Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: Should non-profits be taxed? [ajthomas] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
ajthomas wrote:
TheRef65 wrote:


This is my problem with hospitals being non-profit. In our area there is really only one hospital, the management makes a ton of money and when there is more left over at the end of the year, they give bonuses to upper management and the remainder buys up more and more real estate. In many cases to build something that competes with an existing business.


the Corporate tax rate is lower than the individual rate (now). So if the hospital is passing off profits to executive who are paying income tax, there is more tax dollars being collected.

The purpose of taxes is to provide benefit to the citizenry. Non-profits who do not operate to provide a benefit to the citizenry usually end up losing their non-profit status. Do we need symphony orchestras, blind people running marathons, Triathlon teams, and family planning clinics? I think so.

Right, because the taxes collected on a few top managers will come close to equally the taxes collected, locally. You forget, normally property taxes support local and not state or federal projects. It's a small percentage of the taxes collected on these executives that stays locally. In our area, the property tax goes mostly towards schools. Each time the hospital buys property, quite a bit of taxes are taken off the roles and away from the schools.

Doing a quick Google search it appears most non-profits, about 16% lose their status because they don't file their paperwork with the IRS. And of those who don't file, over half are no longer viable. So trying to equate a small local non-profit, like a triathlon team to a hospital is a joke. The tri team would not typically own property or really even have assests and if they do it would be minimal and not in the thousands of acres like many hospitals.

_____
TEAM HD
Each day is what you make of it so make it the best day possible.
Quote Reply
Re: Should non-profits be taxed? [Harbinger] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Harbinger wrote:
AlanShearer wrote:
Newman's Own is a prime example. BTW, they pay income tax on their earnings.

That's because Newman's Own is not a non-profit.

You are wrong. Paul Newman set it up at the beginning to be 100% owned by the Newman's Own Foundation. Since it is UBTI, they pay income tax on their profits. Read the label. It even says that on it.

Newman's Own Foundation is a charity.

All after tax profits belong to the foundation. On 35 years they have funded over $500M for charitable purposes.

So, Newman Own is a For-Profit corp owned by a non-profit charity. New mans Own (the company) is not a non-profit.

Swimming Workout of the Day:

Favourite Swim Sets:

2020 National Masters Champion - M50-54 - 50m Butterfly
Quote Reply
Re: Should non-profits be taxed? [AlanShearer] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:
Are you saying they don't compete? What do you think happens to local sales of cookies at a grocery store when girl scouts set up just outside to sell cookies?

Nothing happens. The local grocery store gives out more cookies to the local food bank each week than the Girl Scouts sell in a year. They give out more in free samples of various food than the Girl Scouts sell.

Next thing you will be taxing everyone who bakes cookies at home because they are competing with grocery stores. Why should someone who bakes at home be allowed to have a cost advantage? Totally unfair.

________
It doesn't really matter what Phil is saying, the music of his voice is the appropriate soundtrack for a bicycle race. HTupolev
Quote Reply
Re: Should non-profits be taxed? [JasoninHalifax] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
JasoninHalifax wrote:
Harbinger wrote:
AlanShearer wrote:
Newman's Own is a prime example. BTW, they pay income tax on their earnings.

That's because Newman's Own is not a non-profit.

You are wrong. Paul Newman set it up at the beginning to be 100% owned by the Newman's Own Foundation. Since it is UBTI, they pay income tax on their profits. Read the label. It even says that on it.

Newman's Own Foundation is a charity.

All after tax profits belong to the foundation. On 35 years they have funded over $500M for charitable purposes.


So, Newman Own is a For-Profit corp owned by a non-profit charity. New mans Own (the company) is not a non-profit.


Newman's Own is a BRAND that is sold in virtually every grocery store. The brand is owned by Newman's Own, Inc. which is 100% owned by Newman's Own Foundation, a non-profit private foundation (charity). Like many complex companies, they have set up separate entities for various aspects of their operations, such as food sales, real estate investments, etc. They all flow up to the foundation.

Interestingly, NO, Inc. (the food sales operations) was converted from a pass thru entity to a regular C corp in 2010, so now it pays income tax like it's competitors. Previous to that, the taxation occurred at the foundation level.
Last edited by: Harbinger: Mar 29, 18 5:31
Quote Reply
Re: Should non-profits be taxed? [H-] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
H- wrote:
Quote:
Are you saying they don't compete? What do you think happens to local sales of cookies at a grocery store when girl scouts set up just outside to sell cookies?


Nothing happens. The local grocery store gives out more cookies to the local food bank each week than the Girl Scouts sell in a year. They give out more in free samples of various food than the Girl Scouts sell.

Next thing you will be taxing everyone who bakes cookies at home because they are competing with grocery stores. Why should someone who bakes at home be allowed to have a cost advantage? Totally unfair.

The reason the Girl Scout cookie sales are not classified as UBTI and therefore taxed (income) is because there is an exception that applies. If the activity is not regularly carried on then it can be excluded from UBTI. Periodic dances, annual galas, annual fundraisers, etc. This is why the GS cookie sales typically only happen once a year (see, you inadvertently learned something). If the GS sold their cookies year round, then they would be subject to income tax, UBIT (Unrelated Business Income Tax) because of UBTI (Unrelated Business Taxable Income), see the Newman's own brand as an example of this.

If you want to buy the same cookies that the GS sale, they are available in Walmart. Substantially cheaper. Branded under Walmart's Great Value brand. And of course, Walmart pays income tax on their profits.
Quote Reply
Re: Should non-profits be taxed? [H-] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
H- wrote:
Quote:
Are you saying they don't compete? What do you think happens to local sales of cookies at a grocery store when girl scouts set up just outside to sell cookies?


Nothing happens. The local grocery store gives out more cookies to the local food bank each week than the Girl Scouts sell in a year. They give out more in free samples of various food than the Girl Scouts sell.

Next thing you will be taxing everyone who bakes cookies at home because they are competing with grocery stores. Why should someone who bakes at home be allowed to have a cost advantage? Totally unfair.


So, you're local grocery gives out more cookies each week to the local food bank than the Girl Scouts sell?

I call bullshit! https://www.usatoday.com/...ookie-sales/1989791/

If the grocery gave away even a very tiny portion of those numbers they would be out of business. You are equating an organized effort to sell over millions of cookies annually to my grandma making a dozen cookies at home and donating them to a bake sell.

_____
TEAM HD
Each day is what you make of it so make it the best day possible.
Quote Reply
Re: Should non-profits be taxed? [TheRef65] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Thanks for that USA Today Article. (Note more recent articles have sales declining.) I had no idea of the size of sale. I see Oreos regularly get loaded on my trailer from the community food bank but I haven't seen a Girl Scout or a Girl Scout cookie in years.

So now I see Girl Scout cookie sales as a pitcher of water next to a lake instead of a cup.

Girl Scout cookies don't compete against cookie makers. Cookie makers bake the cookies for the GS and get 25% of the sale of the cookies and are tax paying entities.

Girl Scout cookies compete against retail outlets, mainly grocery stores, selling Oreos and other baked cookies. Grocery stores are $600 billion dollar a year market.

I stand by my claim that grocery stores give out orders of magnitude more food product that the Girl Scouts sell. I have carting about 4000-5000 lbs of food per week from the local community food bank to the food pantry with which I am affiliated. I'm not the only vehicle but I have about 2/3 of the weight usually. About 2/3 of what we get comes from various local grocery stores. We are just one little operation. I don't have statistics handy (I'll try to look some up later), but here is a bit on the Feeding America food bank program which states that billions of pounds of food are wasted each year in USA.

________
It doesn't really matter what Phil is saying, the music of his voice is the appropriate soundtrack for a bicycle race. HTupolev
Quote Reply
Re: Should non-profits be taxed? [Harbinger] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Harbinger wrote:
JasoninHalifax wrote:
Harbinger wrote:
AlanShearer wrote:
Newman's Own is a prime example. BTW, they pay income tax on their earnings.

That's because Newman's Own is not a non-profit.

You are wrong. Paul Newman set it up at the beginning to be 100% owned by the Newman's Own Foundation. Since it is UBTI, they pay income tax on their profits. Read the label. It even says that on it.

Newman's Own Foundation is a charity.

All after tax profits belong to the foundation. On 35 years they have funded over $500M for charitable purposes.


So, Newman Own is a For-Profit corp owned by a non-profit charity. New mans Own (the company) is not a non-profit.


Newman's Own is a BRAND that is sold in virtually every grocery store. The brand is owned by Newman's Own, Inc. which is 100% owned by Newman's Own Foundation, a non-profit private foundation (charity). Like many complex companies, they have set up separate entities for various aspects of their operations, such as food sales, real estate investments, etc. They all flow up to the foundation.

Interestingly, NO, Inc. (the food sales operations) was converted from a pass thru entity to a regular C corp in 2010, so now it pays income tax like it's competitors. Previous to that, the taxation occurred at the foundation level.

So you're agreeing with me?

Swimming Workout of the Day:

Favourite Swim Sets:

2020 National Masters Champion - M50-54 - 50m Butterfly
Quote Reply
Re: Should non-profits be taxed? [H-] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
H- wrote:
Thanks for that USA Today Article. (Note more recent articles have sales declining.) I had no idea of the size of sale. I see Oreos regularly get loaded on my trailer from the community food bank but I haven't seen a Girl Scout or a Girl Scout cookie in years.

So now I see Girl Scout cookie sales as a pitcher of water next to a lake instead of a cup.

Girl Scout cookies don't compete against cookie makers. Cookie makers bake the cookies for the GS and get 25% of the sale of the cookies and are tax paying entities.

Girl Scout cookies compete against retail outlets, mainly grocery stores, selling Oreos and other baked cookies. Grocery stores are $600 billion dollar a year market.

I stand by my claim that grocery stores give out orders of magnitude more food product that the Girl Scouts sell. I have carting about 4000-5000 lbs of food per week from the local community food bank to the food pantry with which I am affiliated. I'm not the only vehicle but I have about 2/3 of the weight usually. About 2/3 of what we get comes from various local grocery stores. We are just one little operation. I don't have statistics handy (I'll try to look some up later), but here is a bit on the Feeding America food bank program which states that billions of pounds of food are wasted each year in USA.

I've been looking for information to determine how Girl Scouts (GS) cookie sales affect the market and have had little to no success. Everything keeps coming back to GS websites and information. Even changing search engines and not even mentioning the GS and only saying January and February, it all goes back to GS.

_____
TEAM HD
Each day is what you make of it so make it the best day possible.
Quote Reply
Re: Should non-profits be taxed? [Harbinger] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Harbinger wrote:
AlanShearer wrote:
Newman's Own is a prime example. BTW, they pay income tax on their earnings.

That's because Newman's Own is not a non-profit.

You are wrong. Paul Newman set it up at the beginning to be 100% owned by the Newman's Own Foundation. Since it is UBTI, they pay income tax on their profits. Read the label. It even says that on it.

Newman's Own Foundation is a charity.

All after tax profits belong to the foundation. On 35 years they have funded over $500M for charitable purposes.

Nope.

Newman's Own, Inc. was incorporated in 1982. Newman's Own Foundation was created in 2005. Prior to the creation of the foundation, Newman's Own, Inc. donated after-tax profits to various charitable organizations. After the creation of the foundation, all after-tax profits are donated to it, which then distributes the money to other charitable organizations.

Newman's Own, Inc. is a for-profit, closely held corporation. So is Newman's Organics.
Newman's Own Foundation is a non-profit charitable organization.
Quote Reply
Re: Should non-profits be taxed? [Harbinger] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Interestingly, NO, Inc. (the food sales operations) was converted from a pass thru entity to a regular C corp in 2010, so now it pays income tax like it's competitors.

In other words, Newman's Own, Inc., the company that actually sells the product, is a for-profit business. What are you arguing about?

Previous to that, the taxation occurred at the foundation level.

Except that the foundation was created in 2005.

Newman's Own, Inc. may currently be wholly owned by the foundation (I don't know but will take your word on it), but that doesn't mean it's not a for-profit business.
Last edited by: AlanShearer: Mar 29, 18 8:24
Quote Reply
Re: Should non-profits be taxed? [DavHamm] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The is a proto-opinion. I don't know very much about non-profits.

1.) Non profits should not have to pay corporate taxes on profits.
2.) Non profits should pay every other form of tax -- property, sales, payroll, etc.
Last edited by: SH: Mar 29, 18 8:22
Quote Reply
Re: Should non-profits be taxed? [AlanShearer] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
AlanShearer wrote:
Interestingly, NO, Inc. (the food sales operations) was converted from a pass thru entity to a regular C corp in 2010, so now it pays income tax like it's competitors.

In other words, Newman's Own, Inc., the company that actually sells the product, is a for-profit business. What are you arguing about?

Now. Prior to 2010 if was a pass thru entity to the foundation, who paid the tax. I didn't realize they had changed their tax election. Point being, whether they pay tax at the corp level (now), or flow it thru to the foundation who then pays the tax(previously), the mere fact that it goes to a charity does not result in the earnings being non-taxed, which is the issue in this thread.
Quote Reply
Re: Should non-profits be taxed? [TheRef65] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
one data point, not much to go on:

A client owned an independent grocery store. He would have a small uptick on the 3 weekends he had the Girl Scouts out front selling cookies.
Quote Reply
Re: Should non-profits be taxed? [Sanuk] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Sanuk wrote:
Also one of the main purposes of the cookie sale for the Girl Scouts is to get young kids doing something to help the organization and teach them skills.

One of the reasons I think all NPO's should be taxed is to get government out of charitable organizations. If people want to support teaching kids life skills, they can do it without government involvement. Eliminate the NPO status and the billions spent by government on monitoring them, then eliminate the charitable deductions and the billions spent monitoring that and you are left with organizations that pay tax and individuals (and corporations) who can contribute to worthy causes without any government.



That is just silly. Government monitoring is a drop in the bucket compared to the spending of the charitable organizations.

Consider what you are proposing. If you have money and want to give it to a homeless person you can do so. The homeless person won't pay taxes. But suppose you and some friends decide that instead of giving money to a homeless person who are often just going to buy alcohol or drugs, you instead form an association that will buy a house to be used as a shelter for the homeless people. You incorporate the association so that you can have a bank account and purchase the house. You and your friends donate money to the association.

Are you proposing that each fiscal year any operating surplus (donation revenue minus operating expenses) be taxed as corporate income?

Are there any people knowledgeable about non-profit operations and tax law who argue in support of your proposal?

________
It doesn't really matter what Phil is saying, the music of his voice is the appropriate soundtrack for a bicycle race. HTupolev
Quote Reply

Prev Next