The #121212concert for Sandy relief is underway, and the opening act was Bruce Springsteen who was joined by Jon Bon Jovi for a rendition of Born to Run. That’s the tip of the iceberg for this huge show.

Funds raised by the show are to go to the Robin Hood Relief Fund. 100% of the funds are supposed to go to disaster assistance (as per Billy Crystal in his opening monologue).

It’s expected that the show will be simulcast to an audience of 2 billion people.

I understand that some folks are reluctant to give to this charity, or to the American Red Cross, or other major charitable groups because they aggregate funds and don’t necessarily fund relief directly for those affected by this particular natural disaster. That’s their prerogative.

For those folks, here are a couple of local charities that are helping folks in the affected areas of the New York City metro area.

I’ve donated to the Staten Island Rotary, which is assisting folks on Staten Island and with which I have personal connections. Rotary organizations throughout the region have similar efforts underway.

Project Hospitality Staten Island Hurricane Relief Fund

If you’re not sure of a particular charity, always check out sites like Charity Navigator and the BBB to see whether the charities are making every effort to maximize your donations and not eating it up with overhead and extraneous expenses.

Beware: Time Is Ripe for Hurricane Sandy Scams

Investment scams and charity fraud crop up after every natural disaster. But Hurricane Sandy is the first U.S. catastrophe to occur in the social-media age.

“We are in uncharted territory,” says Andrew Stoltmann, a Chicago securities attorney. “And social media has expanded the tentacles of scamsters exponentially.”

A decade ago fraudsters had to rely on phone calls to deliver their high-pressure sales pitches. Then they were able to use e-mail. Now social media adds an entirely new weapon to their arsenal.

When a natural disaster like Hurricane Sandy occurs, there is an outpouring of relief from Americans who want to help. And they become easily vulnerable to fraud.

The latest outgrowth of social media is crowdsourced funding, or crowdfunding, which is a way to pool small donations on the Internet from large amounts of investors — or people who want to support causes. It was approved by the JOBS Act, which was passed this year. Crowdfunding can’t be used until next year for investments. But it can be used now for charities — and, therefore, by scam artists looking to rip off the unwary.

More

Romney Avoids Taxes via Loophole Cutting Mormon Donations - Bloomberg

In 1997, Congress cracked down on a popular tax shelter that allowed rich people to take advantage of the exempt status of charities without actually giving away much money.

Individuals who had already set up these vehicles were allowed to keep them. That included Mitt Romney, then the chief executive officer of Bain Capital, who had just established such an arrangement in June 1996.

Democrats Accuse Romney of Applying a Political Strategy in Filing His 2011 Tax Returns

According to Mitt’s own words we shouldn’t elect him if he isn’t smart enough to take every deduction allowed him to pay the lowest minimum tax allowed by law. Which Mitt do we believe or disbelieve?

Democrats say Mitt Romney manipulated his deductions to keep his overall 2011 federal income tax rate below a certain level for political purposes. The Republican presidential nominee is certain to face new questions about his finances.

Romney and his wife, Ann, donated roughly $4 million to charities last year, but they only claimed a deduction of $2.25 million on their tax return, filed with the Internal Revenue Service on Friday.

Romney made $13.7 million last year and paid $1.94 million in federal income taxes, giving him an effective tax rate of 14.1 percent. That was a bit above the 13.9 percent rate paid on 2010 income.

More precisely, the returns showed that the couple paid $1,935,708 in taxes on income of $13,696,951.

Democrats quickly leaped on the documents, saying Romney had claimed fewer deductions than he was entitled to just to keep his rate at such a level. Romney told reporters in August he had never paid below 13 percent in taxes in any given year over the past 20. Had he taken the full charitable deduction, it would have pushed his tax liability below 13 percent.

“The information released today reveals that Mitt Romney manipulated one of the only two years of tax returns he’s seen fit to show the American people - and then only to ‘conform’ with his public statements. That raises the question: What else in those returns has Romney manipulated?” said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev.

philanthropy.com

Charities rarely make deliberate efforts to solicit young adults because they think people in their 20s and early 30s are unlikely to give.

But a new survey of more than 6,500 people ages 20 to 35 shows they are inclined to give—and are more than willing to ask their friends and relatives to do the same—when they feel passionately about a cause.

About 75 percent of young people who provided data for the 2012 Millennial Impact Report said they gave money to a nonprofit in 2011, while 70 percent said they have helped solicit donations by encouraging colleagues and others to support a cause.

But the report also found that charities wanting to connect with young donors should not expect to raise big sums. Of young adults who gave money to charities in 2011, 58 percent reported that their largest contribution was $100 or less. Only 16 percent gave $500 or more to one organization.

More

pbs.org

With the pressure on, some of the city halls, including some governed by the conservative Popular Party, have started to charge the Catholic Church property taxes, which has caused outrage in the Church. The Church, which is probably the wealthiest property owner in Spain, is exempt from taxes, as are other religions, foundations and NGOs. However, the other religions are super minorities, and most of their places of worship — with the exception of palatial mosques built by the Saudis — are not owned but rented.

There’s one synagogue in Madrid, a historical building and, I heard, mostly Orthodox, while the various reformed or more modern congregations have rented places. (We went to the Bar Mitzvah of the son of a friend of ours — an American — and it was in a rented hotel conference room. The congregation regularly meets in a rented apartment.) The Brits have actual church property in Madrid — the Anglican Church. Evangelists have rented store fronts and NGOs operate out of rented offices. Probably none of them own their headquarters.

So the Church argues that the unions and political parties also don’t pay property taxes (headquarters for most of the political parties are rented offices, while unions were given back property they owned during the Republic). Of course, the argument goes that the comparison isn’t fair. The Church is a huge property owner — from national monuments (the government pays for maintenance, restoration, and security, etc.) to parish churches to thousands of private schools, retirement homes for elderly priests and clergy, etc.

So the argument is: “OK, national monuments, we get that. OK, schools, because the government could never fill in the gap if there were no Catholic schools. OK, all the local fiestas and patron saints days. OK, all the charities. OK, works of art.”

But once you open the door, a flood of questions rush in, especially in times of austerity and belt tightening: What about Spanish taxes subsidizing the salaries, stipends, living allowances, etc., of the clergy? What about all the income earned by the church from weddings, communions, funerals? Not to mention all revenue from private Catholic schools and private Catholic hospitals. How come they don’t pay taxes?

More

philanthropy.com

The federal government is asking big nonprofits like universities and hospitals to spend too much time and money reporting on their finances and other activities, nonprofit officials told members of Congress today at a hearing held by the House Ways and Means Committee.

The wide-ranging hearing, the first in a series of sessions expected to be held by a Ways and Means subcommittee that oversees the Internal Revenue Service, also featured a call to change the standards for getting charity status so that groups would have to prove they are making a positive contribution, rather than giving them an exemption simply because they avoid things like lobbying and engaging in untaxed business activities.

And the head of a prominent coalition of charities issued a plea for the renewal of tax breaks that encourage charitable giving.

Rep. Charles W. Boustany Jr., a Republican from Louisiana and the subcommittee’s chairman, called the hearing to gather information for “the committee’s effort toward comprehensive tax reform.” In October, Mr. Boustany sent a letter to the Internal Revenue Service asking for information about nonprofit regulation in which he expressed concern that too many charities resembled for-profit companies.

More

sigmundcarlandalfred.wordpress.com

A short while ago in Sao Paulo I witnessed in a restaurant something that moved me. Among the waiters, dressed in the same uniform as the others - that is, white shirt, black trousers and burgundy bow tie - was a young man with Down’s Syndrome. He was clearly very happy and proud to work there and to make himself useful: he cleared dishes, wiped glasses, and so forth. (The restaurant, incidentally, was a good one.)

I do not know whether or not the waiter with Down’s Syndrome was connected in any way with the owner or manager of the restaurant, but his employment there seemed to me an imaginative and efficient act of management, and not merely a charitable one. Of course, the young man in question benefited - you could see that by the pride on his face; but so did the restaurant as a business, in more ways than one.

The effect on both customers and staff of employing the young man was likely to be highly beneficial. Customers would probably see him and conclude that the owner was a decent and therefore an honest man, not unscrupulous, trustworthy. The presence of someone patently more unfortunate than they would inhibit their inclination, if any, to petty complaint; they would feel ashamed to carp. Satisfaction rushes in where complaint fears to tread.

As for the staff, they, in keeping an eye open for the welfare and safety of the young man, would be aware that they were performing a meritorious social duty and not just helping the owner to a profit; and behaving well self-reinforces good behaviour. Their propensity to complain, if any, would likewise be reduced. Though strict and narrow analysis might demonstrate that the waiter with Down’s Syndrome was not worth his wages - slowness, low productivity, breakages, etc. - his intangible morale-boosting outweighed by far his deficiencies as an employee.

I have noticed this effect before. For example, I have been asked several times to a certain radio studio to give the public the inestimable benefit of my opinion, usually in a few seconds flat. (All opinions should be expressed as concisely as possible, but not more concisely than possible.) And at this certain studio is employed as a receptionist, who shows guests to the various rooms in which they will give vent, a young black woman who is both blind and somewhat physically handicapped, requiring sticks to walk.

csmonitor.com

Mitt Romney makes a lot of money. But he and his wife, Ann, also give away a significant amount of their wealth to charity and especially their church.

On Tuesday, when he released his income tax returns, Mr. Romney, a multimillionaire and presidential candidate, revealed that while he reported he made $42.5 million over the past two years, he also gave away $7 million.

While Romney is not thought of as a great philanthropist, his rate of giving is considered high. For example, in 2010 he gave $2.9 million or 14 percent of his income to charity. A typical person gives 2 to 3 percent of their income. And people who made $10 million or more typically gave 6.5 percent to charity, according to Roberton Williams of the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center in Washington.

“Romney’s rate is very high,” says Mr. Williams.

Part of the reason for the high rate of giving is Romney’s contributions to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, also known as the Mormon church. According to the church, members are expected to tithe 10 percent of their income. In Romney’s case, in 2010 he gave $1.5 million, closer to 7 percent of his adjusted gross income. In 2011, he gave $2.6 million, or 12.4 percent of his income.

But Romney and his wife also gave a considerable amount of money - some $1.5 million in 2010 and $500,000 in 2011 - to other charities, mainly through the Tyler Charitable Foundation, apparently named for a street Romney and his wife lived on in Belmont, Mass. In 2010, the foundation had more than $10 million in assets. 

In 2010, the largest beneficiaries of the Tyler Charitable Foundation included the Mormon Church ($145,000), the Friends of George W. Bush Library ($100,000), and the Center for Treatment of Pediatric MS ($75,000). However, the foundation also made contributions to organizations including the US Equestrian Team Foundation ($10,000), Harvard Business School ($10,000), and Homes for Our Troops ($20,000).

More

philanthropy.com

Flying into Port-au-Prince on a recent day, Wendy Flick noticed changes to the landscape that gave her hope for the earthquake-ravaged city.

Ms. Flick, who runs the Unitarian Universalist Service Committee’s relief program in Haiti, saw more green spaces than she had remembered. That meant more rubble from the capital’s destroyed buildings had been cleared and some tent cities closed. And she saw new clusters of homes.

Two years after a 7.0-magnitude quake left 1.5 million Haitians homeless, aid workers like Ms. Flick cling to signs like that. But the numbers alone tell a grim story.

Roughly 519,000 people still live under tents in emergency camps that have dotted Port-au-Prince since the disaster. By the end of 2012, that number is expected to drop by only about half, according to a coalition of groups that coordinates shelter. Just 11,393 homes have been repaired and 3,206 permanent units constructed.

Housing has proved the trickiest challenge facing aid workers in Haiti, as they grapple with disputes over land ownership and where they can legally build. And now, with hundreds of thousands of people still homeless, money is starting to dry up. Only about a third of the money raised by aid groups remains.

Charities like Food for the Poor and Habitat for Humanity International, which specialize in housing, have spent all the cash they received. The American Red Cross and other large charities still have money, but they are struggling to find effective ways to spend it.

Most Haitians didn’t own land before the quake and have nowhere to rebuild. Squabbles over land titles have scuttled projects. Critics fault aid groups for focusing too much on transitional shelter and not enough on long-term solutions.

Emptying Coffers

Over all, about two-thirds of the $1.7-billion raised in the United States and abroad by 47 nonprofits has been spent, according to a Chronicle survey. Fifteen of 53 groups have either run out of funds or have less than $200,000 left. In total, 60 aid groups and their international affiliates have raised $2.1-billion worldwide for Haiti’s earthquake victims, including $1.43-billion from Americans.

That is similar to the rate of spending after other disasters. But with so much work left undone, hopes of building Haiti “back better” seem increasingly out of reach.

Smaller building projects, and those in rural areas, have met with some success, but large-scale construction hasn’t happened.

The American Red Cross plans to put $187-million of the $486-million it raised toward housing. Mostly it is providing aid to other nonprofits; so far, it has committed $58.8-million to other charities to provide shelter. But while Red Cross money has given temporary shelter to 36,270 people, it has yet to build a single permanent home.

More