EO Tax Journal

1 – Weekend Reading: “Charity in the 21st Century”

2 – House Republicans Seek More Information from AARP
_________________________

1 – Weekend Reading: “Charity in the 21st Century”

For your weekend reading, I suggest “Charity in the 21st Century: Trending Toward Decay,” by Roger Colinvaux, Associate Professor of Law, Catholic University School of Law, that is in the latest Florida Tax Review. To access the article, go to http://ssrn.com/abstract=1809171. Continue…

Readers have told me they found of interest the summary of a Council on Foundations’ survey of governance and expenses of foundation boards reprinted last week (see Email Update 2011-41). Happening this week is the annual “Foundations on the Hill” day, sponsored by COF and the Forum of Regional Associations of Grantmakers, which involves foundation employees visiting congressional offices in Washington.

On Tuesday, Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.) welcomed these visitors with a rousing luncheon speech: “If you’re not at the table, you’re on the menu,” and less dramatically, “It’s very important for you to make sure that you are engaged, that you are being heard.”

In this vein, I think readers may find of interest excerpts from COF’s 2011 legislative agenda:

Legislative Agenda for Philanthropy for the 112th Congress
The Council on Foundations, Arlington, Virginia Continue…

Some interesting statistics on foundations were released today by the Council on Foundations. 

Foundation Management Survey Reveals Governance and Expenses of Foundation Boards

Findings Inform Efforts to Strengthen Leadership, Mission Continue…

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) has released an interesting report, reprinted below, that is noted in today’s New York Times, “Wife’s Charity Offers Corporate Tie to a Governor.” The article notes that a foundation set up by the wife of the governor of Louisiana “is among the newest of charities set up by elected officials, including members of Congress, or their families that are mutually beneficial: companies seeking to influence politicians or curry favor can donate unrestricted amounts of money, while the officials benefit from the good will associated with charitable work financed by businesses.”

For an earlier Times’ article on the same topic, see “Congressional Charities Pulling In Corporate Cash,” September 5, 2010, noted in Email Update 2010-125. Continue…

This weekend’s reading focuses on hospitals, but with two very different items. One is a submission by the American Bar Association regarding the application of new requirements imposed on tax-exempt hospitals by section 501(r). Pretty standard stuff. The other item is an article in the Washington Post that discusses medical restrictions imposed by Catholic hospitals.

I’m not aware that anyone has addressed in a law review article whether Catholic hospitals that restrict certain medical practices are not entitled to tax-exempt status based on a public policy argument. While the Post article does not raise this issue, it seems to me to be a lurking issue.

Query: If a hospital wants to be recognized as exempt under sections 501(c)(3) and 170(b)(1)(A)(iii), must it follow accepted medical practices? In the case of Catholic hospitals, can they deny medical care based on religious beliefs and still be exempt? If religious beliefs trump medical considerations, should Catholic hospitals be eligible for Medicare payments and other government benefits, the argument being that they are not following standard medical practices and hence in opposition to public policy?

While I have no answer, I think the issue is one of more than academic interest: Should hospitals have to follow accepted medical practices and standards of care in order to be described as a hospital under section 170(b)(1)(A)(iii)? Should theologians be making medical decisions? Should a Christian Scientist “hospital” that forbids surgical procedures be entitled to exemption? Should a homeopathic hospital be exempt? Should medical care that is being subsidized by the government be subject to restrictions based on scriptural interpretations? If anyone has any answers, I’m all ears. Continue…