles the [[donor]] to a [[tax deduction]] | For a [[non-profit organization]] to have '''charitable status''' under the law means that a [[donation]] to that organization results in the issue of a [[tax receipt]] - that is, a [[receipt]] that entitles the [[donor]] to a [[tax deduction]]. | ||
Accordingly, organizations with such '''status''' fall under much closer scrutiny than those without it. | Accordingly, organizations with such '''status''' fall under much closer scrutiny than those without it. This is reasonable because: | ||
Effectively, citizens of that jurisdiction give up a right to tax some amount on the assumption that the organization acts in their own interests. In the [[United States]] there are also complex rules about whether charities are registered per state or federally, and where they can solicit for donations and how. ''See [[alleged Wikimedia corruption]] for some standing issues on this.'' | |||
Sometimes the powers of charitable status are ab/used to reflect political biases, e.g. [[Greenpeace]] is charitable in some countries, not in others, and the difference usually depends on political forces in power in each country. | |||
Latest revision as of 16:28, 6 September 2004
For a non-profit organization to have charitable status under the law means that a donation to that organization results in the issue of a tax receipt - that is, a receipt that entitles the donor to a tax deduction.
Accordingly, organizations with such status fall under much closer scrutiny than those without it. This is reasonable because:
Effectively, citizens of that jurisdiction give up a right to tax some amount on the assumption that the organization acts in their own interests. In the United States there are also complex rules about whether charities are registered per state or federally, and where they can solicit for donations and how. See alleged Wikimedia corruption for some standing issues on this.
Sometimes the powers of charitable status are ab/used to reflect political biases, e.g. Greenpeace is charitable in some countries, not in others, and the difference usually depends on political forces in power in each country.