Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!columbia!caip!princeton!allegra!ulysses!burl!clyde!cbatt!cbuxc!cbuxb!cbrma!ask From: ask@cbrma.UUCP (A.S.Kamlet) Newsgroups: net.legal,net.taxes,net.religion,net.politics Subject: Re: RE. Scopes II (non-profit corps and churches) Message-ID: <4954@cbrma.UUCP> Date: Thu, 21-Aug-86 18:08:21 EDT Article-I.D.: cbrma.4954 Posted: Thu Aug 21 18:08:21 1986 Date-Received: Fri, 22-Aug-86 21:16:34 EDT References: <1069@bu-cs.bu-cs.BU.EDU> Reply-To: ask@cbrma.UUCP (A.S.Kamlet(Art)) Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Columbus Lines: 53 Xref: mnetor net.legal:3335 net.taxes:547 net.religion:2737 net.politics:9319 In article <1069@bu-cs.bu-cs.BU.EDU> bzs@bu-cs.BU.EDU (Barry Shein) writes: > >>A non-profit corporation is roughly defined as a corporation that does not pay >>money to the stockholders. (Yes, if Exxon stopped distributing its dividends, >>that would make it a non-profit corporation. And a darn poor investment. > >Not to knit picks, but I'm, still not satisfied with this definition. Many >if not most of the corporations on the OTC don't pay dividends, but I don't >think that makes them either non-profit (nor particularly poor investments, >but that's a different issue.) I'm sincere, what *is* the definition of >a non-profit organization? Surely not just one that operates at a loss? : : Disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer, but I believe the following to be correct. Please don't take my comments as Truth; only as my best belief as to what the facts are: In order to qualify as a non-profit organization for which I can take tax deductions when I make a contribution, the organization must qualify under the appropriate section ( I think is is 403 ) of the IRS code. The organization must fill out the IRS forms and send a copy of its purpose, bylaws, etc to the IRS. The IRS may rule yes or no on whether the organization qualifies as a 403 (various subsections) organization. A 403() organization will not hesitate to tell you that it is a 403() organization, if you ask. Exxon would probably not qualify. Also, not all aspects of the organization automatically qualify. The general IRS rule on churches is that the religion parts of a church qualify, but the non-religion aspects don't. For example, a church land and building, used for religious purposes, would qualify, and the church would probably not pay taxes on this property. Contributions made for the upkeep of this property and to pay church employees, and for other "bona fide" religious purposes would probably be ruled as valid tax deductions. But if the church also owned, say, a computer manufacturing company which earned lots of money that was plowed back into the church, the IRS would probably rule that: 1) it's perfectly fine for the church to own and operate the company; 2) money that I give to the company, whether to buy its computers or as a donation to the company itself, would not be tax deductible; 3) the earnings of the company would be taxable, the same as for any similar manufacturing company; and 4) property taxes etc would be due from the company. Also, if a part of the church was engaged in what the IRS calls political lobbying or something like that, the IRS can rule that part of the church's activity to be non-tax exempt. If the church has not taken care to set up any such lobbying organization as a separate entity, the IRS could threaten to declare (at its peril :-) ) that the church itself is non-tax exempt!! -- Art Kamlet AT&T Bell Laboratories Columbus {cbosgd | ihnp4}!cbrma!ask