The Tax Law of Charitable Giving, 2017 Supplement [5 ed.] 9781119345251, 9781119345473

Citation preview

ftoc

02/06/2017

20:24:9

Page viii

ffirs

02/06/2017

21:8:45

Page i

the tax law of

charitable giving Fifth Edition 2017 Cumulative Supplement

ffirs

02/06/2017

21:8:45

Page ii

BECOME A SUBSCRIBER! Did you purchase this product from a bookstore? If you did, it’s important for you to become a subscriber. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. may publish, on a periodic basis, supplements and new editions to reflect the latest changes in the subject matter that you need to know in order to stay competitive in this ever-changing industry. By contacting the Wiley office nearest you, you’ll receive any current update at no additional charge. In addition, you’ll receive future updates and revised or related volumes on a 30-day examination review. If you purchased this product directly from John Wiley & Sons, Inc., we have already recorded your subscription for this update service. To become a subscriber, please call 1-877-762-2974 or send your name, company name (if applicable), address, and the title of the product to: mailing address:

Supplement Department John Wiley & Sons, Inc. One Wiley Drive Somerset, NJ 08875

e-mail: fax:

[email protected] 1-732-302-2300

For customers outside the United States, please contact the Wiley office nearest you: Professional & Reference Division John Wiley & Sons Canada, Ltd. 22 Worcester Road Etobicoke, Ontario M9W1L1 CANADA Phone: 416-236-4433 Phone: 11-800-567-4797 Fax: 416-236-4447 Email: [email protected]

John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. The Atrium Southern Gate, Chichester West Sussex PO 19 8SQ ENGLAND Phone: 44-1243-779777 Fax: 44-1243-775878 Email: [email protected]

John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd. 33 Park Road P.O. Box 1226 Milton, Queensland 4064 AUSTRALIA Phone: 61-7-3859-9755 Fax: 61-7-3859-9715 Email: [email protected]

John Wiley & Sons (Asia) Pte., Ltd. 2 Clementi Loop #02-01 SINGAPORE 129809 Phone: 65-64632400 Fax: 65-64634604/5/6 Customer Service: 65-64604280 Email: [email protected]

ffirs

02/06/2017

21:8:45

Page iii

the tax law of

charitable giving Fifth Edition 2017 Cumulative Supplement

Bruce R. Hopkins

ffirs

02/06/2017

21:8:45

Page iv

Cover Design: Wiley Cover Image: ©iStockphoto.com/Trifonov_Evgeniy Copyright  2017 by Bruce R. Hopkins. All rights reserved. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, New Jersey. Published simultaneously in Canada. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning, or otherwise, except as permitted under Section 107 or 108 of the 1976 United States Copyright Act, without either the prior written permission of the Publisher, or authorization through payment of the appropriate per-copy fee to the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc., 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, (978) 750-8400, fax (978) 646-8600, or on the Web at www.copyright.com. Requests to the Publisher for permission should be addressed to the Permissions Department, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030, (201) 748-6011, fax (201) 748-6008, or online at http://www.wiley.com/go/permissions. Limit of Liability/Disclaimer of Warranty: While the publisher and author have used their best efforts in preparing this book, they make no representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the contents of this book and specifically disclaim any implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. No warranty may be created or extended by sales representatives or written sales materials. The advice and strategies contained herein may not be suitable for your situation. You should consult with a professional where appropriate. Neither the publisher nor author shall be liable for any loss of profit or any other commercial damages, including but not limited to special, incidental, consequential, or other damages. For general information on our other products and services or for technical support, please contact our Customer Care Department within the United States at (800) 762-2974, outside the United States at (317) 572-3993 or fax (317) 572-4002. Wiley publishes in a variety of print and electronic formats and by print-on-demand. Some material included with standard print versions of this book may not be included in e-books or in print-on-demand. If this book refers to media such as a CD or DVD that is not included in the version you purchased, you may download this material at http://booksupport.wiley.com. For more information about Wiley products, visit www.wiley.com. ISBN 9781118768037; ISBN 9781119345473 (Supplement) ISBN 9781119345251 (ePDF) ISBN 9781119345459 (ePub) Printed in the United States of America 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

ftoc

02/06/2017

20:24:9

Page v

Contents

Preface

ix

About the Author Book Citations

xi

xiii

PART ONE INTRODUCTION

TO THE

TAX LAW

OF

CHARITABLE GIVING

1

Chapter One Charitable Giving Law: Basic Concepts *§ 1.3 Principles of Charitable Organizations Law Philosophy 3 *§ 1.4 Statistical Profile of Charitable Sector 3

3

Chapter Two The United States Tax System: An Overview § 2.5 Deductions 5 § 2.6 Standard Deduction 6 § 2.7 Concept of Taxable Income 6 § 2.15 Taxation of Income 6

5

PART TWO BASICS

9

OF

CHARITABLE GIVING LAW

Chapter Three Fundamental Concepts *§ 3.1 Meaning of Gift 11 § 3.2 Meaning of Donor 12 § 3.4 Public Charities and Private Foundations 12 § 3.6 Factors Affecting Income Tax Deductibility of Charitable Gifts *Chapter Four Gifts of Money and Property § 4.3 Gifts of Long-Term Capital Gain Property in General

PART THREE CHARITABLE GIVING

IN

GENERAL

11

13 15

15

17

Chapter Six Timing of Charitable Deductions § 6.13A Gifts of Easements (New) 19 § 6.15 Gifts by S Corporations 19

19

Chapter Seven Percentage Limitations § 7.12A Qualified Conservation Contributions 21 *§ 7.12B Conservation Gifts by Farmers and Ranchers

21 22

Chapter Eight Estate and Gift Tax Considerations § 8.2 Federal Gift Tax 25

25

Chapter Nine Special Gift Situations § 9.3 Inventory 27 § 9.7 Conservation Property 28 *Easements and Other Conservation Property § 9.10 Retirement Plan Accounts 35 *§ 9.19 Bargain Sales 35

27

■

v

■

28

ftoc

02/06/2017

20:24:9

Page vi

CONTENTS

*§ 9.22 Contributions by Trusts 35 *§ 9.22A Contributions by Estates 36 Chapter Ten Other Aspects of Deductible Giving *§ 10.1 Valuation of Property 41 *§ 10.4 Conditional Gifts 42 *§ 10.7 Interrelationship with Business Expense Deduction *§ 10.14 Penalties 44 § 10.15 Transactions of Interest 45

41

42

PART FOUR PLANNED GIVING

47

Chapter Twelve Charitable Remainder Trusts *§ 12.2 Charitable Remainder Annuity Trust Rules *§ 12.4 Issues 51 *§ 12.12 Calculation of Charitable Deduction 52

49 49

Chapter Thirteen Pooled Income Funds § 13.7 Pass-Through of Depreciation 55

55

Chapter Sixteen Charitable Lead Trusts § 16.7 Private Foundation Rules 57

57

PART FIVE INTERNATIONAL CHARITABLE GIVING

59

Chapter Eighteen

61

International Giving by Individuals during Lifetime

PART SIX ADMINISTRATION

OF

CHARITABLE GIVING PROGRAMS

Chapter Twenty-One Substantiation and Appraisal Requirements *§ 21.3 Substantiation Requirements for Gifts of $250 or More 65 *§ 21.4 Substantiation Requirements for Noncash Gifts 68 *§ 21.5 Appraisal Requirements 68 § 21.7 Appraisals of Clothing and Household Items 69 *§ 21.8 Burden of Proof Rules 69 Special Events, Corporate Sponsorships, and Donor-Advised Funds § 23.4 Donor-Advised Funds 71

63 65

Chapter Twenty-Three

PART SEVEN APPENDICES *Appendix H

Appendix I

71

73

Monthly Federal Interest Rates Used in Valuing Partial Interests (IRC § 7520)

75

Deemed Rates of Return for Transfers to New Pooled Income Funds

85

■

vi

■

ftoc

02/06/2017

20:24:9

Page vii

CONTENTS

TABLES

87

Cumulative Table of Cases

89

Cumulative Table of IRS Revenue Rulings and Revenue Procedures

101

Cumulative Table of IRS Private Determinations Cited in Text

105

Cumulative Table of IRS Private Letter Rulings, Technical Advice Memoranda, and General Counsel Memoranda

109

Table of Cases Discussed in Bruce R. Hopkins’ Nonprofit Counsel

121

Cumulative Table of IRS Revenue Rulings Discussed in Bruce R. Hopkins’ Nonprofit Counsel

127

Cumulative Table of Private Letter Rulings and Technical Advice Memoranda Discussed in Bruce R. Hopkins’ Nonprofit Counsel

129

Table of Charitable Giving Law Tax Reform Proposals

131

Cumulative Index

139

■

vii

■

ftoc

02/06/2017

20:24:9

Page viii

fpref

02/03/2017

7:30:38

Page ix

Preface

This is the third Preface to accompany the fifth edition of this book. This cumulative supplement covers developments in the charitable giving law context for the period ending as of the close of 2016. This supplement reflects the various extensions of law occasioned by enactment of the Protecting Americans from Tax Hikes Act of 2015 and the Tax Increase Prevention Act of 2014. The supplement also encompasses the extraordinary amount of litigation that is taking place in this field, particularly in the realms of gifts (or ostensible gifts) of easements, valuation of property that is the subject of charitable giving, the substantiation and appraisal requirements, and application of accuracyrelated penalties in the charitable deduction context. There have even been two court opinions denying estates a charitable contribution deduction for distributions for charitable purposes because the amounts were not permanently set aside, as well as a court opinion concerning determination of the value of the remainder interest in a net income makeup charitable remainder unitrust. Final regulations were issued concerning a transaction of interest involving dispositions of assets from charitable remainder trusts. Proposed regulations were issued to implement the exception to the general charitable gift substantiation requirement, by which donee organizations may file information returns with the IRS that report the required information about contributions; this proposal was withdrawn in the face of intense public and political opposition. The IRS provided a prototype provision that may be included in the governing instrument of a charitable remainder annuity trust, which will be treated as a qualified contingency, enabling the trust to continue to qualify as a CRAT and sidestep the probability-of-exhaustion test. The IRS has contributed some private letter rulings in the charitable giving area as well as an interesting chief counsel advice memorandum concerning the circumstances when a charitable gift may be deductible as a business expense. The potential for tax reform looms. Consequentially, this cumulative supplement includes a new table, this of proposed and House of Representatives–passed law revisions in the charitable giving setting. My thanks go to my development editor, Matthew Davis, and Seshadri Srinivasan, production editor, for their assistance and support in connection with this cumulative supplement. Bruce R. Hopkins March, 2017

■

ix

■

fpref

02/03/2017

7:30:38

Page x

flast

02/03/2017

7:38:19

Page xi

About the Author

Bruce R. Hopkins is the principal lawyer in Bruce R. Hopkins Law Firm, LLC, in Kansas City, Missouri. He concentrates in the representation of charitable and other nonprofit organizations. His practice ranges over the entirety of law matters involving tax-exempt organizations, with emphasis on charitable giving (including planned giving), the formation of nonprofit organizations, acquisition of recognition of tax-exempt status for them, the private inurement and private benefit doctrines, the intermediate sanctions rules, legislative and political campaign activities issues, public charity and private foundation rules, unrelated business planning, use of exempt and for-profit subsidiaries, joint venture planning, tax shelter involvement, review of annual information returns, fundraising law issues, and Internet communications developments. Mr. Hopkins served as chair of the Committee on Exempt Organizations, Tax Section, American Bar Association; chair, Section Taxation, National Association of College and University Attorneys; and president, Planned Giving Study Group of Greater Washington, D.C. Mr. Hopkins is the series editor of Wiley’s Nonprofit Law, Finance, and Management Series. In addition to The Tax Law of Charitable Giving, Fifth Edition, he is the author of Bruce R. Hopkins’ Nonprofit Law Dictionary; The Law of TaxExempt Organizations, Eleventh Edition; Planning Guide for the Law of Tax-Exempt Organizations: Strategies and Commentaries; IRS Audits of Tax-Exempt Organizations: Policies, Practices, and Procedures; The Tax Law of Associations; The Tax Law of Unrelated Business for Nonprofit Organizations; The Nonprofits’ Guide to Internet Communications Law; The Law of Intermediate Sanctions: A Guide for Nonprofits; Starting and Managing a Nonprofit Organization: A Legal Guide, Sixth Edition; Nonprofit Law Made Easy; Charitable Giving Law Made Easy; Private Foundation Law Made Easy; Fundraising Law Made Easy; 650 Essential Nonprofit Law Questions Answered; The First Legal Answer Book for Fund-Raisers; The Second Legal Answer Book for Fund-Raisers; The Legal Answer Book for Nonprofit Organizations; and The Second Legal Answer Book for Nonprofit Organizations; and is the coauthor, with Jody Blazek, of Private Foundations: Tax Law and Compliance, Fourth Edition; also with Ms. Blazek, The Legal Answer Book for Private Foundations; with Thomas K. Hyatt, of The Law of Tax-Exempt Healthcare Organizations, Fourth Edition; with David O. Middlebrook, of Nonprofit Law for Religious Organizations: Essential Questions and Answers; with Douglas K. Anning, Virginia C. Gross, and Thomas J. Schenkelberg, of The New Form 990: Law, Policy, and Preparations; also with Ms. Gross, Nonprofit Governance: Law, Practice, and Trends; and with Alicia M.

■

xi

■

flast

02/03/2017

7:38:19

Page xii

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Kirkpatrick, The Law of Fundraising, Fifth Edition. He also writes Bruce R. Hopkins’ Nonprofit Counsel, a monthly newsletter, published by John Wiley & Sons. Mr. Hopkins earned his JD and LLM degrees at George Washington University National Law Center, his SJD degree at the University of Kansas School of Law, and his BA at the University of Michigan. He is the Professor From Practice at the Kansas University Law School, where he teaches courses on nonprofit and tax-exempt organizations, including the charitable giving rules. Mr. Hopkins received the 2007 Outstanding Nonprofit Lawyer Award (Vanguard Lifetime Achievement Award) from the American Bar Association, Section of Business Law, Committee on Nonprofit Corporations. He is listed in The Best Lawyers in America, Nonprofit Organizations/Charities Law, 2007–2016.

■

xii

■

flast01

02/03/2017

9:54:9

Page xiii

Book Citations

Throughout this book, four books by the author (in some instances, as coauthor), all published by John Wiley & Sons, are referenced as follows: 1. The Law of Fundraising, Fifth Edition (2013): cited as Fundraising 2. The Law of Tax-Exempt Organizations, Eleventh Edition (2016): cited as TaxExempt Organizations 3. The New Form 990: Law, Policy, and Preparation (2009): cited as New Form 990 4. Private Foundations: Tax Law and Compliance, Fourth Edition (2014): cited as Private Foundations The second and fourth of these books are annually supplemented. Also, updates on all of the foregoing subjects (plus The Tax Law of Charitable Giving) are available in Bruce R. Hopkins’ Nonprofit Counsel, the author’s monthly newsletter, also published by John Wiley & Sons.

■

xiii

■

flast01

02/03/2017

9:54:9

Page xiv

p01

02/03/2017

7:40:18

Page 1

P A R T

O N E

Introduction to the Tax Law of Charitable Giving Chapter 1 Charitable Giving Law: Basic Concepts Chapter 2 The United States Tax System: An Overview

p01

02/03/2017

7:40:18

Page 2

c01

02/06/2017

8:48:52

Page 3

C H A P T E R

O N E

Charitable Giving Law: Basic Concepts *§ 1.3

*§ 1.4

Principles of Charitable Organizations Law Philosophy 3

Statistical Profile of Charitable Sector 3

*§ 1.3 PRINCIPLES OF CHARITABLE ORGANIZATIONS LAW PHILOSOPHY p. 14, note 37. Insert following existing text: In a situation where a partnership intended to make $4.75 million in charitable contributions but the gifts were, due to a clerical error, made by means of a business corporation’s checks and the matter was corrected, a court refused to uphold the IRS’s disallowance of the deduction, declaring that “[t]o disallow a charitable deduction simply because of a clerical error goes against the liberal policy of encouraging charitable giving” (Green v. United States, 2016 WL 552964 (W.D. Okla. 2016)). Likewise, (Green v. United States, 2015 WL 1482508 (W.D. Okla. 2015)).

§ 1.4 STATISTICAL PROFILE OF CHARITABLE SECTOR p. 23, second complete paragraph, seventh line. Delete in the following and substitute below. *p. 23, second complete paragraph, last line. Delete 2012 and substitute 2015; delete $316 and substitute $373. *p. 26, second and third complete paragraphs. Delete and substitute: Charitable giving in the United States in 2015 is estimated to have totaled $373.3 billion.120 Giving by individuals in 2015 amounted to an estimated $264.6 billion; this level of giving constituted 71 percent of all charitable giving for the year. Grantmaking by private foundations is an estimated $58.5 billion *120

These data are from Giving USA 2016, published by the Giving USA Foundation, and researched and written under the auspices of the Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University. ■

3

■

c01

02/06/2017

8:48:52

Page 4

CHARITABLE GIVING LAW: BASIC CONCEPTS

(16 percent of total funding). Gifts in the form of charitable bequests in 2015 are estimated to be $31.8 billion (9 percent of total giving). Gifts from corporations in 2015 totaled $18.5 billion (5 percent of total giving for that year). Contributions to religious organizations in 2015 totaled $119.3 billion (32 percent of all giving that year). Gifts to educational organizations amounted to $57.48 billion (15 percent); to human service entities, $45.21 billion (12 percent); to foundations, $42.26 billion (11 percent); to health care institutions, $29.8 billion (8 percent); to public-society benefit organizations, $26.9 billion (7 percent); to international affairs entities, $15.75 billion (4 percent); to arts, culture, and humanities entities, $17 billion (5 percent); and to environmental and animals groups, $10.7 billion (3 percent). Two percent of this total (about $7 billion) involved gifts to individuals, such as corporate contributions of medicine.

c02

02/03/2017

18:53:30

Page 5

C H A P T E R

T W O

The United States Tax System: An Overview § 2.5

§ 2.6 § 2.7

(a) Personal Exemption 6 (c) Phaseout of Exemptions 6 § 2.15 Taxation of Income 6 (a) General Rules 6

Deductions 5 (b) Personal Expense Deductions 5 (c) Itemized Deduction Limitation 5 Standard Deduction 6 Concept of Taxable Income 6

*p. 32, note 1, second line. Delete and substitute: Overview of the Federal Tax System as in Effect for 2016 (JCX-43-16, May 10, 2016).

p. 32, note 2, lines 4 and 5. Delete No. 13-05061 (D.C. Cir., Feb. 11, 2014) and substitute 742 F.3d 1013, 1014 (D.C. Cir. 2014).

§ 2.5 DEDUCTIONS (b) Personal Expense Deductions p. 38, note 18. Insert following existing text: This section provides an income tax charitable contribution deduction for individuals and corporations; it does not, however, apply with respect to charitable contributions made by estates or certain trusts (Reg. § 1.170A-1(j)(1)). Estates and certain trusts are, however, afforded an income tax charitable deduction for amounts actually paid during a tax year for charitable purposes (IRC § 642(c)(1)) and for amounts permanently set aside for charitable purposes (IRC § 642(c)(2)). Cf. §§ 9.22, 9.22A. Charitable deductions are also available in the gift tax and estate tax contexts (see §§ 8.2(k), text accompanied by notes 48-72; 8.3(b), text accompanied by notes 104-120).

(c) Itemized Deduction Limitation p. 39, first paragraph, first sentence. Delete (including footnote) and substitute: The total amount of itemized deductions allowed for 2016 is reduced by 3 percent for each dollar of adjusted gross income in excess of $311,300 in the case of a joint return or a surviving spouse, $285,350 in the case of a head of

■

5

■

c02

02/03/2017

18:53:30

Page 6

THE UNITED STATES TAX SYSTEM: AN OVERVIEW

household, $259,400 in the case of an individual who is not married and who is not a surviving spouse or head of household, and $155,650 in the case of a married individual filing a separate return.20

§ 2.6 STANDARD DEDUCTION p. 39, note 21. Delete text following first sentence and substitute: The standard deduction for 2016 for married individuals filing joint returns and surviving spouses is $12,600; for heads of households, $9,300; for unmarried individuals (other than surviving spouses and heads of households), $6,300; and for married individuals filing separate returns, $6,300. Rev. Proc. 2015-53, 2015-44 I.R.B. 615 § 3.14(1).

§ 2.7 CONCEPT OF TAXABLE INCOME (a) Personal Exemption p. 40, note 23. Delete text following first period and substitute: The personal exemption amount for 2016 is $4,050. Rev. Proc. 2015-53, 2015-44 I.R.B. 615 § 3.24(1).

(c) Phaseout of Exemptions p. 40, note 24. Delete text following first period and substitute: For 2016, the threshold amounts are $311,300 for married individuals filing joint returns and surviving spouses, $285,350 for heads of households, $259,400 for unmarried individuals (other than surviving spouses and heads of households), and $155,650 for married individuals filing separate returns. Rev. Proc. 2015-53, 2015-44 I.R.B. 615 § 3.24(2).

p. 40, note 25. Delete text following first period and substitute: For 2016, the point at which an individual taxpayer’s personal exemption is phased out is $433,800 for married individuals filing joint returns and surviving spouses, $407,850 for heads of households, $381,900 for unmarried individuals (other than surviving spouses and heads of households), and $216,900 for married individuals filing separate returns. Rev. Proc. 2015-53, 2015-44 I.R.B. 615 § 3.24(2).

§ 2.15 TAXATION OF INCOME (a) General Rules pp. 54 and 55. Delete text following fourth complete paragraph and balance of table on p. 55, and substitute: The income tax rates for individuals for 2016 are:

20

Rev. Proc. 2015-53, 2015-44 I.R.B. 615 § 3.15. ■

6

■

c02

02/03/2017

18:53:31

Page 7

§ 2.15 TAXATION OF INCOME

If taxable income . . . Is over:

Then regular income tax equals: a

But not over:

Married individuals filing joint return Not over $18,550 $18,550 $75,300 $151,900 $231,450 $413,350 $466,950

$75,300 $151,900 $231,450 $413,350 $466,950

10% of taxable income $1,855 plus 15% of excess over $18,550 $10,367.50 plus 25 percent of excess over $75,300 $29,517.50 plus 28% of excess over $151,900 $51,791.50 plus 33% of excess over $231,450 $111,818.50 plus 35% of excess over $413,350 $130,578.50 plus 39.6% of excess over $466,950

$50,400 $130,150 $210,800 $413,350 $441,000

10% of taxable income $1,325 plus 15% of excess over $13,250 $6,897.50 plus 25% of excess over $50,400 $26,835 plus 28% of excess over $130,150 $49,417 plus 33% of excess over $210,800 $116,258.50 plus 35% of excess over $413,350 $125,936 plus 39.6% of excess over $441,000

$37,650 $91,150 $190,150 $413,350 $415,050

10% of taxable income $927.50 plus 15% of excess over $9,275 $5,183.75 plus 25% of excess over $37,650 $18,558.75 plus 28% of excess over $91,150 $46,278.75 plus 33% of excess over $190,150 $119,934.75 plus 35% of excess over $413,350 $120,529.75 plus 39.6% of excess over $415,050

Heads of households Not over $13,250 $13,250 $50,400 $130,150 $210,800 $413,350 $441,000 Unmarried individuals Not over $9,275 $9,275 $37,650 $91,150 $190,150 $413,350 $415,050 a

Rev. Proc. 2015-53, 2015-44 I.R.B. 615 § 3.01, tables 1-3. Table 4 contains the tax rates for married individuals filing separate returns.

■

7

■

c02

02/03/2017

18:53:31

Page 8

p02

02/03/2017

18:55:22

Page 9

P A R T

T W O

Basics of Charitable Giving Law Chapter 3 Fundamental Concepts Chapter 4 Gifts of Money and Property

p02

02/03/2017

18:55:22

Page 10

c03

02/03/2017

18:57:51

Page 11

C H A P T E R

T H R E E

Fundamental Concepts Meaning of Gift 11 *(a) General Rules 11 *(n) Mandatory Gift 11 § 3.2 Meaning of Donor 12 § 3.1

§ 3.4 § 3.6

Public Charities and Private Foundations 12 Factors Affecting Income Tax Deductibility of Charitable Gifts

13

§ 3.1 MEANING OF GIFT (a) General Rules p. 73-74, last sentence beginning on p. 73. Delete (except for footnote) and substitute: A third element that is sometimes invoked in this context is donative intent. *p. 74, note 14. Insert as second paragraph: A court rejected the government’s notion that donative intent was not present because the donor only learned of the concept of a bargain sale (see § 19.19) after the structuring of the transaction was underway and because the donor “desired the tax benefits flowing from a charitable contribution” (Davis v. Commissioner, 109 T.C.M. (CCH) 1451, 1459 (2015)). As to the latter, were that the law, there would be few deductible gifts.

*p. 79, note 46. Insert as second paragraph: As an example of word processors’ spell-checks running amuck, the donor in a case at one stage was prepared to argue the issue of donative intent. In (presumably unreviewed) papers filed with the court, this came out as “donut of intent.” The court, in a delicious pun, observed that this is a doctrine “confected” by the donor, adding that this doctrine “presumably should not be confused with the more vanilla ‘donative intent.’ ” Palmer Ranch Holdings Ltd. v. Commissioner, 812 F.3d 982, 988, note 1 (11th Cir. 2016).

(n) Mandatory Gift p. 116, second paragraph. Insert as last sentences: Moreover, payments made by a company to various public charities, in order to comply with rules of a governmental entity, where failure to make the payments

■

11

■

c03

02/03/2017

18:57:51

Page 12

FUNDAMENTAL CONCEPTS

could jeopardize the company’s continued business operations, were ruled by the IRS to not be deductible as charitable gifts.256.1 A court ruled that a transaction “bears the classic feature of a quid pro quo exchange,” where a grant of an easement (claimed as a gift) was required to enable the “donors” to obtain permission from a county to sell their development rights with respect to the underlying property.*256.2

§ 3.2 MEANING OF DONOR p. 117. Insert as last complete paragraph: This presumably is obvious but, in the case of a contribution, the donor must be the person who actually makes it. As an illustration of this point (which rarely arises), the parents of a deceased child established scholarship fund as a memorial to the child; it is structured as an irrevocable trust. The trust was funded with life insurance proceeds; it made scholarship grants out of the trust’s investment income. This couple did not include the investment income of the trust in their gross income; they, however, claimed the scholarship payments as charitable contributions deductions. These deductions were, of course, denied.267.1 p. 118, note 276. Delete case citation and substitute: 106 T.C.M. (CCH) 346 (2013), aff’d as to second issue, 793 F.3d 866 (8th Cir. 2015).

§ 3.4 PUBLIC CHARITIES AND PRIVATE FOUNDATIONS p. 136. Insert following carryover paragraph, before heading: AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH ORGANIZATIONS An agriculture research organization is an entity that is engaged in the continuous active conduct of agricultural research (as defined in the Agricultural Research, Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977) in conjunction with a land-grant college or university or a non-land grant college of agriculture. For a contribution to an agricultural research organization to qualify for the 50percent limitation,401.1 during the calendar year in which a contribution is made to the organization, the organization must be committed to spend the contribution for the research before January 1 of the fifth calendar year which begins after the date of the contribution.401.2 256.1

Priv. Ltr. Rul. 201437004. Costello v. Commissioner, 109 T.C.M. (CCH) 1441, 1448 (2015). Kalapodis v. Commissioner, 108 T.C.M. (CCH) 392 (2014). See § 7.5. IRC §§ 170(b)(1)(A)(ix) (added by the Protecting Americans from Tax Hikes Act of 2015 (Pub. L. No. 114-113) § 331(a)) and 509(a)(1). It is intended that this provision be interpreted in like manner to and consistent with the rules applicable to medical research organizations (see the text accompanied by supra notes 397-401).

*256.2 267.1 401.1 401.2

■

12

■

c03

02/03/2017

18:57:51

Page 13

§ 3.6 FACTORS AFFECTING INCOME TAX DEDUCTIBILITY OF CHARITABLE GIFTS

§ 3.6 FACTORS AFFECTING INCOME TAX DEDUCTIBILITY OF CHARITABLE GIFTS p. 153, second complete paragraph. Insert as second bullet point: •

545.1

The person claiming a charitable deduction for the gift must actually be its donor.545.1

See § 3.2, text accompanied by note 267.1. ■

13

■

c03

02/03/2017

18:57:51

Page 14

c04

02/03/2017

19:0:22

Page 15

C H A P T E R

F O U R

Gifts of Money and Property § 4.3

Gifts of Long-Term Capital Gain Property in General 15

§ 4.3 GIFTS OF LONG-TERM CAPITAL GAIN PROPERTY IN GENERAL p. 164, note 15. Insert following second sentence and its citation: A federal court of appeals stated that the “fair market value standard is as close to a generalized valuation standard as there is in the tax code.” Schwab v. Commissioner, 715 F.3d 1169, 1179 (9th Cir. 2013). The U.S. Tax Court declared that the “concept of fair market value has always been part of the warp and woof of our income, estate, and gift tax laws, and . . . [thus] the necessity of determining fair market values . . . for . . . numerous purposes has always been a vital and unavoidable function of the tax administration and judicial process.” Nestle Holdings, Inc. v. Commissioner, 94 T.C. 803, 815 (1990). It has been held that the fair market valuation standard is applicable in the context of charitable giving by trusts (see § 9.22). Green v. United States, 2015 WL 1482508 (W.D. Okla. 2015).

■

15

■

c04

02/03/2017

19:0:22

Page 16

p03

02/03/2017

8:39:45

Page 17

P A R T

T H R E E

Charitable Giving in General Chapter 6 Timing of Charitable Deductions Chapter 7 Percentage Limitations Chapter 8 Estate and Gift Tax Considerations Chapter 9 Special Gift Situations Chapter 10 Other Aspects of Deductible Giving

p03

02/03/2017

8:39:45

Page 18

c06

02/03/2017

19:6:35

Page 19

C H A P T E R

S I X

Timing of Charitable Deductions § 6.13A Gifts of Easements (New) 19 § 6.15 Gifts by S Corporations 19

p. 232. Insert following first complete paragraph, before heading:

§ 6.13A GIFTS OF EASEMENTS (NEW) As is the case with gifts of real property,65.1 state law will determine the effective date of the contribution of an easement. In one situation, a partnership purported to convey a conservation easement in 2004, claiming a $2.21 million charitable deduction. A court determined that, under state law, a conservation easement is effective only if it is duly recorded and indexed in the county where the land is situated. Consequently, because the easement transfer was not recorded until 2005, the court rejected the partnership’s argument that the easement was contributed in 2004.65.2

§ 6.15 GIFTS BY S CORPORATIONS p. 234, third line. Delete 2014 and insert 2015. p. 234, note 80, first paragraph. Insert as last sentences: This provision was further extended, through December 31, 2014, by enactment of the Tax Increase Prevention Act of 2014 (Pub. L. No. 113-295) (§ 137). The Protecting Americans from Tax Hikes Act of 2015, enacted on December 18, 2015 (Pub. L. No. 114-113 § 115), reinstated this provision and made these rules, as to basis adjustments to the stock of S corporation making charitable gifts of property, permanent.

65.1 65.2

See § 6.13. Mecox Partners LP v. United States, 2016 WL 398216 (S.D.N.Y., Feb. 1, 2016). Likewise, Zarlengo v. Commissioner, 108 T.C.M. (CCH) 155 (2014). ■

19

■

c06

02/03/2017

19:6:35

Page 20

c07

02/03/2017

21:20:2

Page 21

C H A P T E R

S E V E N

Percentage Limitations *§ 7.12B Conservation Gifts by Farmers and Ranchers 22 Example 7.21B 24

§ 7.12A Qualified Conservation Contributions 21 Example 7.21A 22

p. 270. Insert following Example 7.21, before heading:

§ 7.12A QUALIFIED CONSERVATION CONTRIBUTIONS The 30 percent contribution base limitation on contributions of capital gain property by individuals111.1 is inapplicable with respect to qualified conservation contributions.111.2 Rather, individuals may deduct the fair market value of any qualified conservation contribution to a public charity111.3 to the extent of the excess of 50 percent of the contribution base over the amount of all other allowable charitable contributions.111.4 These contributions are not taken into account in determining the amount of other allowable charitable contributions.111.5 Individuals are allowed to carry over any qualified conservation contributions that exceed the 50 percent limitation for up to 15 years.111.6 These rules as originally enacted were applicable to contributions made in tax years beginning after December 31, 2005, and before January 1, 2008.111.7 Thereafter, these rules were extended and made applicable to contributions made in tax years beginning before January 1, 2010.111.8 After that, these rules

111.1 111.2 111.3 111.4 111.5 111.6 111.7 111.8

See § 7.6. See § 9.7, text accompanied by notes 153-156. That is, an organization described in IRC § 170(b)(1)(A). See § 3.4. IRC § 170(b)(1)(E)(i). IRC § 170(b)(1)(E)(iii). IRC § 170(b)(1)(E)(ii). IRC § 170(b)(1)(E)(vi). Heartland, Habitat, Harvest, and Horticulture Act of 2008 (Pub. L. No. 110-246 § 15302(a)(1)). ■

21

■

c07

02/03/2017

21:20:3

Page 22

PERCENTAGE LIMITATIONS

were extended and made applicable to contributions made in tax years beginning before January 1, 2012.111.9 Another measure extended these rules with respect to contributions made in tax years through December 31, 2013.111.10 Thereafter, the rules were extended again with respect to contributions made in tax years through December 31, 2014.111.11 After that, these rules were reinstated and made permanent.111.12 Example 7.21A An individual with a contribution base of $100,000 makes a qualified conservation contribution (within a tax year covered by these rules) of property with a fair market value of $80,000 and makes other charitable contributions, subject to the 50 limitation, of $60,000. This individual is allowed a deduction of $50,000 in the current tax year for nonconservation contributions (50 percent of the $100,000 contribution base) and is allowed to carryover the excess $10,000 for up to five years.a A current deduction is not allowed for the qualified conservation contribution but the entire $80,000 qualified conservation contribution may be carried forward for up to 15 years.

*§ 7.12B CONSERVATION GIFTS BY FARMERS AND RANCHERS In the case of an individual who is a qualified farmer or rancher for the tax year in which a qualified conservation contribution is made, a contribution deduction for that type of gift is allowable up to 100 percent of the excess of the individual’s contribution base over the amount of all other allowable charitable contributions.111.13 A qualified farmer or rancher is a person whose gross income from the trade or business of farming111.14 is greater than 50 percent of the person’s gross income for the tax year.111.15 In the case of a corporation (the stock of which is not publicly traded) that is a qualified farmer or rancher for the tax year in which this type of contribution is made, a qualified conservation contribution is allowable up to 100 percent of the

111.9

111.10 111.11

111.12 a 111.13 111.14 111.15

Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010 (Pub. L. No. 111-312 § 723(a)). American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 (Pub. L. No. 112-240 § 206(a)). Tax Increase Prevention Act of 2014 (Pub. L. No. 113-295 § 106(a)). The U.S. House of Representatives, on February 12, 2015, passed legislation that would make these rules permanent (America Gives More Act (H.R. 644 § 4(a)(1)). Protecting Americans from Tax Hikes Act of 2015 (Pub. L. No. 114-113) § 111. See § 7.5(b). IRC § 170(b)(1)(E)(iv)(I). See IRC § 2032A(e)(5). IRC § 170(b)(1)(E)(v). ■

22

■

c07

02/03/2017

21:20:3

Page 23

*§ 7.12B CONSERVATION GIFTS BY FARMERS AND RANCHERS

excess of the corporation’s taxable income111.16 over the amount of all other allowable charitable deductions.111.17 Any excess (in these two contexts) may be carried forward for up to 15 years as a contribution subject to the 100 percent limitation.111.18 As an additional condition of eligibility for the 100 percent limitation, with respect to any contribution of property in agriculture or livestock production, or that is available for production, by a qualified farmer or rancher, the qualified real property interest111.19 must include a restriction that the property remain generally available for this production.111.20 (There is no requirement as to any specific use in agriculture or farming, or necessarily that the property be used for these purposes; it is sufficient that the property merely remain available for these purposes.) The IRS issued guidance as to these rules, including an explanation as to how the percentage limitations and carryovers apply in a tax year in which a person has made a qualified conservation contribution and one or more other charitable gifts; it addresses the definition of the terms qualified conservation contribution, qualified farmer, and qualified rancher, and explains the nature of a restriction that the property is available for agriculture or livestock production.111.21 These rules, as originally enacted, were applicable to qualified contributions made in tax years beginning after December 31, 2005, and before January 1, 2008.111.22 These rules were thereafter extended and made applicable to contributions made in tax years beginning before January 1, 2010.111.23 After that, these rules were extended and made applicable to contributions made in tax years beginning before January 1, 2012.111.24 Another measure extended these rules to embrace contributions made in tax years through December 31, 2013.111.25 Once again, these rules were extended to encompass these types of contributions made in tax years through December 31, 2014.111.26 Thereafter, these rules were reinstated and made permanent.111.27

111.16 111.17 111.18 111.19 111.20 111.21 111.22 111.23 111.24

111.25 111.26

111.27

See § 7.3. IRC § 170(b)(2)(B)(i). IRC § 170(b)(2)(B)(ii). See § 9.7, text accompanied by note 153. IRC § 170(b)(1)(E)(iv)(II). Notice 2007-50, 2007-25 I.R.B. 1430. IRC §§ 170(b)(1)(E)(vi), 170(b)(2)(B)(iii). Heartland, Habitat, Harvest, and Horticulture Act of 2008 (Pub. L. No. 110-246 § 15302(a)(2)). Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010 (Pub. L. No. 111-312 § 723(b)). American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 (Pub. L. No. 112-240 § 206(b)). Tax Increase Prevention Act of 2014 (Pub. L. No. 113-295 § 106(b)). The U.S. House of Representatives, on February 12, 2015, passed legislation that would make these rules permanent (America Gives More Act (H.R. 644 § 4(a)(2)). Protecting Americans from Tax Hikes Act of 2015 (Pub. L. No. 114-113) § 115. ■

23

■

c07

02/03/2017

21:20:3

Page 24

PERCENTAGE LIMITATIONS

Example 7.21B Using the facts of Example 7.21A, if the individual is a qualified farmer or rancher, in addition to the $50,000 deduction for the nonconservation contributions, an additional $50,000 deduction for the qualified conservation contribution is allowed and $30,000 may be carried forward for up to 15 years as a contribution subject to the 100 percent limitation.

■

24

■

c08

02/03/2017

19:18:21

Page 25

C H A P T E R

E I G H T

Estate and Gift Tax Considerations § 8.2

(h) Annual Exclusion 25

Federal Gift Tax 25 (g) Exclusions from Taxable Gift 25

§ 8.2 FEDERAL GIFT TAX (g) Exclusions from Taxable Gift p. 293. Insert following second complete paragraph: Transfers to Social Welfare Organizations. The fifth exclusion from the definition of a taxable gift is for transfers to tax-exempt social welfare organizations.31.1 Transfers to Labor Organizations. The sixth exclusion from the definition of a taxable gift is for transfers to tax-exempt labor organizations.31.2 Transfers to Business Leagues. The seventh exclusion from the definition of a taxable gift is for transfers to tax-exempt business leagues.31.3 p. 293, third complete paragraph, first line. Change fifth to eighth. (h) Annual Exclusion p. 293, note 33, last line. Delete and substitute: for 2016 is $14,000. Rev. Proc. 2015-53, 2015-44 I.R.B. 615 § 3.35(1).

31.1

31.2

31.3

IRC § 2501(a)(6), applicable with respect to gifts made after December 18, Americans from Tax Hikes Act of 2015 (Pub. L. No. 114-113) § 408). Organizations, ch. 13. IRC § 2501(a)(6), applicable with respect to gifts made after December 18, Americans from Tax Hikes Act of 2015 (Pub. L. No. 114-113) § 408). Organizations, ch. 15. IRC § 2501(a)(6), applicable with respect to gifts made after December 18, Americans from Tax Hikes Act of 2015 (Pub. L. No. 114-113) § 408). Organizations, ch. 14. ■

25

■

2015 (Protecting See Tax-Exempt 2015 (Protecting See Tax-Exempt 2015 (Protecting See Tax-Exempt

c08

02/03/2017

19:18:21

Page 26

c09

02/03/2017

21:23:30

Page 27

C H A P T E R

N I N E

Special Gift Situations (e) Valuation 33 (h) Donative Intent 34 (i) Special Rules for Capital Gain Real Property 35 § 9.10 Retirement Plan Accounts 35 (e) Special Statutory Rule 35 § 9.19 Bargain Sales 35 *(a) Definition of Bargain Sale 35 *§ 9.22 Contributions by Trusts 35 (a) General Rules 35 *§ 9.22A Contributions by Estates 36

§ 9.3

Inventory 27 (b) Restrictions on Use 27 (h) Special Rule for Food Inventory 27 § 9.7 Conservation Property 28 Easements and Other Conservation Property 28 *(a) Qualified Real Property Interests 28 (b) Qualified Organizations 31 *(c) Conservation Purpose 33 *(d) Exclusivity Requirement 33

§ 9.3 INVENTORY (b) Restrictions on Use p. 344, note 66. Insert as first sentence: A company’s contributions of wrinkle creams, hair gels, perfumes, hair sprays, hair texturizers, curling irons, hair dyes, nail polishes, epilators, and hair restoration treatments were held to not be qualified contributions eligible for this enhanced deduction for gifts of inventory because the products do not relate to any specific need that caused persons to be needy; the products were characterized by the government as “luxury items” rather than “necessities of life” (Chief Couns. Adv. Mem. 201414014).

(h) Special Rule for Food Inventory p. 351, first paragraph. Insert as last sentence: Late in 2014, this provision was again extended, encompassing contributions of this nature through 2014.95.1 Thereafter, these rules were reinstated, modified, and made permanent.95.2 95.1

IRC 170(e)(3)(C)(iv), as amended by § 126 of the Tax Increase Prevention Act of 2014 (Pub. L. No. 113-265). 95.2 Protecting Americans from Tax Hikes Act of 2015 (Pub. L. No. 114-113) § 113. ■

27

■

c09

02/03/2017

21:23:30

Page 28

SPECIAL GIFT SITUATIONS

§ 9.7 CONSERVATION PROPERTY p. 357. Change heading to read:

EASEMENTS AND OTHER CONSERVATION PROPERTY p. 357, first paragraph, second line. Insert, such as easements, following property. p. 357, first paragraph, penultimate line. Insert detailed tax regulations, following of. p. 357, first paragraph last line. Insert comma following rulings and before footnote number. (a) Qualified Real Property Interests *p. 359, first complete paragraph. Insert footnote following last line: 167.1 Charitable deductions for contributions of easements to qualified charitable organizations have been upheld in Schmidt v. Commissioner, 108 T.C.M. (CCH) 135 (2014); Palmer Ranch Holdings Ltd. v, Commissioner, 107 T.C.M. (CCH) 1408 (2014).

p. 359. Insert as second complete paragraph: As to the matter of the requirement of a restriction in perpetuity, litigation has ensued as to two issues: whether there can be substitution of real property underlying the easement and the reach of the rule pertaining to subordination of mortgages. p. 359. Insert as fourth complete paragraph: An appellate court affirmed this decision, with the court observing that the statute provides that a qualified real property interest includes a “restriction (granted in perpetuity) on the use which may be made of the real property.”169.1 This makes it clear, the court stated, that a “perpetual use restriction must attach to a defined parcel of real property rather than simply some or any (or interchangeable parcels of) real property.”169.2 Thus, the court of appeals held that, in order to constitute a qualified conservation contribution, the “parcel in which [the] use must be restricted in perpetuity is ‘the parcel’ that must be contributed to a qualified organization exclusively for conservation purposes.”169.3 There is no allowable deduction in this case, the court concluded, because, although the restriction may be perpetual, the restriction on the real property is not. It added that the Code “requires a donor to grant an easement to a

169.1 169.2 169.3

Belk v. Commissioner, 774 F.3d 221, 225 (4th Cir. 2014). Id. Id. at 226. ■

28

■

c09

02/03/2017

21:23:30

Page 29

EASEMENTS AND OTHER CONSERVATION PROPERTY

single, immutable parcel at the outset to qualify for a charitable deduction.”169.4 The U.S. Tax Court relied heavily on this decision in concluding that a contribution of a conservation easement, where the terms of the easement allow for boundary adjustments, was not deductible because the easement failed to constitute a qualified real property interest.*169.5 p. 359. Insert following existing text: As to the matter of the mortgage subordination rule, it was held in one case that a charitable contribution deduction was not available for a gift of a conservation easement, in that the rule was not followed.171.1 The gift was made by a partnership; at the time of the gift, a deed of trust securing the property was not subordinated to the easement, although that was done about two years later. During the two-year interim, the partnership had the money to pay off the note, all bills were paid, and payments on the note were current. The court also held that the failure to subordinate could not be excused by the soremote-as-to-be-negligible standard in the tax regulations.171.2 An appellate court affirmed, taking the position that the provision “expressly provides that subordination is a prerequisite to allowing a deduction.”171.3 The court also held that, even if it were to view the regulation as ambiguous with respect to timing, the “result would be no different” because it deferred to the 169.4

*169.5

171.1 171.2

171.3

Id. at 227. This appellate court made some other interesting observations to buttress its holding. It noted that permitting the donors to have a deduction for the gift of the easement would enable them to “bypass several requirements critical to the statutory and regulatory schemes governing deductions for charitable contributions” (at 226). For example, in the case of contributions of property for which a deduction of more than $500,000 is claimed, a qualified appraisal of the property must accompanying the tax return involved (see § 21.5). The court wrote that permitting the donors to “change the boundaries of the [e]asement renders the appraisal meaningless; it is no longer an accurate reflection of the value of the deduction, for parts of the donation may be clawed back” (at 226). The court added that “it matters not” that the easement requires that the removed property be replaced with property of equal or greater value, “because the purpose of the appraisal requirement is to enable the Commissioner, not the donee or donor, to verify the value of a donation” (at id). The court stated that the easement’s substitution provision “places the [donors] beyond the reach of the Commissioner in this regard” (at id). The court also noted that the requirement in the tax regulations that a donor of a conservation easement make available to the donee “documentation sufficient to establish the condition of the property” would be “skirted if the borders of an easement could shift” (at 226–227). The court wrote: “Not only does this regulation confirm that a conservation easement must govern a defined and static parcel, it also makes clear that holding otherwise would deprive donees of the ability to ensure protection of conservation interests by, for instance, examination of maps and photographs of ‘the protected property’” (at 227). Balsam Mountain Investments, LLC v. Commissioner, 109 T.C.M (CCH) 1214 (2015); Bosque Canyon Ranch, LP v. Commissioner, 110 T.C.M. (CCH) 48 (2015). Mitchell v. Commissioner, 106 T.C.M. (CCH) 215 (2013). See § 9.7(d), text accompanied by infra note 225. Also Minnick v. Commissioner, 796 F.3d 1156 (9th Cir. 2015). Mitchell v. Commissioner, 775 F.3d 1243, 1250 (10th Cir. 2015). ■

29

■

c09

02/03/2017

21:23:30

Page 30

SPECIAL GIFT SITUATIONS

IRS’s reasonable interpretation on the point.171.4 It further wrote that “[b]ecause a conservation easement subject to a prior mortgage obligation is at risk of extinguishment upon foreclosure, requiring subordination at the time of the donation is consistent with the Code’s requirement that the conservation purpose be protected in perpetuity.”171.5 The court also held that the remote future event provision “cannot be reasonably interpreted to include the relatively unexceptional risk of foreclosure, which exists any time a taxpayer donates an interest in property subject to a mortgage.”171.6 Again, the court took the position that, even if the regulations were unclear with respect to the interplay between the provisions, the court would defer to the IRS’s interpretation to resolve any ambiguity on the point. The court of appeals observed that the Internal Revenue Code and tax regulations “establish bright-line rules that promote efficient and equitable administration of the federal tax incentive program.”171.7 In a case interpreting these rules, an individual contributed a façade easement involving mortgaged property to a qualified charitable organization. The lender agreement provided that the mortgagee bank had “prior claim” to all insurance proceeds as a result of any casualty, hazard, or accident occurring to or about the property and all proceeds of condemnation; this agreement also provided that the bank was entitled to those proceeds “in preference” to the donee until the mortgage was satisfied and discharged. The court concluded that the donee’s right to its proportionate share of future proceeds was thus not guaranteed and, since it interpreted this extinguishment provision as laying down an unconditional requirement that the donee organization be entitled to its proportionate share of future proceeds, the agreement did not satisfy the terms of the provision.171.8 Consequently, the agreement was held to preclude establishment of a perpetual conservation restriction and thus the façade easement was not a qualified real property interest, so that the gift was not a qualified conservation contribution. A number of concerned parties sought reversal of the court’s position; their effort failed. The court agreed that the gift agreement gave the donee a contractual right against the donor and her successors for its proportionate share of the proceeds from the sale of the property following judicial extinguishment of the easement but held that, because of the bank’s priority under the lender agreement, 171.4

Id. at 1250–1251. Id. at 1251. 171.6 Id. at 1252. *171.7 Id. at 1254. Likewise, Minnick v. Commissioner, 104 T.C.M. (CCH) 755 (2012), aff’d, 796 F.3d 1156 (9th Cir. 2015); RP Golf, LLC v. Commissioner, 111 T.C.M. (CCH) 1362 (2016). As to the remote future event provision, the issue is not really the risk of foreclosure but whether a foreclosure attempt would extinguish the conservation easement. The facts showed that the partnership had sufficient assets to satisfy in full the amount due under the secured promissory note. Thus, it appeared that the risk that the easement would be extinguished was so remote as to be negligible. The courts did not address this point. 171.8 Kaufman v. Commissioner, 134 T.C. 182 (2010). 171.5

■

30

■

c09

02/03/2017

21:23:30

Page 31

EASEMENTS AND OTHER CONSERVATION PROPERTY

that right was “insufficient” to satisfy the extinguishment requirements of the tax regulations.171.9 This decision was vacated and remanded, however, with the appellate court of the view that the IRS and the lower court’s reading of the regulations was not reasonable, and that the agency and the court were overly technical in applying the rules.171.10 When the lower court next considered the case, it ruled that the façade easement, at the time of its conveyance, lacked any value, thus denying a charitable deduction on that basis.171.11 In a similar case, the court denied a charitable deduction for a gift of a façade easement because the conservation purpose was not protected in perpetuity, in that the charity was not guaranteed a proportionate share of proceeds in the event of a casualty or condemnation before the mortgage on the property was satisfied.171.12 p. 359, note 171. Delete citation and substitute: 106 T.C.M. (CCH) 523 (2013)

(b) Qualified Organizations p. 361. Insert following first complete paragraph: In another of these rulings, the IRS retroactively revoked the tax-exempt status of an ostensibly charitable organization because its façade easement program is furthering a substantial nonexempt purpose by facilitating inflated charitable deductions, and the organization is operating primarily for private interests and is inadequately administering the program.182.1 The IRS stated that 171.9

Kaufman v. Commissioner, 136 T.C. 294, 309 (2011). The court wrote that, while Reg. § 1.170A14(g)(6)(ii) specifies that the donee’s vested property right must have a value that is proportional to the value of the encumbered property, it “does not otherwise describe the property in which the donee must have a vested right” (at 309). Nonetheless, the court continued, considering the reference to property right in Reg. § 1.170A-14(g)(6)(ii) together with the term donee’s proceeds in Reg. § 1.170A-14(g)(6)(i), “we think it the intent of the drafters [of this regulation] that the donee have a right to a share of the proceeds and not merely a contractual claim against the owner of the previously servient estate” (id.). *171.10 Kaufman v. Shulman, 687 F.3d 21 (1st Cir. 2012). On remand, the Tax Court denied the charitable deduction for the gift of the easement, this time on the ground that that the easement lacked any value, in that it was no more restrictive than standards already imposed by a historic district (Kaufman v. Commissioner, 107 T.C.M. (CCH) 1262 (2014), aff’d, 784 F.3d 56 (1st Cir. 2015)). 171.11 Kaufman v. Commissioner, 107 T.C.M. (CCH) 1262 (2014). 171.12 1982 East, LLC v. Commissioner, 101 T.C.M. (CCH) 1380 (2011). The court wrote that the donor cannot avoid the unconditional requirement of the rule as to perpetuity by showing that a state court “might” judge the easement to to be unenforceable (at 1386). Likewise, Wall v. Commissioner, 103 T.C.M. (CCH) 1906 (2012); Carpenter v. Commissioner, 103 T.C.M. (CCH) 1001 (2012). If state law places a limit on the duration of conservation easements, they obviously cannot be granted in perpetuity; thus, there is no federal charitable deduction for a contribution of them (e.g., Wachter v. Commissioner, 142 T.C. 140 (2014)). 182.1 Priv. Ltr. Rul. 201514010. ■

31

■

c09

02/03/2017

21:23:30

Page 32

SPECIAL GIFT SITUATIONS

this organization “played an integral role in facilitating grossly overstated tax deductions for limited liability companies who invested in historic properties, investment deals that were planned, marketed and executed” by a related tax consulting firm. “By being the vehicle for accepting façade easement donations, only from clients/donors,” the IRS continued, “never questioning the fact that each and every donation package had been appraised by the same appraiser selected by [the tax firm], [the organization] was a willing participant in facilitating grossly overstated charitable contribution deductions in connection with its façade easement program.” Because the organization “help[ed] its donors avoid taxes,” the IRS concluded that it furthered a substantial nonexempt purpose. As to private benefit, the IRS wrote that its examination of the organization’s records “show[s] that the organization’s activities were primarily directed towards being a donation receptacle to facilitate maximum tax benefits for [the tax firm’s] customers, donors.” The IRS said it “believes that all the donors reaped inappropriate tax benefits in connection with [the organization’s] façade easement program.” The agency stated that the organization’s board of directors “performed virtually no oversight with respect to activities but simply yielded to every request made by” the firm. The organization was said to not require donors to provide baseline studies with respect to the easements; it did “no due diligence of its own.” The consulting firm was portrayed as “so dominat[ing]” the nonprofit organization’s operations that it “abused the tax-exempt status of [the organization] to serve its own interests and the private interest of clients and donors at the expense of the general public.” Not surprisingly, the IRS found that this organization was impermissibly benefiting the consulting business. The organization was faulted for not engaging in exempt activities that further conservation purposes. It was said to have “few to no policies or procedures in place to ensure that it furthers a [charitable] conservation purposes” when it accepts an easement and holds easements.” Here is what the IRS expects of easement donees (and what this organization did not do): inspect the property before accepting a gift of an easement, take photographs or create a report detailing the condition of the property, require the donor to provide a baseline study of the property, record how the easement will serve a conservation purpose, have directors with significant experience in fields related to conservation, having policies for ongoing inspection and monitoring of the property, protect the burdened property in perpetuity, and do not become involved in substantial overvaluation of the easements. This organization’s directors did not review, or engage anyone with conservation issues experience to review, any of the easement agreement “with a critical eye.” The IRS found at least one instance where the easement documentation impermissibly allows changes to the facade. Some of the agreements did not have the required provisions concerning subordination of debt to the ■

32

■

c09

02/03/2017

21:23:30

Page 33

EASEMENTS AND OTHER CONSERVATION PROPERTY

easement. Indeed, it appears from the agent’s report that all of the donated easements failed to provide for any additional significant conservation restrictions on the underlying properties in relation to those already imposed by local law. (c) Conservation Purpose p. 365, note 208. Insert following existing text: A charitable deduction for a contribution of a preservation easement in the façade of a building located in a historic district was denied because the easement did not preserve the entire exterior of the building (Partita Partners, LLC v. United States, 15-cv-2561 (S.D.N.Y., Oct. 25, 2016)).

*p. 365, note 212. Insert following existing text: A case where the charitable deduction was lost for failure to attach the appraisal to the appropriate tax return is Gemperle v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2016-1 (2016).

pp. 365-366. Delete last paragraph on p. 365 and carryover of that paragraph on p. 366 (including footnotes). (d) Exclusivity Requirement *p. 367, note 225, sixth line. Delete (1994) and substitute (1993), aff’d, 67 F.3d 314 (11th Cir. 1995). *p. 368, note 230. Insert following existing text: A case where the charitable deduction was lost because the formula for computing extinguishment proceeds did not comport with this regulation is Carroll v. Commissioner, 146 T.C. ___ (2016).

pp. 368-369. Delete first complete paragraph on p. 368, the subsequent paragraph, and the first complete paragraph on p. 369 (including footnotes). (e) Valuation p. 371. Insert as first complete paragraph: On occasion, a court will hold that there is no charitable contribution deduction for a gift of an easement because the easement lacked value, in that it was no more restrictive than the requirements of local law.246.1 By contrast, courts have recognized situations where conservation deeds of easement were more restrictive than applicable law and thus allowed the

246.1

E.g., Scheidelman v. Commissioner, 105 T.C.M. (CCH) 117 (2013); Dunlap v. Commissioner, 103 T.C.M. (CCH) 1689 (2012); 1982 East, LLC v. Commissioner, 101 T.C.M. (CCH) 1380 (2011); Herman v. Commissioner, 98 T.C.M. (CCH) 197 (2009). ■

33

■

c09

02/03/2017

21:23:30

Page 34

SPECIAL GIFT SITUATIONS

charitable deductions.246.2 Likewise, a charitable deduction for an easement gift may not arise because the easement restrictions were no greater than criteria imposed by a landmark district or similar body.246.3 An easement may lack value, for charitable deduction purposes, because an appraisal showed that it inherently did not reduce the value of the property it ostensibly encumbered.246.4 A transaction involving the transfer of an easement to a charitable organization may not yield a charitable deduction because of the value of the consideration the transferor received in the exchange.246.5 p. 371, note 245, last line. Delete and substitute: to its original position (139 T.C. 304 (2012), aff’d, 755 F.3d 236 (5th Cir. 2014))

p. 372, note 257. Insert following existing text: Considering the case on remand, the Tax Court adhered to its original position that the donor’s appraisal did not embody a “reliable methodology” but focused on its findings that the reports of the donor’s experts were not credible; it concluded that the donor had not provided sufficient evidence to establish entitlement to the claimed charitable deduction and held that the contributed easement lacked value for deduction purposes (Scheidelman v. Commissioner, 105 T.C.M. (CCH) 1117 (2013), aff’d, 755 F.3d 148 (2nd Cir. 2014)).

p. 373, note 262, last line. Delete citation and substitute: 106 T.C.M. (CCH) 523 (2013)

(h) Donative Intent p. 377, note 293. Insert as second paragraph: An individual is granting perpetual conservation easements to a government agency and will receive mitigation banking credits in exchange. A mitigation bank is an area of land containing wetlands, natural habitats, or other elements of ecological value that has been restored, established, enhanced, or preserved, and that is then set aside to compensate for future conversions of other lands of similar ecological value for development purposes. The transferor of the easement becomes entitled to receive these credits in an amount and type as determined by the agency. The transferor may retain the credits and use them to mitigate development activity in other nearby natural habitats or can sell the credits to others who may use the credits to satisfy compensatory mitigation requirements. The IRS ruled that the conveyance of a perpetual conservation easement in exchange for these mitigation credits is a sale or exchange of property for federal income tax purposes (IRC § 1001) (Priv. Ltr. Rul. 201222004).

*246.2

E.g., Gorra v. Commissioner, 106 T.C.M. (CCH) 523 (2013); Simmons v. Commissioner, 98 T.C. M. (CCH) 211 (2009), aff’d, 646 F.3d 6 (D.C. Cir. 2011). 246.3 E.g., Chandler v. Commissioner, 142 T.C. 279 (2014); Kaufman v. Commissioner, 107 T.C.M. (CCH) 1262 (2014). *246.4 E.g., Mountanos v. Commissioner, 107 T.C.M. (CCH) 1211 (2013) aff’d, __ Fed. Appx. __, No. 14-71580 (9th Cir., June 1, 2016); Esgar Corporation v. Commissioner, 103 T.C.M. (CCH) 1185 (2012), aff’d, 744 F.3d 648 (10th Cir. 2014); Tempel v. Commissioner, 136 T.C. 341 (2011). 246.5 E.g., Seventeen Seventy Sherman Street, LLC v. Commissioner, 107 T.C.M. (CCH) 1599 (2014). See § 3.1(c). ■

34

■

c09

02/03/2017

21:23:30

Page 35

*§ 9.22 CONTRIBUTIONS BY TRUSTS

(i) Special Rules for Capital Gain Real Property pp. 378-380. Delete §§ 9.7(i), 9.7(j) (including footnotes).

§ 9.10 RETIREMENT PLAN ACCOUNTS (e) Special Statutory Rule p. 399, note 419. Insert as last sentences: This provision was further extended, through December 31, 2014, by enactment of the Tax Increase Prevention Act of 2014 (Pub. L. No. 113-265) (§ 108). Thereafter, this rule was reinstated and made permanent (Pub. L. No. 114-113) § 112).

p. 399. Insert footnote following last line: 420 The Congressional Research Service, on January 16, 2014, published a report titled “Qualified Charitable Distributions from Individual Retirement Accounts: Features and Legislative History.”

§ 9.19 BARGAIN SALES (a) Definition of Bargain Sale p. 424, note 561, first line. Insert following second comma: Davis v. Commissioner, 109 T.C.M. (CCH) 1450 (2015);

*p. 424. Insert as fourth complete paragraph: In another instance, a limited liability company owned land overlooking a dam owned by a flood control district. The company sought to build luxury homes on the property. After facing a variety of obstacles thrown up by the district in opposing the development, the company abandoned its plans and sold the property to the district. The company claimed a charitable contribution deduction based on a bargain sale. The IRS asserted that the fair market value of the property was not higher than the sale price and thus that a deduction was not available. A court found the value of the property to be $2.167 million and allowed a charitable deduction for the difference between that amount and the sale price of $735,000.564.1

*§ 9.22 CONTRIBUTIONS BY TRUSTS (a) General Rules *p. 437, note 631. Insert as second paragraph: There was an argument that a trust, despite the unavailability of the IRC § 642(c)(1) deduction, was entitled to a distribution deduction (IRC § 661), to the extent of its distributable net income, for the payments to the charities. Following an extensive analysis of the “genuine ambiguity” of the statutory provisions and the legislative history, and the ensuing case law and commentary, the IRS’s office of chief counsel concluded that a sentence in the tax regulations (Reg. § 1.663(a)-2) establishing the exclusivity of IRC § 642(c) as the deduction for charitable payments 564.1

Cave Buttes, LLC v. Commissioner, 147 T.C. No. 10 (2016). ■

35

■

c09

02/03/2017

21:23:30

Page 36

SPECIAL GIFT SITUATIONS

by trusts and estates “represents a better overall reading of the law” (Chief Couns. Adv. Mem. 201651013). Four reasons were given for this conclusion, the principal one being that a specific statute should be held to control over the provisions of a general one.

*p. 438. Insert as second complete paragraph, before heading: The charitable deduction provision639.1 generally provides that, in the case of a trust or estate, there is a charitable contribution deduction for a gift of income made pursuant to the trust’s governing instrument for charitable purposes. A charitable gift not made pursuant to the governing instrument thus is not deductible.639.2 A settlement agreement arising from a will contest constitutes a governing instrument.639.3 Conversely, a charitable deduction was not allowed to marital deduction trust because the distribution was made pursuant to the wife's will, not the husband's original will.639.4 The IRS, stressing that there was no conflict with respect to the resulting trust following division of an original trust, and noting that the purpose of a court order was to enable the parties to receive the economic benefits they tried to obtain from modification of the “parent” trust, concluded that payments from the trust to two charities are not deductible by the trust.639.5

p. 444. Insert following first paragraph, before heading:

*§ 9.22A CONTRIBUTIONS BY ESTATES An unlimited income tax charitable contribution deduction is afforded to estates (and certain trusts) for amounts paid during a tax year to a charitable organization.673.1 The general requirement that a charity be created or organized in the U.S., a state, the District of Columbia, or a possession of the U.S.673.2 is not applicable in this context.673.3 The fiduciary of an estate(or trust, if applicable)may electtotreat aspaid during a tax year anyamount ofgross income received duringthe year or any precedingtax year which is otherwise deductible and which is paid after the close of the tax year but onorbefore thelast day of the next succeedingtax year oftheestate(ortrust).673.4 In addition, any part of the gross income of an estate (or certain trusts673.5) which, pursuant to the terms of the will, is (1) permanently set aside during the tax year for a charitable purpose or (2) to be used (within or without the U.S. or any of its possessions) exclusively for religious, charitable, scientific, literary, or educational purposes, or for the prevention of cruelty to children or animals, 639.1 639.2 639.3 639.4 639.5 673.1 673.2 673.3 673.4 673.5

See supra note 631. E.g., Crown Income Charitable Fund v. Commissioner, 8 F.3d 571 (7th Cir. 1993). Emanuelson v. United States, 159 F. Supp. 34 (D.C. Conn. 1958). Brownstone v. United States, 465 F.3d 525 (2nd Cir. 2006). Chief Couns. Adv. Mem. 201651013. IRC § 642(c)(1); Reg. § 1.642(c)-1(a)(1). IRC § 170(c)(2)(A). Reg. § 1.642(c)-1(a)(2). Reg. § 1.642(c)-1(b). Reg. § 1.642(c)-2(b). ■

36

■

c09

02/03/2017

21:23:30

Page 37

*§ 9.22A CONTRIBUTIONS BY ESTATES

or for the establishment, acquisition, maintenance, or operation of a nonprofit public cemetery, is allowed as a deduction.673.6 An amount will not be deemed permanently set aside for a charitable purpose “unless under the terms of the governing instrument and the circumstances of the particular case the possibility that the amount set aside, or to be used, will not be devoted to such purpose or use is so remote as to be negligible.”673.7 As an example, where there is a possibility of invasion of the corpus of a charitable remainder trust673.8 in order to make payment of the annuity amount or unitrust amount, no deduction will be allowed under these rules in respect of any amount set aside by an estate for distribution to the trust.673.9 Until early 2015, the U.S. Tax Court did not have occasion to consider the soremote-as-to-be-negligible standard in this context. It did, however, examine identical language in connection with the tax regulations concerning the general federal income tax charitable contribution deduction. In one instance, the court construed the standard as being a “chance which every dictate of reason would justify an intelligent person in disregarding as so highly improbable and remote as to be lacking in reason and substamce.”673.10 More recently, the court defined the phrase as a “chance which persons generally would disregard as so highly improbable that it might be ignored with reasonable safety in undertaking a serious business transaction.”673.11 In 2015, the court considered a situation where an estate claimed an income tax charitable contribution deduction, on the basis that it had permanently set aside an amount of its gross income for charity. One of the estate’s assets was a condominium in which the decedent’s brother resided. During the administration of the estate, he asserted a life tenancy in the condominium. Because of the cost of litigation, the estate lacked sufficient funds to pay the amount previously deducted as a charitable contribution. The estate contended that there was no “reasonably foreseeable possibility” that it would incur unanticipated costs associated with the litigation. The IRS argued that there was a “substantial possibility of a prolonged and expensive legal fight” that would have required the estate to dip into the funds it allegedly set aside for charity. Siding with the government, the court concluded that the brother’s claim was “serious” and that the facts and circumstances of the situation put the estate on notice that the possibility of an “extended and 673.6

IRC § 642(c)(2); Reg. § 1.642(c)-2(a). For purposes of these two deductions, an amount received by an estate (or trust) which is includible in its gross income as income in respect of a decedent (see § 9.10(a)) is included in the entity’s gross income for these purposes (Reg. § 1.642(c)-3). 673.7 Reg. § 1.642(c)-2(d). 673.8 See § 12.1(a). 673.9 Reg. § 1.642(c)-2(d). 673.10 Briggs v. Commissioner, 72 T.C. 646, 657 (1979), aff’d, 665 F.2d 1051 (9th Cir. 1981). 673.11 885 Inv. Co. v. Commissioner, 95 T.C. 156, 161 (1990). ■

37

■

c09

02/03/2017

21:23:30

Page 38

SPECIAL GIFT SITUATIONS

expensive legal fight,” and thus the dissipation of funds set aside for charitable purposes, was more than so remote as to be negligible.673.12 The brother’s “active litigation of his property rights to the . . . condo created a real possibility that the funds set aside for [charity] would be depleted during the pendency of the lawsuit,” leading the court to conclude that it was not so remote as to be negligible that the funds of the estate would have to be invaded in order to continue its administration and consequently that the amount at issue was not permanently set aside.673.13 Another case on these points quickly followed the foregoing one. The Tax Court, in the fall of 2015, again held that an estate is not entitled to a charitable contribution deduction for distributions for charitable purposes because the amounts were not permanently set aside for charity.673.14 In this case, the decedent died testate in 2008, a resident of New York. He was unmarried with no children. His parents predeceased him. The estate tax return was submitted in 2012. His will conveyed 100 percent of the residuary estate to the two churches he regularly attended. This will did not provide for gross income to be permanently set aside or separated into distinct accounts. The coexecutors of the estate filed a petition for probate of the decedent’s will in 2009. In 2010, a lawyer for the decedent’s heirs at law filed a notice of appearance as counsel for seven heirs as intervenors. The state’s attorney general appeared on behalf of the charitable beneficiaries. Late in 2010, the probate court appointed a guardian ad litem to find and represent any unascertained descendants. Early in 2012, the parties settled as to the basis of the probate proceeding. Near the close of that year, the parties settled regarding payment of lawyers’ fees and the coexecutors’ commissions. The court found that, during the year at issue (2010), this estate was in the midst of an ongoing legal controversy that was not fully resolved at the time the estate filed its tax return. The ongoing undetermined expenses and the chance that amount might go to the intervenors made the possibility not so remote as to be negligible that the amount set aside for the churches would go to noncharitable beneficiaries. The following factors were found to be evidence that, during the year in issue and through the time when the estate filed its tax return there was a legal controversy, thus making it likely if not certain that additional legal expenses and coexecutors’ commissions would deplete estate assets: (1) as of the due date of the estate’s tax return, the estate knew that a lawyer was representing the intervenors contesting the will, and therefore the estate could anticipate additional litigation costs; (2) the will contest involved this lawyer, the New York State’s attorney general’s office, and the guardian ad litem, all representing *673.12 *673.13 *673.14

Estate of Belmont v. Commissioner, 144 T.C. 84 (2015). Id. at 96. Estate of DiMarco v. Commissioner, 110 T.C.M. (CCH) 292 (2015). ■

38

■

c09

02/03/2017

21:23:30

Page 39

*§ 9.22A CONTRIBUTIONS BY ESTATES

potentially conflicting interests and necessitating litigation costs; (3) the intervenor action involved multiple attempts to find witnesses to the will, including demands for discovery; and (4) the accrual of additional administrative expenses in defending a challenge to the will could be vague, uncertain, ambiguous, and indefinite. The court also noted that the estate failed to segregate the funds into a separate account. The estate held funds in a general account which it used to pay all of the estate’s expenses. Neither the estate nor the coexecutors made an effort to isolate or specifically designate the funds as permanently set aside for charitable purposes. By virtue of the fact that the settlements pertaining to designation of the beneficiaries and consequential legal and administrative expenses were not finalized until after the year at issue and the estate filed its income tax return, the court found that the possibility that the funds would go exclusively to noncharitable beneficiaries was not so remote as to be negligible. In Estate of Belmont, the court held that an amount cannot be permanently set aside during active litigation. The estate asserted that the settlement conferences were not contentious and thus insufficient to invoke the Belmont standard. The court disagreed, noting the three years of multiple meetings involving the probate court, settlement conferences, and the filing of discovery requests and demands. These negotiations were found to be tantamount to the requisite legal controversy. As is the case with trusts, the date-of-death value generally controls the amount of the estate tax charitable deduction based on the amount that passes to charity.673.15 If, however, a trustee has the power to divert property to be transferred for charitable purposes to a use which would have rendered it, to the extent that it is subject to the power, not deductible had it been directly bequeathed by the decedent, the charitable deduction is limited to the portion of the property that is exempt from the trustee’s exercise of the power.673.16 Thus, it is possible that the value of an estate’s charitable deduction will be determined by post-death events. The impact of post-death events on an estate’s charitable deduction was nicely illustrated in a case involving post-death intrafamily transactions that caused property of considerably lesser value than that originally bequeathed to pass to a charitable organization.673.17 An individual died, leaving stock in a corporation, as to which she was the majority stockholder, with a date-of-death value of about $14 million, to a charity. After her death, her sons converted the tax status of the corporation and caused a redemption of much of the stock, causing the charity to receive two notes and some nonvoting stock having a value of about one-half of the bequeathed stock. The estate contended that the post-death events occurred for business reasons and therefore should not affect *673.15 *673.16 *673.17

IRC § 2055(a)(2); Reg. § 20.2055-1(a)(2). Reg. § 20.2055-2(b)(1). Estate of Dieringer v. Commissioner, 146 T.C. 117 (2016). ■

39

■

c09

02/03/2017

21:23:30

Page 40

SPECIAL GIFT SITUATIONS

the amount of the estate’s charitable deduction. The court did not agree with the estate, stating that the record before it “does not support a substantial decline in [the corporation’s] per share value.”673.18 It invoked case law that “intrafamily transactions in a close corporation receive a heightened level of scrutiny.”673.19 The redemption occurred, the court concluded, without any “independent and outside accountability.”673.20 The sons “altered [the] decedent’s testamentary plan by reducing the value of the assets eventually transferred to the foundation without significant constraints.”673.21 The court concluded: “We do not believe that Congress intended to allow as great a charitable contribution deduction where persons divert a decedent’s charitable contribution, ultimately reducing the value of property transferred to a charitable organization.”673.22

*673.18 *673.19 *673.20 *673.21 *673.22

Id. at 133. Id. Id. Id. Id. ■

40

■

c10

02/06/2017

7:35:22

Page 41

C H A P T E R

T E N

Other Aspects of Deductible Giving *§ 10.7 Interrelationship with Business Expense Deduction 42 § 10.14 Penalties 44 *(a) Accuracy-Related Penalty 44 § 10.15 Transactions of Interest 45 (b) Asset Dispositions 45

§ 10.1

Valuation of Property 41 *(a) General Principles 41 *§ 10.4 Conditional Gifts 42 *(a) Material Conditions— Nondeductibility 42

§ 10.1 VALUATION OF PROPERTY *(a) General Principles p. 475. Insert as first bullet item under Example 10.1: •

Individuals purchased approximately 150,000 books at a substantial discount, held them for the long-term capital gain holding period, then contributed them to various libraries. The U.S. Tax Court held that the “sheer number of [these donated] books . . . would require a substantial discount from” the list price. The fair market value of the books was found to be no more than 20 percent of the catalog list price.32.1

*p. 483, n. 91. Delete text and substitute: Herman v. United States, 73 F. Supp. 2d 912, 915 (E.D. Tenn. 1999).

*p. 483, n. 92. Delete 89,984. *p. 483. Insert as third and fourth bullet items: •

32.1 88.1

A court ruled that the allocation of excess state land preservation tax credits by a limited liability company, for money, in exchange for a nonvoting membership interest in the LLC was a disguised sale.88.1 These credits were generated by a contribution of a conservation easement. The donor of the easement, the LLC claimed a charitable

Skripak v. Commissioner, 84 T.C. 285, 325 (1985). IRC § 707. ■

41

■

c10

02/06/2017

7:35:22

Page 42

OTHER ASPECTS OF DEDUCTIBLE GIVING

•

contribution deduction in the amount of $7.4 million. The IRS proposed reduction of the contribution amount by $4.9 million. The court, however, reduced the contribution amount by a mere $48,333.88.2 A court of appeals held that the donor of a conservation easement was entitled to a pre-easement value of the underlying real property of at least $21 million; the IRS asserted the value was $7.75 million;88.3 on remand, the lower court sustained the donor’s position, at trial, that the value of the property was $25.2 million.88.4

*p. 484, n. 93, first line. Delete 89,985 and insert 916. *p. 485, note 100. Insert following existing text: For a discussion of the application of the tax law principles of sham and lack of economic substance in the charitable contribution valuation context, see RERI Holdings I, LLC v. Commissioner, 107 T.C. M. (CCH) 1488 (2014). Also RERI Holdings I, LLC v. Commissioner, 143 T.C. 41 (2014).

*§ 10.4 CONDITIONAL GIFTS *(a) Material Conditions—Nondeductibility p. 501, note 165, last line. Insert 377 following T.C.

§ 10.7 INTERRELATIONSHIP WITH BUSINESS EXPENSE DEDUCTION *p. 510. Insert following first complete paragraph, before heading: The IRS explored situations where contributions are deductible as business expenses rather than as charitable gifts.214.1 This analysis is based on the following facts. A for-profit company is engaged in the business of providing certain services. It has created and operates a program (Program X) by which it makes contributions to tax-exempt organizations, both charitable and noncharitable, as well as other nonprofit and for-profit entities. The company prominently advertises its contributions as part of Program X. A business expense deduction is not allowed for a contribution that would be allowed deductibility as a charitable gift were it not for the percentage limitations on charitable deductions.214.2 Likewise, as noted, a business expense deduction is not allowed for a contribution if any part of it is deductible as a charitable gift.214.3 *88.2 *88.3 *88.4 214.1 214.2 214.3

SWF Real Estate, LLC v. Commissioner, 109 T.C.M. (CCH) 1327 (2015). Palmer Ranch Holdings Ltd. v. Commissioner, 812 F.3d 982 (11th Cir. 2016). Palmer Ranch Holdings Ltd. v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2016-190 (Tax Ct., Oct. 13, 2016). Chief Couns. Adv. Mem. 201543013. IRC § 162(b). Reg. § 1.162-15(a). ■

42

■

c10

02/06/2017

7:35:22

Page 43

§ 10.7 INTERRELATIONSHIP WITH BUSINESS EXPENSE DEDUCTION

Transfers of property to a charitable organization which bear a direct relationship to the transferor’s trade or business and which are made with a reasonable expectation of commensurate financial return may constitute valid expenses of a trade or business, deductible as business expenses.214.4 Contributions to noncharitable organizations which bear a direct relationship to the donor’s business and are made with a reasonable expectation of commensurate financial return may constitute allowable deductions as business expenses, provided the contribution is not made for a nondeductible purpose.214.5 Nondeductible purposes are lobbying and political campaign activities.214.6 The IRS chief counsel ruled that this corporate donor had a reasonable expectation of commensurate financial return for its contributions through Program X. Thus, its gifts to charitable organizations are deductible as business expenses, to the extent they are not disallowed by the business expense deduction rules. The general counsel also so held in connection with gifts to noncharitable exempt organizations, certified B corporations, and other for-profit businesses. The IRS ruled that a corporation, maintaining a political action committee charity gift match program, may not deduct as a business expense charitable contributions because they are being made in connection with political campaigns on behalf of candidates for public office.214.7 This business corporation has a related political action committee,214.8 which is funded by its employees and those of its subsidiaries. To incentivize employee contributions to the PAC, within a monetary range, the corporation matches each of these contributions with a contribution in the name of the employee to one or more charities selected by the employee. The corporation sought a ruling from the IRS that these charitable contributions are deductible as business expenses. The IRS noted that direct political contributions by this corporation are not deductible as business expenses, including those paid or incurred in connection with a political campaign.214.9 The agency stated that the corporation’s contributions to its PAC and its charitable gifts are “inextricably linked,” inasmuch as the political gifts are a “prerequisite” and the matched charitable gifts are intended to incentivize the political gifts. The matching charitable contributions were thus ruled to be in connection with political campaigns.

214.4

Reg. § 1.170A-2(c)(5). Reg. § 1.162-15(b). 214.6 IRC § 162(e)(1); Reg. § 1.162-20. *214.7 Priv. Ltr. Rul. 201616002. *214.8 That is, an IRC § 527 organization. See Tax-Exempt Organizations, Chap. 17. *214.9 IRC § 162(e)(1)(B). 214.5

■

43

■

c10

02/06/2017

7:35:22

Page 44

OTHER ASPECTS OF DEDUCTIBLE GIVING

§ 10.14 PENALTIES *(a) Accuracy-Related Penalty p. 524, complete paragraph. Delete first sentence (including footnotes) and substitute: This exception may apply in the income tax charitable contribution context. p. 525, carryover paragraph. Insert as last sentence: In another instance, the court concluded that the accuracy-related penalties were inapplicable because the donors acted with reasonable cause; they worked with the charitable donee to formulate a plan in connection with the gifted property, the charity’s employees were qualified to make the assessments they made, and, by attaching the appraisals to their tax returns, the donors demonstrated good-faith reliance on the appraisals.300.1 p. 525. Insert as first, second, and third complete paragraphs: The reasonable cause/good-faith exception does not apply in the case of an underpayment attributable to a substantial or gross valuation overstatement with respect to charitable deduction property.300.2 This exception to the exception has an exception: That rule does not apply to a substantial valuation overstatement if the claimed value of the property was based on a qualified appraisal300.3 made by a qualified appraiser300.4 and the donor made a good faith investigation of the value of the contributed property.300.5 The import of this good faith investigation requirement was illustrated in a case involving a gift of a historic preservation easement on their home (which proved to lack value) by married donors who, in the words of an appellate court, are “highly intelligent” and “very well-educated.”300.6 The appraiser they used was recommended by the charitable donee; the couple was not disturbed by the fact that this appraiser had previously appraised façade easements on only nine occasions, all of them involving the same donee. The donors had signed a letter that included a statement that the restrictions imposed by the easement agreement were the same as those already in place on the residence by virtue of zoning restrictions; *300.1 300.2

300.3 300.4 300.5

*300.6

Atkinson v. Commissioner, 110 T.C.M. (CCH) 550 (2015). IRC § 6664(c)(3), first sentence. Charitable deduction property generally is property contributed for which a charitable deduction is claimed (IRC § 6664(c)(4)(A)). See § 21.5(a). See § 21.5(b). IRC § 6664(c)(3), second sentence. This elimination of the reasonable cause exception for underpayments attributable to gross valuation overstatements of charitable deduction property applies to returns filed after July 25, 2006. Thus, a charitable gift made in 2004, that caused carryover deductions for 2005 and 2006, gave rise to a penalty with respect to the 2006 claimed deduction that did not apply to the 2004 and 2005 deductions (Reisner v. Commissioner, 108 T.C.M. (CCH) 518 (2014)). Kaufman v. Commissioner, 784 F.3d 56 (1st Cir. 2015). ■

44

■

c10

02/06/2017

7:35:22

Page 45

§ 10.15 TRANSACTIONS OF INTEREST

one donor testified that he “didn’t notice” the sentence, while the other stated she “probably didn’t focus on” it. The court of appeals said that the appraiser’s “assumptions and methodology were questionable at best”; his explanation as to why the easement had value was characterized as “vague, nonspecific, and not entirely logical.” A representative of the donee observed in an email to one of these donors that the property owners in the community are not allowed to alter the façade of their historic buildings, “whether there is an easement or not.” This representative added that, “therefore, properties with an easement are not at a market value disadvantage when compared to the other properties in the same neighborhood.” For ignoring these and other “red flags” (the court’s term, an accuracy-related penalty was upheld on the ground that the donors did not make the requisite good faith investigation into the value of the easement.300.7 A court held that the IRS’s determination of 40 percent gross valuation misstatement penalties against donors to charity was proper because the agency’s examination report, where this position was cast as an alternative in relation to the 20 percent accuracy-related penalties, constituted the requisite initial determination.300.8

§ 10.15 TRANSACTIONS OF INTEREST (b) Asset Dispositions p. 538, last paragraph, first line. Delete (including footnote) and substitute: Final regulations were issued in 2015377 that would p. 538, last paragraph, third line. Delete proposed. p. 538, last paragraph, penultimate line. Delete proposed; delete would and insert do.

Id., aff’g 107 T.C.M. (CCH) 1262 (2014). Legg v. Commissioner, 145 T.C. 344 (2015). The initial determination rule is the subject of IRC § 6751(b). T.D. 9729, issued on August 11, 2015. These regulations are identical to those proposed in 2014 (REG-154890-03).

300.7

*300.8

377

■

45

■

c10

02/06/2017

7:35:22

Page 46

p04

02/03/2017

10:1:53

Page 47

P A R T

F O U R

Planned Giving Chapter 12 Charitable Remainder Trusts Chapter 13 Pooled Income Funds Chapter 16 Charitable Lead Trusts

p04

02/03/2017

10:1:53

Page 48

c12

02/03/2017

19:41:32

Page 49

C H A P T E R

T W E L V E

Charitable Remainder Trusts *§ 12.2

§ 12.4

Charitable Remainder Annuity Trust Rules 49 (k) Sidestepping Probability-ofExhaustion Test 49 Issues 51 *(j) University Endowment Investment Sharing with CRTs 51 (m) Merging CRTs 51

§ 12.12

Calculation of Charitable Deduction 52 *(b) Charitable Remainder Unitrusts 52

*§ 12.2 CHARITABLE REMAINDER ANNUITY TRUST RULES p. 566. Insert following first paragraph, before heading: (k) Sidestepping Probability-of-Exhaustion Test The IRS provided a prototype provision that may be included in the governing instrument of a CRAT, which will be treated as a qualified contingency,149.1 enabling the trust to continue to qualify as a CRAT and sidestep the probability-of-exhaustion test.149.2 This sample provision triggers, under certain circumstances, early termination of a CRAT, followed by an immediate distribution of remaining trust assets to the charitable remainder beneficiary. Background Law. To be qualified, a CRAT must meet certain basic requirements, including payment of a sum certain equal to 5 percent of the value of assets initially placed in the trust to an income beneficiary.149.3 Also, a CRAT must be a trust with respect to which a charitable deduction is available.149.4 As of the date of a gift, if a transfer for charitable purposes is dependent on performance of an act or happening of a precedent event in order that it might become effective, a charitable deduction is not allowed unless the possibility

149.1 149.2 149.3 149.4

See § 12.12(c). Rev. Proc. 2016-42, 2016-34 I.R.B. 269. See § 12.2(a)-(f). See § 12.1(a), text accompanied by note 4. ■

49

■

c12

02/03/2017

19:41:32

Page 50

CHARITABLE REMAINDER TRUSTS

that the charitable transfer will not become effective is so remote as to be negligible.149.5 This probability-of-exhaustion test is applied to determine whether a CRAT complies with this regulatory requirement applicable to charitable transfers. If there is a greater than 5 percent probability that payment of the annuity will defeat the charity’s interest by exhausting the trust assets by the close of the trust’s term, the possibility that the charitable transfer will not become effective is not so remote as to be negligible.149.6 The probability of exhaustion, in the case of a CRAT, is calculated first by applying the assumed rate of return on CRAT assets149.7 against the amount of the annuity payment; then, a mortality table149.8 is used to determine the probability that the income beneficiary or beneficiaries will survive exhaustion of the CRAT’s assets.149.9 If the probability that the life beneficiary or beneficiaries will survive exhaustion of the CRAT assets is greater than 5 percent, the charitable remainder interest involved does not qualify for an income, estate, or gift tax charitable deduction and the CRAT is not exempt from federal income tax.149.10 If the assumed rate of return at creation of the trust is equal to or greater than the percentage used to ascertain the annuity payments, exhaustion will never occur. If a trust would, but for a qualified contingency, meet the requirements for a CRAT (or a charitable remainder unitrust), the trust is deemed to meet these requirements.149.11 For purposes of determining the amount of a charitable deduction (or actuarial value of any interest), a qualified contingency is not taken into account.149.12 A qualified contingency is a provision of a trust which provides that, on the happening of a contingency, the income payments will terminate not later than these payments would otherwise terminate under the trust document.149.13 Background Facts. Recently, low interest rates have greatly limited use of the CRAT as an effective charitable-giving vehicle. For example, in May 2016, the assumed rate was 1.8 percent.149.14 At this interest rate, the sole life beneficiary of a CRAT that provides for payment of the minimum allowable annuity (the 5 percent rule) must be at least 72 years of age at creation of the trust for the trust to satisfy the probability-of-exhaustion test. The assumed rate has not exceeded the 5 percent annuity payout rate since December 2007; this has necessitated testing for the probability of exhaustion for each CRAT created since that time. 149.5

E.g., Reg. § 1.170A-1(e). Rev. Rul. 70-452, 1970-2 C.B. 199. *149.7 That is, the IRC § 7520 rate. See § 12.12(a). *149.8 Reg. § 2031-7(d)(7). *149.9 Rev. Rul. 77-374, 1977-2 C.B. 329. *149.10 IRC § 664(c). See § 12.8. *149.11 IRC § 664(f)(1). *149.12 IRC § 664(f)(2). *149.13 IRC § 664(f)(3). See § 12.12(c). *149.14 See Appendix H. *149.6

■

50

■

c12

02/03/2017

19:41:33

Page 51

§ 12.4 ISSUES

Prototype Provision. The IRS provision provides for early termination of a CRAT, and thus the end of the ability to make any more annuity payments, on the date immediately before the date on which any annuity payment would be made, if the payment of the annuity amount would result in the value of the trust corpus, when multiplied by a special discount factor, being less than 10 percent of the value of the initial trust corpus. The benefit of this IRS guidance—where the provision is “assured” of treatment as a qualified contingency—is available only when its “precise language” is used. A CRAT that contains a provision “similar but not identical” to that provided will not necessarily be disqualified but it also will not garner the assurance.

§ 12.4 ISSUES *(j) University Endowment Investment Sharing with CRTs p. 613, note 310. Insert as third sentence: This investment-sharing arrangement is expanding beyond university endowments, as evidenced by this type of structure with a public charity supporting a religious community and its religious, health, social service, and educational institutions (Priv. Ltr. Rul. 201636042).

p. 615. Insert following carryover paragraph, before heading: (m) Merging CRTs There is nothing in the federal tax law expressly authoring the merger of CRTs. Nonetheless, in one instance, the IRS permitted it, although the agency termed the transaction a consolidation of CRTs. This matter involved two CRUTs, created by the same two individuals, under the law of the same state. The terms of the trusts were said to be “substantially identical”; they have the same trustees, the same unitrust amount, the same income beneficiaries, and the same charitable remainder beneficiaries. The purpose of this consolidation, accomplished by transferring all of the assets of one of these trusts to the other, was “eliminat[ion] [of] duplicative administrative time and expenses as well as the filing of duplicative state and federal tax returns.” The IRS ruled that this consolidation would termination the status of the disappearing trust but would not cause the surviving trust to fail to qualify as a CRUT.327.1

327.1

Priv. Ltr. Rul. 201420010. ■

51

■

c12

02/03/2017

19:41:33

Page 52

CHARITABLE REMAINDER TRUSTS

§ 12.12 CALCULATION OF CHARITABLE DEDUCTION (b) Charitable Remainder Unitrusts p. 649, first paragraph, first line. Insert before existing text: *General Rules. p. 649. Insert as second paragraph: As to valuation, the statutory law provides that, “[f]or purposes of determining the amount of any charitable contribution, the remainder interest of a . . . [CRUT] shall be computed on the basis that an amount equal to 5 percent of the net fair market value of its assets (or a greater amount, if required under the terms of the trust instrument) is to be distributed each year.”469.1 p. 649, second paragraph, second line. Delete (if any). p. 649, second paragraph, third line. Insert (fixed percentage) following amount. p. 650. Insert following examples and before heading: NIMCRUT Opinion. The U.S. Tax Court held that the value of the remainder interest of a NIMCRUT478.1 must be calculated using the greater of 5 percent or the fixed percentage stated in the trust instrument.478.2 The court found the valuation standard provided in the Internal Revenue Code ambiguous and deferred to long-standing IRS guidance on the point. In this case, an estate sought a charitable contribution deduction for the values of remainder interests in two NIMCRUTs created during the decedent’s life. Both trust instruments state that the trustee of the trust must make distributions to the noncharitable beneficiary of the lesser of the net trust accounting income for the tax year or a fixed percentage of the net fair market value of the trust assets, valued annually. Each trust instrument also allows the trustee to make additional distributions, limited to trust income, if previous distributions do not equal the fixed percentage. The trust agreements provide for distributions to the income beneficiaries during the unitrust periods payable in quarterly installments. The fixed percentage for one of these trusts is 11 percent; for the other it is 10 percent. At the close of the unitrust period, the remainder of the principal and income in each trust is to be distributed to a charitable organization. At issue was the methodology to use in valuing a remainder interest in a NIMCRUT where actual distributions will be the lesser of a fixed percentage or net income. 469.1 478.1 478.2

IRC § 662(e). See § 12.3(a), text accompanied by note 156. See § 12.3(a), text accompanied by supra notes 165 and 166. Estate of Schaefer v. Commissioner, 145 T.C. 134 (2015). ■

52

■

c12

02/03/2017

19:41:33

Page 53

§ 12.12 CALCULATION OF CHARITABLE DEDUCTION

Where a statute is ambiguous, a court may look to legislative history to ascertain its meaning. As to reliance on IRS administrative guidance, the court is not bound by revenue rulings or revenue procedures. Yet, the court owes them an appropriate level of deference. Pursuant to that standard, the court determines whether the IRS’s pronouncements may have the “power to persuade” by looking to the “thoroughness evident in [their] consideration, the validity of [their] reasoning, [and their] consistency with earlier and later pronouncements.”478.3 The court found the text of the valuation statute ambiguous. It reviewed the distribution rules for CRATs and CRUTs, noting that they utilize terms such as sum certain and fixed percentage.478.4 The valuation statute, however, does not expressly use these terms. The court said it was “unable to determine on its face whether the provision means,” in the case of a CRUT, the fixed percentage or “something different.”478.5 It also found the tax regulations ambiguous, yet found the legislative history “clear.”478.6 This history states that where there is a net income provision, the distribution amount or rate set forth in the trust instrument is to be used for valuation purposes even though distributions may be limited by net income.478.7 The court reviewed IRS guidance on the point.478.8 There it is stated that, in the case of a NIMCRUT, the “computation of the charitable deduction will be determined on the basis that the regular unitrust amount will be distributed in each taxable year of the trust.”478.9 The court accorded this guidance deference, finding it “persuasive.”478.10 “Both pieces of guidance are thoroughly reasoned,” the court stated, “providing examples and explanations based on the applicable provisions.”478.11 It observed that this guidance “has withstood the test of time,” with the revenue ruling being in effect for over four decades and reaffirmed 30 years later when the revenue procedure was published.478.12 The IRS’s position, the court added, “also has remained consistent and has been the subject of little litigation.”478.13 In this case, the court’s decision meant that the estate had to use an annual distribution amount of 11 or 10 percent of the net fair market value of the trust assets when valuing the remainder interests of the two trusts. Because the 478.3

Skidmore v. Swift & Co., 323 U.S. 134, 140 (1944). See § 12.2(a), text accompanied by supra note 64; § 12.3(a), text accompanied by supra note 183, respectively. 478.5 Estate of Schaefer v. Commissioner, 145 T.C. 134, 142 (2015). 478.6 Id. at 143. 478.7 S. Rep. No. 91-552, 91st Cong., 1st Sess. (1969), at 89-90. 478.8 Rev. Rul. 72-395, 1972-2 C.B. 340; Rev. Proc. 2005-54, 2005-2 C.B. 353. See § 12.9. 478.9 Rev. Rul. 72-395, supra note 478.8, § 7.01, at 350. 478.10 Estate of Schaefer v. Commissioner, 145 T.C. 134, 144 (2015). 478.11 Id. 478.12 Id. 478.13 Id. 478.4

■

53

■

c12

02/03/2017

19:41:33

Page 54

CHARITABLE REMAINDER TRUSTS

parties stipulated that the estate would not be entitled to a charitable contribution deduction if the remainder interests are valued using this method, the court sustained the IRS’s determination that the charitable deduction must be denied.478.14 Early Terminations. In the case of the early termination of a NICRUT or NIMCRUT,478.15 the remainder interest is valued using rules similar to the rules for valuing the remainder interest of a charitable remainder trust when determining the amount of the grantor’s charitable contribution deduction.478.16

In general, Beers, “Tax Court Rules Fixed Percentage Specified in NIMCRUT Must Be Used To Value Interests In Determining Whether Trust Meets Remainder Requirement,” Bloomberg BNA, 190 Daily Tax Report J-1 (Oct. 1, 2015). 478.15 See § 12.7. 478.16 That is, the remainder interest is computed on the basis that an amount equal to five percent of the net fair market value of the trust assets (or a greater amount, if required pursuant to the terms of the trust instrument) is to be distributed each year, with any net income limit being disregarded. IRC § 664(e), last sentence (added by the Protecting Americans from Tax Hikes Act of 2015 (Pub. L. No. 114-113) § 344. 478.14

■

54

■

c13

02/03/2017

19:45:11

Page 55

C H A P T E R

T H I R T E E N

Pooled Income Funds § 13.7

Pass-Through of Depreciation

55

§ 13.7 PASS-THROUGH OF DEPRECIATION p. 669. Insert as second complete paragraph, before heading: A public charity created a pooled income fund to generate contributions to be used to purchase nonresidential real property from the charitable organization for a sale-leaseback arrangement. The IRS ruled that any depreciation amount in excess of the income set aside by the fund’s trustee for a depreciation reserve will be properly allocable between the fund’s income beneficiaries and the trustee (a supporting organization).78.1

78.1

Priv. Ltr. Rul. 201450016. ■

55

■

c13

02/03/2017

19:45:11

Page 56

c16

02/03/2017

21:12:1

Page 57

C H A P T E R

S I X T E E N

Charitable Lead Trusts § 16.7

Private Foundation Rules 57

§ 16.7 PRIVATE FOUNDATION RULES p. 709, note 46. Insert following existing text: Distributions of annuity payments by irrevocable testamentary charitable lead annuity trusts created by a husband and wife, pursuant to the terms of previously executed charitable pledge agreements they executed in their capacity as trustees of a private foundation, were ruled to not be acts of self-dealing, notwithstanding the fact that these individuals are disqualified persons with respect to the trust and the foundation, inasmuch as the funding agreement was between the charitable beneficiaries and the foundation, with the spouses acting solely in their capacity as trustees (Priv. Ltr. Rul. 201421023).

■

57

■

c16

02/03/2017

21:12:1

Page 58

p05

02/03/2017

9:0:49

Page 59

P A R T

F I V E

International Charitable Giving Chapter 18 International Giving by Individuals during Lifetime

p05

02/03/2017

9:0:49

Page 60

c18

02/03/2017

9:1:56

Page 61

C H A P T E R

E I G H T E E N

International Giving by Individuals during Lifetime

p. 749, first complete paragraph. Insert as last sentence: An organization, classified as a charitable entity, received contributions from families and transferred the funds, as tuition payments, to foreign schools it supported; the organization was seen as operating as a conduit because it failed to exercise any discretion and control over the funds it provides to the schools, and failed to have a grant application, failed to approve grants in amounts that vary from the amount requested, failed to require grant recipients to provide written reports, and lacked a system by which it can pursue an accounting of funds and seek to recover any misspent funds.32.1

32.1

Priv. Ltr. Rul. 201539032. ■

61

■

c18

02/03/2017

9:1:56

Page 62

p06

02/06/2017

13:32:19

Page 63

P A R T

S I X

Administration of Charitable Giving Programs Chapter 21 Substantiation and Appraisal Requirements Chapter 23 Special Events, Corporate Sponsorships, and Donor-Advised Funds

p06

02/06/2017

13:32:19

Page 64

c21

02/03/2017

21:27:32

Page 65

C H A P T E R

T W E N T Y - O N E

Substantiation and Appraisal Requirements § 21.5

Appraisal Requirements 68 *(a) Qualified Appraisal 68 *(c) Substantial Compliance Doctrine 69 § 21.7 Appraisals of Clothing and Household Items 69 *§ 21.8 Burden of Proof Rules 69

§ 21.3

Substantiation Requirements for Gifts of $250 or More 65 *(a) General Rules 65 (c) Donee Organizations’ Information Reporting 66 *§ 21.4 Substantiation Requirements for Noncash Gifts 68

§ 21.3 SUBSTANTIATION REQUIREMENTS FOR GIFTS OF $250 OR MORE (a) General Rules *p. 783. Delete footnote 32. *p. 784. Insert as first complete paragraph: The U.S. Tax Court has held that the requisite substantiation language can be found in a gift agreement. This court has also held that a deed, in this case a conservation easement deed, may satisfy the substantiation requirements.33.1 The easiest way to satisfy the requirements in this fashion, of course, is where the deed contains the requisite language.33.2 The court has also held, however, that when a deed does not include the explicit statement, the deed as a whole may determine if the donee provided goods or services in exchange for the contribution. Factors that support this compliance are that the deed recites no consideration other than preservation of the property and that the deed states

*33.1 *33.2

Simmons v. Commissioner, 98 T.C.M. 211 (2009), aff’d, 646 F.3d 6 (D.C. Cir. 2011). E.g., Schrimsher v. Commissioner, 101 T.C.M. 1329 (2011). ■

65

■

c21

02/03/2017

21:27:32

Page 66

SUBSTANTIATION AND APPRAISAL REQUIREMENTS

that it constitutes the entire agreement of the parties.33.3 The properly executed deed in a case decided in 2016 did not contain the requisite language nor did it meet the as a whole test.33.4 Suitable substantiation was found in a letter signed by a government official.33.5 It has been held, however, that a settlement agreement between a donor and a donee cannot serve as an appropriate substantiation document.33.6 p. 784, second paragraph, third line. Delete potentially and insert will. p. 784, n. 34. Delete text of note and substitute: IRC § 170(f)(8)(D). The IRS proposed regulations in implementation of this provision, which is an alternative to the written substantiation requirements (IRC § 170(f)(8)(A). See § 21.3(c).

p. 791. Insert following existing text: *p. 791. Delete second complete paragraph (including footnotes). *p. 791, third complete paragraph, first line. Delete still. (c) Donee Organizations’ Information Reporting Proposed regulations implementing the exception to the general charitable gift substantiation requirement were issued on September 16, 2015, by which donee organizations may file information returns with the IRS that report the required information about contributions.72.1 Background. When issuing regulations under the general substantiation rule in 1997, the Treasury Department and the IRS declined to issue regulations to accompany the statutory exception. In the preamble to these proposed regulations, it is stated that the present system “works effectively, with minimal burden on donors and donees, and the Treasury Department and the IRS have received few requests since [1997] to implement a donee reporting system.” In recent years, some donors under examination for their claimed charitable contribution deductions have argued that a failure to comply with the general substantiation rule may be cured if the donee organization files an amended annual information return including the substantiation requirements for the contribution at issue. These donors assert that an amended return is permissible donee reporting in accordance with the exception, even if the amended return is filed with the IRS many years after the charitable contribution at issue was made. The IRS, however, has consistently maintained that this exception is *33.3

E.g., Averyt v. Commissioner, 104 T.C.M. 65 (2012). French v. Commissioner, 111 T.C.M. (CCH) 1241. *33.5 Crimi v. Commissioner, 105 T.C.M. 1330 (2013). *33.6 DiDonato v. Commissioner, 101 T.C.M. 173 (2011). 72.1 REG-138344-13. *33.4

■

66

■

c21

02/03/2017

21:27:32

Page 67

§ 21.3 SUBSTANTIATION REQUIREMENTS FOR GIFTS OF $250 OR MORE

unavailable until final regulations prescribing the method by which donee reporting may be accomplished and that annual information returns are unsuitable for donee reporting.72.2 Summary of Proposal. The Treasury Department and the IRS have concluded that, in order to better protect donor privacy, annual information returns (Form 990 series returns) should not be used for donee reporting. Instead, before these proposed regulations are finalized, the IRS intends to develop a specificuse information return for donee reporting. This information return will have to contain the following information: the name and address of the donor and the donee; the taxpayer identification number of the donor; the amount of cash and a description (but not necessarily the value) of any property other than cash contributed by the donor to the donee; whether any goods and services were provided by the donee in consideration, in whole or in part, for the contribution by the donor; and a description and good-faith estimate of the value of any goods and services provided by the donee or a statement that the goods and services consist solely of intangible religious benefits.72.3 Donee charities are not required to adopt this donee reporting methodology.72.4 Charitable entities that choose to use the donee reporting exception will be required to provide a copy of the information return to the donor at the address the donor provides; the return will contain only the information related to that donor. Donees that opt the reporting approach will have to report the information required pursuant to the general rule as well as the donor’s name, address, and taxpayer identification number. Information returns utilized in connection with this exception will have to be filed by the donee no later than February 28 of the year following the year in which the contribution is made.72.5 The donee organization will have to provide a copy of the information return to the donor by the same date.72.6 p. 784, note 35. Delete last sentence and substitute: Other cases where charitable deductions have been disallowed due to lack of compliance with this substantiation rule are Smith v. Commissioner, 108 T.C.M. (CCH) 384 (2014); Cor v. Commissioner, 106 T.C.M. (CCH) 454 (2013).

72.2 72.3 72.4 72.5 72.6

E.g., Chief Couns. Adv. Mem. 201120022. Prop. Reg. § 1.170A-13(f)(18)(ii). Prop. Reg. § 1.170A-13(f)(18)(v). Prop. Reg. § 1.170A-13(f)(18)(iii). Prop. Reg. § 1.170A-13(f)(18)(iv). ■

67

■

c21

02/03/2017

21:27:32

Page 68

SUBSTANTIATION AND APPRAISAL REQUIREMENTS

§ 21.4 SUBSTANTIATION REQUIREMENTS FOR NONCASH GIFTS *p. 792, n. 75, first line. Insert following first comma: Kunkel v. Commissioner, 109 T.C.M. (CCH) 1379 (2015).

*p. 792, n. 75, second line. Insert closing parenthesis following officer. This proposal was controversial, largely because of the IRS’s insistence that donors’ Social Security numbers be reported on the information returns, raising concerns as to donors’ privacy and identity theft. Seventeen House Republicans, by letter dated December 4, 2015, wrote to the leadership of the House Appropriations Committee, requesting that a provision be added to the fiscal year 2016 appropriations legislation prohibiting funding for finalization of these regulations. Legislation was introduced in the U.S. Senate on December 8, 2015, to block the IRS from issuing these regulations in final form (S. 2073 (Protecting Charitable Contributions Act)). A letter dated December 15, 2015, was sent to the IRS by 215 charitable organizations, orchestrated by Independent Sector and the National Council of Nonprofits, expressing their “strong” and “universal” opposition to the proposal. Independent Sector sent a separate letter, to the same effect, to the IRS, dated December 15, 2015. The Tax Section of the American Bar Association weighed in on this in a December 16 letter. It wrote: “Since the existing [charitable substantiation] process appears to be working well for all but a few taxpayers, we do not believe that development of the [proposed information return] is in any way necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Service.” And: “Moreover, given the substantial issues of privacy and data security associated with collection of taxpayer identification numbers, we think it is unlikely that [this proposed return] will have practical utility.” Over 34,000 comment letters as to this proposal were sent to the IRS, basically all in opposition to it. Bowing to public and political pressure, the IRS, on January 7, 2016, withdrew these proposed regulations.

*p. 792, note 76. Delete (ii) and insert (11). *p. 793, note 83. Delete (c) and insert (C).

§ 21.5 APPRAISAL REQUIREMENTS (a) Qualified Appraisal *p. 796, note 114. Insert following existing text: Likewise, Costello v. Commissioner, 109 T.C.M. (CCH) 1441 (2015) (where the appraiser valued a parcel of property rather than an easement, the subject of a gift, placed on it); Alli v. Commissioner, 107 T.C.M. (CCH) 1082 (2014).

*p. 799, note 139. Insert following existing text: In one case, a donor failed these rules, in that he sought to introduce into evidence purported appraisals by a qualified appraiser but the court did not admit them because the appraiser denied having prepared them (Isaacs v. Commissioner, 109 T.C.M. (CCH) 1624 (2015).

■

68

■

c21

02/03/2017

21:27:32

Page 69

§ 21.8 BURDEN OF PROOF RULES

*(c) Substantial Compliance Doctrine p. 805. Insert as second complete paragraph, before heading: The substantial compliance doctrine, having been rejected in the foregoing and other cases, appeared to have lost significance. Then, the U.S. Tax Court in 2016 revisited the doctrine, having observed that the “border between substantial compliance and lack of substantial compliance is a contested and unclear one.”169.1 The court opened its analysis in this case by stating that it has “always hesitated in substantial compliance cases to push too hard against the regulatory language—it’s not the job of a court to rewrite regulations, especially when Congress so clearly states its intent for an area of tax law to be governed by them.”169.2 The court continued: “This has meant that taxpayers have had great difficulty in meeting the substantial compliance standard because we’ve held that compliance isn’t substantial if an appraisal fails to meet the essential requirements of the governing statute.”169.3 The court considered five flaws in the appraisal involved as identified by the IRS, concluding that the donor company “complied either strictly or substantially with each of the requirements for a qualified appraiser report.”169.4 The court rejected the government’s argument that the donor “orchestrated a voluntary, open-market sale transaction to appear as if it was a bargain sale to enable its partners to entirely offset their significant capital gain with a charitable contribution deduction.”169.5

§ 21.7 APPRAISALS OF CLOTHING AND HOUSEHOLD ITEMS p. 807, note 186. Insert following existing text: An illustration of noncompliance with this rule appears in Smith v. Commissioner, 108 T.C.M. (CCH) 384 (2014).

§ 21.8 BURDEN OF PROOF RULES *p. 808, note 190. Insert before last period: likewise, Brown v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2016-39 (2016).

*p. 808, note 193. Insert before existing text: Barnes v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2016-79 (2016); Wesley v. Commissioner, 110 T.C.M. (CCH) 367 (2015);

*169.1 *169.2 *169.3 *169.4 *169.5

Cave Buttes, LLC v. Commissioner, 147 T.C. No. 10 (2016). Id. at ___. Id. at ___. Id. at ___. Id. at ___. ■

69

■

c21

02/03/2017

21:27:32

Page 70

c23

02/03/2017

21:9:9

Page 71

C H A P T E R

T W E N T Y - T H R E E

Special Events, Corporate Sponsorships, and Donor-Advised Funds § 23.4

Donor-Advised Funds 71

§ 23.4 DONOR-ADVISED FUNDS p. 840, last line. Insert footnote: 77

On the basis of data for 2013, the second-largest charity in the United States is the Fidelity Charitable Gift Fund ($3,671,894,421), with the Schwab Charitable Fund in fourth place ($1,863,118,878), and the Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program in tenth place ($1,032,588,619) (XXVII Chron. of Phil. (No. 1) 20 (Oct. 23, 2014)).

■

71

■

c23

02/03/2017

21:9:9

Page 72

SPECIAL EVENTS, CORPORATE SPONSORSHIPS, AND DONOR-ADVISED FUNDS

■

72

■

p07

02/03/2017

9:7:40

Page 73

P A R T

S E V E N

Appendices Appendix H Monthly Federal Interest Rates Used in Valuing Partial Interests (IRC § 7520) Appendix I Deemed Rates of Return for Transfers to New Pooled Income Funds

p07

02/03/2017

9:7:40

Page 74

bapph

02/02/2017

18:59:57

Page 75

A P P E N D I X

H

*Monthly Federal Interest Rates Used in Valuing Partial Interests (IRC § 7520) Month

Rate (%) 10.6 10.0 9.8 10.2 10.0 9.8 9.6 9.8 10.2 10.6 10.6 11.0 10.6 10.4 10.2 10.6 10.6 10.2 9.8 9.6 9.6 9.6 9.6 9.6

July 1989 Aug. 1989 Sept. 1989 Oct. 1989 Nov. 1989 Dec. 1989 Jan. 1990 Feb. 1990 Mar. 1990 Apr. 1990 May 1990 June 1990 July 1990 Aug. 1990 Sept. 1990 Oct. 1990 Nov. 1990 Dec. 1990 Jan. 1991 Feb. 1991 Mar. 1991 Apr. 1991 May 1991 June 1991

Rev. Rul. 89-86 89-92 89-105 89-111 89-117 89-127 90-1 90-12 90-22 90-28 90-41 90-48 90-52 90-66 90-75 90-81 90-92 90-99 91-1 91-9 91-15 91-23 91-29 91-35

(Continued )

■

75

■

bapph

02/02/2017

18:59:57

Page 76

APPENDIX H

Month

Rate (%) 9.6 9.8 9.6 9.0 8.6 8.6 8.2 7.6 8.0 8.4 8.6 8.4 8.2 7.8 7.2 7.0 6.8 7.4 7.6 7.6 7.0 6.6 6.6 6.4 6.6 6.4 6.4 6.0 6.0 6.2 6.4 6.4 6.4 7.0 7.8 8.4 8.2 8.4 8.4 8.6 9.0

July 1991 Aug. 1991 Sept. 1991 Oct. 1991 Nov. 1991 Dec. 1991 Jan. 1992 Feb. 1992 Mar. 1992 Apr. 1992 May 1992 June 1992 July 1992 Aug. 1992 Sept. 1992 Oct. 1992 Nov. 1992 Dec. 1992 Jan. 1993 Feb. 1993 Mar. 1993 Apr. 1993 May 1993 June 1993 July 1993 Aug. 1993 Sept. 1993 Oct. 1993 Nov. 1993 Dec. 1993 Jan. 1994 Feb. 1994 Mar. 1994 Apr. 1994 May 1994 June 1994 July 1994 Aug. 1994 Sept. 1994 Oct. 1994 Nov. 1994

■

76

Rev. Rul. 91-39 91-41 91-48 91-53 91-57 91-62 92-1 92-8 92-13 92-23 92-33 92-39 92-50 92-59 92-67 92-87 92-90 92-104 93-1 93-10 93-19 93-23 93-32 93-39 93-42 93-51 93-55 93-64 93-71 93-82 94-1 94-9 94-15 94-22 94-29 94-36 94-44 94-50 94-55 94-61 94-67

■

bapph

02/02/2017

18:59:57

Page 77

APPENDIX H

Month

Rate (%) 9.4 9.6 9.6 9.4 8.8 8.6 8.2 7.6 7.2 7.6 7.6 7.4 7.2 6.8 6.8 6.6 7.0 7.6 8.0 8.2 8.2 8.0 8.0 8.0 7.6 7.4 7.6 7.8 7.8 8.2 8.2 8.0 7.6 7.6 7.6 7.4 7.2 7.2 6.8 6.8

Dec. 1994 Jan. 1995 Feb. 1995 Mar. 1995 Apr. 1995 May 1995 June 1995 July 1995 Aug. 1995 Sept. 1995 Oct. 1995 Nov. 1995 Dec. 1995 Jan. 1996 Feb. 1996 Mar. 1996 Apr. 1996 May 1996 June 1996 July 1996 Aug. 1996 Sept. 1996 Oct. 1996 Nov. 1996 Dec. 1996 Jan. 1997 Feb. 1997 Mar. 1997 Apr. 1997 May 1997 June 1997 July 1997 Aug. 1997 Sept. 1997 Oct. 1997 Nov. 1997 Dec. 1997 Jan. 1998 Feb. 1998 Mar. 1998

Rev. Rul. 94-73 95-3 95-13 95-20 95-27 95-39 95-42 95-48 95-51 95-62 95-67 95-73 95-79 96-6 96-14 96-15 96-19 96-24 96-27 96-34 96-37 96-43 96-49 96-52 96-57 97-1 97-7 97-10 97-17 97-19 97-24 97-27 97-30 97-36 97-41 97-44 97-49 98-4 98-7 98-11

(Continued ) ■

77

■

bapph

02/02/2017

18:59:58

Page 78

APPENDIX H

Month

Rate (%)

Rev. Rul.

6.8 6.8 7.0 6.8 6.8 6.6 6.2 5.4 5.4 5.6 5.6 5.8 6.4 6.2 6.4 7.0 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.4 7.4 7.4 8.0 8.2 8.0 7.8 8.0 8.0 7.6 7.6 7.4 7.2 7.0 6.8 6.2 6.2 6.0 5.8 6.0 6.2 6.0

98-18 98-23 98-28 98-33 98-36 98-43 98-50 98-52 98-57 99-2 99-8 99-11 99-17 99-21 99-25 99-29 99-32 99-32 99-41 99-45 99-48 2000-1 2000-9 2000-11 2000-19 2000-23 2000-28 2000-32 2000-38 2000-41 2000-45 2000-50 2000-54 2001-3 2001-7 2001-12 2001-17 2001-22 2001-27 2001-34 2001-36

Apr. 1998 May 1998 June 1998 July 1998 Aug. 1998 Sept. 1998 Oct. 1998 Nov. 1998 Dec. 1998 Jan. 1999 Feb. 1999 Mar. 1999 Apr. 1999 May 1999 June 1999 July 1999 Aug. 1999 Sept. 1999 Oct. 1999 Nov. 1999 Dec. 1999 Jan. 2000 Feb. 2000 Mar. 2000 Apr. 2000 May 2000 June 2000 July 2000 Aug. 2000 Sept. 2000 Oct. 2000 Nov. 2000 Dec. 2000 Jan. 2001 Feb. 2001 Mar. 2001 Apr. 2001 May 2001 June 2001 July 2001 Aug. 2001

■

78

■

bapph

02/02/2017

18:59:58

Page 79

APPENDIX H

Month

Rate (%)

Rev. Rul.

5.8 5.6 5.0 4.8 5.4 5.6 5.4 5.6 6.0 5.8 5.6 5.2 4.6 4.2 3.6 4.0 4.2 4.0 3.8 3.6 3.8 3.6 3.0 3.2 4.2 4.4 4.0 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.0 3.8 3.8 4.6 5.0 4.8 4.6 4.4 4.2 4.2

2001-43 2001-49 2001-52 2001-58 2002-2 2002-5 2002-10 2002-17 2002-25 2002-36 2002-40 2002-48 2002-53 2002-61 2002-74 2002-81 2003-5 2003-16 2003-26 2003-35 2003-45 2003-60 2003-71 2003-94 2003-101 2003-107 2003-114 2003-122 2004-2 2004-9 2004-25 2004-39 2004-44 2004-54 2004-66 2004-84 2004-69 2004-96 2004-102 2004-106

Sept. 2001 Oct. 2001 Nov. 2001 Dec. 2001 Jan. 2002 Feb. 2002 Mar. 2002 Apr. 2002 May 2002 June 2002 July 2002 Aug. 2002 Sept. 2002 Oct. 2002 Nov. 2002 Dec. 2002 Jan. 2003 Feb. 2003 Mar. 2003 Apr. 2003 May 2003 June 2003 July 2003 Aug. 2003 Sept. 2003 Oct. 2003 Nov. 2003 Dec. 2003 Jan. 2004 Feb. 2004 Mar. 2004 Apr. 2004 May 2004 June 2004 July 2004 Aug. 2004 Sept. 2004 Oct. 2004 Nov. 2004 Dec. 2004

(Continued ) ■

79

■

bapph

02/02/2017

18:59:58

Page 80

APPENDIX H

Month

Rate (%)

Rev. Rul.

4.6 4.6 4.6 5.0 5.2 4.8 4.6 4.8 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.4 5.4 5.2 5.4 5.6 5.8 6.0 6.0 6.2 6.0 5.8 5.6 5.8 5.6 5.6 5.8 5.6 5.6 5.6 6.0 6.2 5.8 5.2 5.2 5.0 4.4 4.2 4.0 3.4

2005-2 2005-8 2005-13 2005-23 2005-27 2005-32 2005-38 2005-54 2005-57 2005-66 2005-71 2005-77 2006-4 2006-7 2006-10 2006-22 2006-24 2006-29 2006-35 2006-39 2006-44 2006-50 2006-55 2006-61 2007-2 2007-9 2007-15 2007-23 2007-29 2007-36 2007-44 2007-50 2007-57 2007-63 2007-66 2007-70 2008-4 2008-9 2008-11 2008-20

Jan. 2005 Feb. 2005 Mar. 2005 Apr. 2005 May 2005 June 2005 July 2005 Aug. 2005 Sept. 2005 Oct. 2005 Nov. 2005 Dec. 2005 Jan. 2006 Feb. 2006 Mar. 2006 Apr. 2006 May 2006 June 2006 July 2006 Aug. 2006 Sept. 2006 Oct. 2006 Nov. 2006 Dec. 2006 Jan. 2007 Feb. 2007 Mar. 2007 Apr. 2007 May 2007 June 2007 July 2007 Aug. 2007 Sept. 2007 Oct. 2007 Nov. 2007 Dec. 2007 Jan. 2008 Feb. 2008 Mar. 2008 Apr. 2008

■

80

■

bapph

02/02/2017

18:59:59

Page 81

APPENDIX H

Month

Rate (%)

Rev. Rul.

3.2 3.8 4.2 4.2 4.2 3.8 3.6 3.4 2.4 2.0 2.4 2.6 2.4 2.8 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.0 3.4 3.2 3.2 3.4 3.2 2.8 2.6 2.4 2.0 2.0 1.8 2.4 2.8 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.8 2.4

2008-24 2008-28 2008-33 2008-43 2008-46 2008-49 2008-50 2008-53 2009-1 2009-5 2009-8 2009-10 2009-12 2009-16 2009-20 2009-22 2009-29 2009-33 2009-35 2009-38 2010-1 2010-6 2010-8 2010-11 2010-12 2010-15 2010-18 2010-19 2010-20 2010-24 2010-26 2010-29 2011-2 2011-4 2011-6 2011-10 2011-11 2011-13 2011-14

May 2008 June 2008 July 2008 Aug. 2008 Sept. 2008 Oct. 2008 Nov. 2008 Dec. 2008 Jan. 2009 Feb. 2009 Mar. 2009 Apr. 2009 May 2009 June 2009 July 2009 Aug. 2009 Sept. 2009 Oct. 2009 Nov. 2009 Dec. 2009 Jan. 2010 Feb. 2010 Mar. 2010 Apr. 2010 May 2010 June 2010 July 2010 Aug. 2010 Sept. 2010 Oct. 2010 Nov. 2010 Dec. 2010 Jan. 2011 Feb. 2011 Mar. 2011 Apr. 2011 May 2011 June 2011 July 2011

(Continued )

■

81

■

bapph

02/02/2017

18:59:59

Page 82

APPENDIX H

Month

Rate (%)

Rev. Rul.

2.2 2.0 1.4 1.4 1.6 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.6 1.2 1.2 1.0 1.0 1.2 1.0 1.2 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.4 1.2 1.2 1.4 2.0 2.0 2.4 2.0 2.0 2.2 2.4 2.2 2.2 2.4 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2

2011-16 2011-20 2011-22 2011-25 2011-31 2012-2 2012-7 2012-9 2012-11 2012-13 2012-15 2012-20 2012-21 2012-24 2012-28 2012-30 2012-31 2013-1 2013-3 2013-7 2013-9 2013-11 2013-12 2013-15 2013-13 2013-18 2013-21 2013-22 2013-26 2014-1 2014-6 2014-8 2014-12 2014-13 2014-16 2014-20 2014-19 2014-22 2014-26 2014-28

Aug. 2011 Sept. 2011 Oct. 2011 Nov. 2011 Dec. 2011 Jan. 2012 Feb. 2012 Mar. 2012 Apr. 2012 May 2012 June 2012 July 2012 Aug. 2012 Sept. 2012 Oct. 2012 Nov. 2012 Dec. 2012 Jan. 2013 Feb. 2013 Mar. 2013 Apr. 2013 May 2013 June 2013 July 2013 Aug. 2013 Sept. 2013 Oct. 2013 Nov. 2013 Dec. 2013 Jan. 2014 Feb. 2014 Mar. 2014 Apr. 2014 May 2014 June 2014 July 2014 Aug. 2014 Sept. 2014 Oct. 2014 Nov. 2014

■

82

■

bapph

02/02/2017

18:59:59

Page 83

APPENDIX H

Month

Rate (%)

Rev. Rul.

2.0 2.2 2.0 1.8 2.0 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.2 2.2 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.4 1.4 1.6 1.6 1.8 2.4 2.6

2014-31 2015-1 2015-3 2015-4 2015-7 2015-8 2015-14 2015-15 2015-16 2015-19 2015-21 2015-22 2015-25 2016-1 2016-4 2016-7 2016-9 2016-11 2016-13 2016-17 2016-18 2016-20 2016-25 2016-26 2016-27 2017-2 2017-4

Dec. 2014 Jan. 2015 Feb. 2015 Mar. 2015 Apr. 2015 May 2015 June 2015 July 2015 Aug. 2015 Sep. 2015 Oct. 2015 Nov. 2015 Dec. 2015 Jan. 2016 Feb. 2016 Mar. 2016 Apr. 2016 May 2016 June 2016 July 2016 Aug. 2016 Sep. 2016 Oct. 2016 Nov. 2016 Dec. 2016 Jan. 2017 Feb. 2017

■

83

■

bapph

02/02/2017

18:59:59

Page 84

bappi

02/03/2017

9:10:26

Page 85

A P P E N D I X

I

Deemed Rates of Return for Transfers to New Pooled Income Funds Year

Rate (%)

1989 (Jan.-Apr.) 1989 (May-Dec.) 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

9.0 9.4 9.8 9.8 9.8 9.4 8.4 6.8 7.2 7.2 7.2 6.8 6.6 6.6 6.6 4.0 4.8 3.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.6 2.8 1.8 1.8 1.4 1.2 1.2 ■

85

■

bappi

02/03/2017

9:10:26

Page 86

p08

02/03/2017

20:4:38

Page 87

T A B L E S

Cumulative Table of Cases Cumulative Table of IRS Revenue Rulings and Revenue Procedures Cumulative Table of IRS Private Determinations Cited in Text Cumulative Table of IRS Private Letter Rulings, Technical Advice Memoranda, and General Counsel Memoranda Table of Cases Discussed in Bruce R. Hopkins’ Nonprofit Counsel Cumulative Table of IRS Revenue Rulings Discussed in Bruce R. Hopkins’ Nonprofit Counsel Cumulative Table of Private Letter Rulings and Technical Advice Memoranda Discussed in Bruce R. Hopkins’ Nonprofit Counsel Table of Charitable Giving Law Tax Reform Proposals

p08

02/03/2017

20:4:38

Page 88

blast

02/03/2017

10:10:26

Page 89

Cumulative Table of Cases

.

Ballantine v. Tomlinson, § 8.3(b) Balsam Mountain Investments, LLC v. Commissioner, § 9.7(a) Barnes v. Commissioner, § 21.8 Bass v. Commissioner, § 3.1(a) Beaver v. Commissioner, § 10.14(b) Behrend v. United States, § 4.8 Belcher, Estate of v. Commissioner, § 6.2 Belk v. Commissioner, § 9.7 Belmont, Estate of, § 9.22A Bennett, Estate of v. Commissioner, § 8.6(a) Bergquist v. Commissioner, §§ 6.5, 10.1(a), 10.14, 10.14(a) Biagiotti v. Commissioner, § 9.1(a) Bialo v. Commissioner, § 9.9 Biedenharn Realty Co. v. United States, § 2.16(a) Bilingual Montessori Sch. of Paris, Inc. v. Commissioner, § 18.2 Bischel v. United States, § 3.1(f) Bixby v. Commissioner, § 3.8 Blackford, Estate of v. Commissioner, § 15.2(a) Blake v. Commissioner, §§ 3.1(c), 4.8 Bob Jones University v. United States, § 3.3(b) Boeshore, Estate of v. Commissioner, § 8.3(b) Bogardus v. Commissioner, § 3.1(c) Boltar, LLC v. Commissioner, § 10.1(a) Bond v. Commissioner, §§ 12.1(c), 21.5(c) Bond v. United States, § 3.1(e) Bonner v. City of Pritchard, § 8.3(b) Boone Operations Co., LLC v. Commissioner, §§ 9.19(a), 21.3(a)

Abood v. Detroit Board of Education, § 1.3(c) Addis v. Commissioner, §§ 17.6(a), 21.3(b) Akers v. Commissioner, § 10.1(a) Aldea v. Commissioner, § 21.8 Alioto v. Commissioner, § 6.13 Alisobhani v. Commissioner, § 18.2 Allen v. Commissioner, §§ 3.1(b), 3.1(e), 10.14(e) Alli v. Commissioner, § 21.5(a) Allis-Chalmers Mfg. Co. v. United States, §§ 3.1(c), 8.3(b) Alman v. Commissioner, §§ 3.1(a), 3.1(n) Alston v. United States, § 8.3(b) American Bible Soc’y v. Ritchie, § 14.8 American Council on Gift Annuities v. Ritchie, § 14.8 American Guidance Foundation, Inc. v. United States, § 3.4(a) American Party v. White, § 1.3(c) Andrus v. Burnet, § 6.7 Angell v. Commissioner, §§ 9.1(a), 10.14(e) Anonymous v. Commissioner, § 18.2 Anselmo v. Commissioner, §§ 9.1(a), 9.2, 10.1(a) Arbini v. Commissioner, § 10.1(a) Arbor Towers Assocs. v. Commissioner, § 10.1(a) Arceneaux v. Commissioner, § 3.1(c) Atkinson v. Commissioner, § 10.14(a) Atkinson, Estate of v. Commissioner, §§ 8.6(c), 12.1(a), 12.2(b), 12.2(e), 12.3(a), 12.3(e) Averyt v. Commissioner, § 21.3(a) Babilonia v. Commissioner, § 3.1(c)

■

89

■

blast

02/03/2017

10:10:26

Page 90

CUMULATIVE TABLE OF CASES

Carey v. Population Serv. Int’l, § 1.3(c) Carl J. Herzog Found., Inc. v. University of Bridgeport, § 10.4(d) Carpenter v. Commissioner, § 9.7(d) Carrie A. Maxwell Trust, Pasadena Methodist Foundation, Inc. v. Commissioner, § 3.3(b) Carroll v. Commissioner, § 9.7(d) Carrington v. Commissioner, § 4.8 Carter v. United States, §§ 3.1(a), 11.4 Casey v. Commissioner, § 10.1(a) Cassidy, Estate of v. Commissioner, § 15.2(a) Cavalaris v. Commissioner, §§ 9.15(b), 9.15(c), 9.15(d), 9.15(e), 9.16(a), 9.16(b), 9.16(c), 21.8 Cave Buttes, LLC v. Commissioner, §§ 9.19(a), 21.5(c) Chandler v. Commissioner, § 9.7(e) Channing v. United States, §§ 3.1(a), 3.1(c) Chapman v. Commissioner, § 3.4(a) Charleston Chair Co. v. United States, § 3.3(b) Chase v. Commissioner, § 6.14 Chiu v. Commissioner, § 9.2 Chou v. Commissioner, § 10.1(a) Christensen v. Commissioner, § 6.0 Christiansen, Estate of v. Commissioner, §§ 8.3(b), 9.31, 10.4(e) Chronicle Publ’g Co. v. Commissioner, § 7.18(a) Church of World Peace, Inc. v. Commissioner, § 9.7(b) Citizens & S. Nat’l Bank v. United States, § 3.1(a) Clause, Estate of v. Commissioner, § 21.5(c) Cleveland Board of Education v. LaFleur, § 1.3(c) Clopton, Estate of v. Commissioner, § 8.6(a)

Boser v. Commissioner, § 9.15(e) Bosque Canyon Ranch, LP v. Commissioner, § 9.7(a) Bowman v. Commissioner, § 10.3 Boy Scouts of America et al. v. Dale, § 1.3(c) Bradford, Estate of v. Commissioner, § 8.3(a) Bradford v. Commissioner, § 10.14(b) Bragg v. Commissioner, § 10.1(a) Braswell v. Commissioner, §§ 10.12, 10.14(b) Briggs v. Commissioner, §§ 9.22A, 10.4(b) Brigham v. Commissioner, § 10.1(a) Brinley v. Commissioner, § 3.1(a) Broad v. Commissioner, § 10.1(a) Brooks v. Commissioner, § 21.4 Brotman v. Commissioner, §§ 3.1(a), 3.1(c) Brotzler v. Commissioner, § 6.13 Brown v. Commissioner, §§ 3.1(a), 10.14(a), 21.8 Brown v. Socialist Workers ’74 Campaign Committee, § 1.3(c) Browning v. Commissioner, §§ 3.1(b), 9.19(a), 10.1(c)(9) Brownstone v. United States, § 9.22 Bruzewicz v. United States, § 21.5(c) Buckley v. Valeo, § 1.3(c) Buder v. United States, § 3.3(b) Buffalo Tool & Die Mfg. Co. v. Commissioner, § 10.1(a) Bullard, Estate of v. Commissioner, § 9.19(c) Burdick, Estate of v. Commissioner, § 8.6(b) Burke v. United States, §§ 3.1(a), 8.3(b) Burner v. Harmel, § 3.1(e) Burnet v. Sanford & Brooks Co., § 2.17 Butler v. Commissioner, § 10.1(c) Campbell v. Prothro, § 4.2 Camps Newfound/Owatonna, Inc. v. Town of Harrison, Maine et al., § 1.2 ■

90

■

blast

02/03/2017

10:10:26

Page 91

CUMULATIVE TABLE OF CASES

Crimi v. Commissioner, §§ 9.19(a), 21.3(a) Crosby Valve & Gage Co. v. Commissioner, §§ 3.1(a), 3.1(k) Crown Income Charitable Fund v. Commissioner, § 9.22 Daniel v. Commissioner, § 21.8 Danz v. Commissioner, § 10.3 Daoud v. Commissioner, § 10.14(b) D’Arcangelo v. Commissioner, §§ 12.1(c), 21.5(c) Dave Inv. Co. v. Commissioner, § 3.1(k) Davidson v. Commissioner, § 3.3(b) Davis v. Commissioner, § 3.1(a) Davis v. Commissioner, §§ 3.1(a), 9.19(a) Davis v. United States, §§ 3.1(a), 10.3, 10.5 Dayton v. Commissioner, § 10.4(a) DeJong v. Commissioner, §§ 3.1(a), 3.1(c), 3.1(n) Delbridge v. United States, § 8.7 Democratic Party v. Wisconsin, § 1.3(c) Denbigh, Estate of v. Commissioner, § 11.4 Dennis v. United States, § 10.1(a) Derby v. Commissioner, §§ 9.19(a), 10.14(a), 22.2 DiDinato v. Commissioner, § 21.3(a) Dieringer v. Commissioner, § 9.22A Dodge, Jr. v. Commissioner, § 6.13 Doherty v. Commissioner, § 10.1(a) Dolese v. Commissioner, § 10.10 Dorris v. Commissioner, § 21.8 Douglas v. Commissioner, §§ 3.1(a), 6.13 Dowell v. United States, § 3.1(n) Droz v. Commissioner, § 10.1(a) Dubin v. Commissioner, § 9.2 Duffy v. Birmingham, § 1.3(a) Dunlap v. Commissioner, §§ 9.7(c), 9.7(e), 10.1(a)

Cogan v. Commissioner, § 3.1(c) Cohan v. Commissioner, §§ 10.14(a), 21.3(d), 21.8 Coit v. Green, § 1.3(a) Coldwater Seafood Corp. v. Commissioner, § 10.14(a) Commissioner v. Bosch, Estate of, § 8.6(b) Commissioner v. Bradley, § 6.4 Commissioner v. Duberstein, §§ 3.1(a), 3.1(n) Commissioner v. Glenshaw Glass Co., §§ 2.2, 2.14, 2.14(d) Commissioner v. Hubert, Estate of, § 8.3(b) Commissioner v. LoBue, § 3.1(a) Commissioner v. North Am. Bond Trust, § 12.1(b) Commissioner v. Peterman, § 9.20 Commissioner v. Proctor, § 9.31 Commissioner v. Robertson, Estate of, § 8.7 Commissioner v. Sternberger, Estate of, §§ 10.4(e), 11.4 Commissioner v. Tellier, § 9.31 Commissioner v. Tufts, § 9.20 Considine v. Commissioner, § 3.1(c) Consolidated Investors Group v. Commissioner, §§ 3.1, 3.3, 9.19(a), 21.5(c) Continental Ill. Nat’l Bank & Trust Co. v. United States, §§ 8.6(a), 19.2(c) Cook v. Commissioner, § 3.1(a) Cooley v. Commissioner, § 10.1(c)(8) Cor v. Commissioner, § 21.3(a) Corn Prod. Ref. Co. v. Commissioner, § 2.16(a) Costello v. Commissioner, §§ 21.5(a), 31.1(a) Cousins v. Wigoda, § 1.3(c) Crane v. Commissioner, § 9.20 Crestar Bank v. IRS, § 8.3(b) ■

91

■

blast

02/03/2017

10:10:26

Page 92

CUMULATIVE TABLE OF CASES

First Trust Co. of St. Paul State Bank v. Reynolds, § 8.7 Flanagan v. United States, § 8.6(b) Found. Of Human Understanding v. United States, § 3.4(a) Fox v. Commissioner, § 4.8 Foxworthy, Inc. v. Commissioner, § 10.14(b) Frates v. Commissioner, § 9.1(a) Frazee v. United States, § 10.1(a) Freeland v. Commissioner, § 9.20 French v. Commissioner, § 21.3(a) Freytag v. Commissioner, § 10.14(a) Friedberg v. Commissioner, §§ 10.1(c), 21.5(c) Friedman v. Commissioner, §§ 4.8, 9.7(e), 21.3(a) Froh v. Commissioner, § 11.4 Fund for Anonymous Gifts, The v. United States, § 3.1(h) Gaerttner v. Commissioner, § 21.4 Gainer v. Commissioner, § 10.14(a) Gajewski v. Commissioner, § 10.14(b) Galloway v. United States, § 8.3(b) Gemperle v. Commissioner, § 9.7(b) Glass v. Commissioner, § 9.7(d) Global Relief Found., Inc. v. O’Neill, § 10.11 Glynn v. Commissioner, § 6.0 Goldman v. Commissioner, § 10.1(a) Goldman, Estate of v. Commissioner, § 10.14(a) Goldstein v. Commissioner, § 10.1(a) Goodwin v. United States, § 3.1(a) Gookin v. United States, § 3.1(a) Gorra v. Commissioner, §§ 9.7(a), 9.7(c), 9.7(e), 10.14(a) Graev v. Commissioner, § 10.4(a) Granan v. Commissioner, § 6.3 Grant v. Commissioner, §§ 9.14, 10.14(e) Graves v. Commissioner, § 3.1(c)

885 Inv. Co. v. Commissioner, 9.22A Durden v. Commissioner, § 21.3(a) Duval v. Commissioner, § 4.4(b) Dyer v. Commissioner, § 6.13 Ebben v. Commissioner, §§ 9.19(b), 9.20 Edwards v. Commissioner, § 3.1(c) Edwards v. Phillips, §§ 19.2(b), 19.2(c) Ehrhart v. Commissioner, § 3.1(c) 885 Inv. Co. v. Commissioner, §§ 9.22A, 10.4(b) Elliott v. Commissioner, § 21.8 Ellis First Nat’l Bank v. United States, § 15.2(a) Emanuelson v. United States, § 9.22 Engel v. Commissioner, §§ 10.1(a), 10.14(e) Erhart v. Commissioner, § 3.1(b) ErSelcuk v. Commissioner, § 18.2 ESB Financial v. United States, § 8.6(c) Esgar Corporation v. Commissioner, §§ 9.7(e), 10.1(c) Evans v. Commissioner, § 10.14(a) Evenchik, Estate of v. Commissioner, § 21.5(a) Fair v. Commissioner, §§ 9.19(a), 9.19(d), 10.1(a), 12.1(c), 21.5(c) Fausner v. Commissioner, § 3.1(a) Fehrs Fin. Co. v. Commissioner, § 21.5(c) Feistman v. Commissioner, § 3.1(c) Ferguson v. Commissioner, §§ 3.1(i), 6.5 Ferman v. Commissioner, § 10.1(a) Fernandez v. Commissioner, § 21.2 Ferrell v. Commissioner, § 9.1(a) Fifth Third Bank v. Firstar Bank, § 12.1(b) First Nat’l Bank v. Commissioner, § 10.9(a)

■

92

■

blast

02/03/2017

10:10:26

Page 93

CUMULATIVE TABLE OF CASES

Herman v. Commissioner, §§ 9.7(c), 9.7(d), 9.7(e) Herman v. United States, § 10.1(a) Hernandez v. Commissioner, §§ 3.1(a), 3.1(c) Herter v. Commissioner, § 18.2 Hewitt v. Commissioner, §§ 12.1(c), 21.5(c) Higbee v. Commissioner, § 10.14(a) Hilborn v. Commissioner, §§ 9.7(e), 10.1(a), 21.5(a) Hillsboro Nat’l Bank v. Commissioner, § 12.4(i) Hodgdon v. Commissioner, § 9.19(d) Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Dev. v. Ashcroft, § 10.11 Hopkins v. Hopkins, § 17.4 Howard v. Commissioner, § 3.1(a) Hubert, Estate of v. Commissioner, §§ 8.3(b), 8.6(b) Hudspeth v. United States, § 3.1(i) Hughes v. Commissioner, §§ 9.7(d), 10.1(c)(9) Humacid Co. v. Commissioner, § 4.8 Humes v. United States, § 10.4(e) Hunter v. Commissioner, § 4.4(a) Hutchinson Baseball Enter., Inc. v. Commissioner, § 3.3(b) Igberaese v. Commissioner, § 21.8 Ilfeld v. Hernandez, § 10.6 International Reform Federation v. District Unemployment Board, § 3.3(b) Investment Company v. Commissioner, § 10.3(b) Irby v. Commissioner, §§ 21.3(a), 21.3(b) Irwin v. Commissioner, §§ 3.1(c), 3.6 Ithaca Trust Co. v. United States, §§ 8.3(b), 8.7, 9.31, 11.3 Jackson v. Commissioner, § 10.14(a) Jackson, Estate of v. United States, § 8.6(c) Jacobs v. United States, § 3.1(h)

Great N. Nekoosa Corp. v. United States, § 9.7(a) Green v. Connally, § 1.3(a) Green v. United States, §§ 1.3, 4.3 Greene v. United States, §§ 3.1(i), 4.3, 4.8, 9.11, 9.23, 15.3 Greer v. Commissioner, § 6.5 Greer v. United States, § 8.7 Gregory, Estate of v. Commissioner, § 12.4(a) Griffin v. Commissioner, §§ 6.2, 9.7(e) Griffiths v. Helvering, § 18.3 Griswold v. Connecticut, § 1.3(c) Grosshandler v. Commissioner, § 10.14(b) Grove v. Commissioner, § 4.8 Grynberg v. Commissioner, § 7.7(b) Guardian Indus. v. Commissioner, § 2.16(a) Guest v. Commissioner, §§ 6.13, 9.20, 21.8 Gunkle v. Commissioner, § 3.1(b) Guren v. Commissioner, § 6.7 Haak v. United States, § 3.1(c) Hall, Estate of v. Commissioner, § 8.6(c) Hamilton v. Commissioner, § 3.1(c) Hamm v. Commissioner, § 9.31 Harbison v. United States, §§ 8.6(c), 8.7 Harding v. Commissioner, § 10.1(a) Harken v. Commissioner, § 9.1(a) Harrison v. Schaffner, § 3.1(i) Harwood v. Commissioner, § 9.31 Haught v. Commissioner, § 10.1(a) Hay v. Commissioner, § 9.19(a) Hearst Corp. v. United States, § 10.1(a) Heasley v. Commissioner, § 10.14(a) Helvering v. Bliss, § 3.3(b) Helvering v. Horst, § 3.1(i) Helvering v. Nat’l Grocery Co., § 10.1(a) Henslee v. Union Planters Nat’l Bank & Trust Co., § 8.7 ■

93

■

blast

02/03/2017

10:10:26

Page 94

CUMULATIVE TABLE OF CASES

Knott v. Commissioner, § 9.19(a) Koftinow v. Commissioner, § 9.1(a) Krapf, Jr. v. United States, § 10.1(a) Kunkel v. Commissioner, § 21.4 LaGarde v. Commissioner, §§ 6.0, 9.16(c) La Meres, Estate of v. Commissioner, § 3.1(a) Lamphere v. Commissioner, § 21.8 Larson v. Valente, § 1.3(c) Lee, Estate of v. Commissioner, § 10.14(a) Legg v. Commissioner, § 10.14(a) Leila G. Newhall Trust v. Commissioner, § 12.8 Leonard Pipeline Contractors v. Commissioner, § 10.1(a) Levine v. Commissioner, § 9.14 Lindberg v. United States, § 10.1(a) Lindsley v. Commissioner, § 4.4(a) Linzy v. Commissioner, § 21.3(a) Lio v. Commissioner, §§ 9.1(a), 10.1(a) Lippmann v. Commissioner, § 6.7 Lockett, Estate of v. Commissioner, § 8.7 Logan v. Commissioner, § 9.18 Lombardo v. Commissioner, § 3.1(c) Londen v. Commissioner, § 6.5 Lord v. Commissioner, § 21.5 Losch v. Commissioner, § 10.1(a) Lucky Stores v. Commissioner, §§ 9.3(a), 9.3(c) MacMichael v. Commissioner, § 9.16(c) Magnin, Estate of v. Commissioner, § 10.1(a) Magnolia Dev. Corp. v. Commissioner, § 4.8 Mann v. Commissioner, § 6.0 Manning v. Commissioner, § 10.1(a) Marcello v. Commissioner, § 10.14(a) Marine, Estate of v. Commissioner, § 8.7

Jacobson v. Commissioner, § 10.1(a) Jefferson Mills v. United States, § 3.1(c) Jennings v. Commissioner, §§ 3.3(a), 21.8 Jennings, Estate of v. Commissioner, § 11.4 Jersig v. Commissioner, § 9.16(c) Johnson, Estate of v. United States, §§ 8.3(b), 8.6(c) Johnson v. Commissioner, §§ 9.1(a), 10.1(a) Johnson v. United States, § 6.13 Jones v. Commissioner, §§ 3.1(f), 9.12 Jones v. United States, § 3.1(i) Jordan v. United States, § 6.1 Jorgenson v. Commissioner, § 21.5(c) Judicial Watch, Inc. v. Rossotti, § 2.0 Kalapodis v. Commissioner, § 3.2 Kaltreider v. Commissioner, § 2.16(a) Kamilche Co. v. United States, § 3.1(e) Kaplan v. Commissioner, §§ 6.13, 10.1(a), 10.2 Kaplun v. United States, § 19.2(c) Kaufman v. Commissioner, §§ 9.7(a), 9.7(d), 9.7(e), 10.14(a) Kellahan v. Commissioner, § 10.14(a) Kendrix v. Commissioner, §§ 21.3(a), 21.8 Kentucky Bar Foundation, Inc. v. Commissioner, § 3.3(b) King v. United States, § 9.31 Kingsrow Enter., Inc. v. Metromedia, Inc., § 6.6 Kinsey v. Commissioner, § 3.1(i) Kiva Dunes Conservation, LLC v. Commissioner, §§ 9.7(d), 10.1(a), 10.1(c)(9) Klauer v. Commissioner, §§ 4.18, 9.19(e) Klavan v. Commissioner, §§ 3.1(e), 10.1(a), 10.14(e) Knight v. Commissioner, § 9.31 ■

94

■

blast

02/03/2017

10:10:27

Page 95

CUMULATIVE TABLE OF CASES

Mortensen v. Commissioner, § 10.14(a) Mose & Garrison Siskin Mem’l Found., Inc. v. United States, § 17.5 Mount Mercy Associates v. Commissioner, § 3.1(c) Mountanos v. Commissioner, § 3.1(e) Mountanos v. Commissioner, 9.7(e) 1982 East, LLC v. Commissioner, 9.7(a), 9.7(e) Murphy v. Commissioner, §§ 3.1(c), 6.0, 10.14(a), 10.14(c), 21.8 Musgrave v. Commissioner, § 3.1(l) NAACP v. Alabama, § 1.3(c) NAACP v. Button, § 1.3(c) NAACP v. Claiborne Hardware Co., § 1.3(c) National Found., Inc. v. United States, § 3.1(h) National Savings & Trust Co. v. United States, § 19.2(c) Neely v. Commissioner, § 9.1(a) Nehring v. Commissioner, § 6.1 Neonatology Associates, P.A. v. Commissioner, § 10.14(a) Nestle Holdings, Inc. v. Commissioner, § 4.3 Newhouse, Estate of v. Commissioner, § 10.1(a) Nicoladis v. Commissioner, §§ 9.7(e), 10.1(a) Niedringhaus v. Commissioner, § 10.14(b) 1982 East, LLC v. Commissioner, §§ 9.7(a), 9.7(d), 9.7(e) O’Conner, Estate of v. Commissioner, § 16.4 Odd v. Commissioner, § 3.1(c) Oetting v. United States, § 8.6(c) Old Colony Trust Co. v. United States, §§ 19.2(a), 19.2(c)

Marquis v. Commissioner, § 3.1(a) Martin v. Machiz, § 4.8 Mast v. Commissioner, § 10.1(a) May v. Commissioner, § 2.5(a) McAllister, Estate of v. Commissioner, § 19.4(a) McCall v. United States, § 6.5 McCarthy v. United States, § 6.2 McCord v. Commissioner, §§ 9.26, 9.31, 10.1(a) McGlotten v. Connally, § 1.3(a) McLaughlin v. Commissioner, § 3.1(a) McLendon, Estate of v. Commissioner, § 11.4 McLennan v. United States, §§ 3.1(a), 3.1(b), 9.7(h) McMillan v. Commissioner, § 3.1(c) Mecox Partners LP v. United States, § 6.13A Mellon v. Commissioner, § 6.0 Merchants Bank v. Commissioner, § 8.7 Metzger, Estate of v. Commissioner, § 6.2 Meyer v. Nebraska, § 1.3(c) Miami Beach First National Bank v. United States, § 11.4 Miller v. IRS, § 3.1(a) Miner v. Commissioner, § 21.8 Minnesota Tea Co. v. Helvering, § 18.3 Minnick v. Commissioner, §§ 9.7(a), 9.7(d) Mitchell v. Commissioner, §§ 9.7(a), 9.7(d) Mitchell, Estate of v. Commissioner, § 10.1(a) Mobley v. Commissioner, § 10.14(b) Moffet v. Commissioner, § 11.4 Mohamed v. Commissioner, § 21.5(c) Moore v. East Cleveland, § 1.3(c) Morgan Guaranty Trust Co. v. United States, § 3.1(i) Morrison v. Commissioner, § 6.5 ■

95

■

blast

02/03/2017

10:10:27

Page 96

CUMULATIVE TABLE OF CASES

Peerless Indus., Inc. v. United States, § 4.9 Pennsylvania Co. for Insurance on Lives v. Helvering, § 3.3(b) Perlmutter v. Commissioner, § 3.1(a) Pescosolido v. Commissioner, § 9.9 Peterson Irrevocable Trust No. 2 v. Commissioner, § 3.1(i) Petter, Estate of v. Commissioner, §§ 9.31, 10.4(e) Petty v. Commissioner, § 6.7 Petzoldt v. Commissioner, § 10.14(b) Phinney v. Dougherty, § 3.3(b) Pierce v. Society of Sisters, § 1.3(c) Pleasant Summit Land Corp. v. Commissioner, § 2.16(a) Poldrugovaz v. Commissioner, § 3.1(c) Pollard v. Commissioner, § 3.1(c) Pollock v. Farmers’ Loan & Trust Co., § 1.3(a) Portland Golf Club v. Commissioner, § 1.3(a) Primus, in re, § 1.3(c) Prussner v. United States, § 21.5(c) Quilloin v. Walcott, § 1.3(c) Quinn v. Commissioner, § 10.14(b) Rauenhorst v. Commissioner, § 3.1(i) Rebecca K. Crown Income Charitable Fund v. Commissioner, § 16.4 Recklitis v. Commissioner, § 10.14(b) Reddert, Estate of v. United States, § 8.6(c) Reisner v. Commissioner, § 10.14(a) Rent Control Coalition for Fair Housing v. Berkeley, § 1.3(c) RERI Holdings I, LLC v. Commissioner, § 10.1(a) Rhoades v. Commissioner, § 9.2 Richardson v. Commissioner, §§ 3.3(b), 6.5 Richie v. American Council on Gift Annuities, § 5.9 Richmond v. United States, § 9.7(e)

Olmstead v. United States, § 1.3(c) Olson v. United States, § 10.1(a) O’Neil v. United States, § 6.7 Oppewal v. Commissioner, §§ 3.1(a), 3.1(c) O’Reilly v. Commissioner, §§ 10.1(a), 11.4 Orphanos, Estate of v. Commissioner, § 19.2(c) Orth v. Commissioner, §§ 9.1(a), 10.1(a) Osborne v. Commissioner, §§ 9.7(h), 10.1(a) Ottawa Silica v. United States, § 3.1(c) Ould v. Washington Hospital for Foundlings, § 3.3(b) Oxford Orphanage, Inc. v. United States, § 8.6(c) Ozee v. American Council on Gift Annuities, § 14.8 Page v. Commissioner, § 3.1(c) Palmer v. Commissioner, § 4.8 Palmer, Estate of v. Commissioner, § 10.1(a) Palmer Ranch Holdings Ltd. v. Commissioner, §§ 3.1(a), 9.7(a), 10.1(a) Palumbo, Estate of v. United States, § 8.3(b) Parker v. Commissioner, §§ 3.1(e), 10.1(a), 10.14(e) Parks v. Commissioner, § 10.1(a) Parshall Christian Order v. Commissioner, §§ 3.1(j), 3.4(a) Partita Partners, LLC v. United States, § 9.7(c) Pasqualini v. Commissioner, §§ 2.16(a), 4.4(a), 10.1(a) Patel v. Commissioner, §§ 3.1(c), 10.14(a) Patton v. Commissioner, § 10.14(b) Peace v. Commissioner, § 10.5 ■

96

■

blast

02/03/2017

10:10:27

Page 97

CUMULATIVE TABLE OF CASES

Sandler v. Commissioner, §§ 4.4(a), 10.1(a) Satullo v. Commissioner, § 9.7(d) Sawade, Estate of v. Commissioner, § 6.5 Schachter v. Commissioner, § 9.2 Scheffres v. Commissioner, § 3.1(c) Scheidelman v. Commissioner, §§ 3.1(n), 9.7(c), 9.7(e), 10.1(c), 10.14(a), 21.5(c) Schmidt v. Commissioner, § 9.7(a) Schoellkopf v. United States, § 19.2(c) Schrimsher v. Commissioner §§ 21.3(a), 21.3(b) Schwab v. Commissioner, §§ 4.3, 10.1(a) Secretary of State of Maryland v. Joseph H. Munson Co., Inc., § 25.8 Sedam v. United States, § 3.1(n) Seed v. Commissioner, §§ 3.1(a), 9.16(c) Seldin v. Commissioner, § 3.1(c) Sergeant v. Commissioner, § 10.1(a) S & H, Inc. v. Commissioner, § 2.16(a) Seventeen Seventy Sherman Street, LLC v. Commissioner, § 9.7(e) Shapiro, Estate of v. Commissioner, § 11.4 Sheffels v. United States, § 9.16(c) Shelton v. Tucker, § 1.3(c) Sheppard v. United States, §§ 4.3, 4.8 Short v. Commissioner, § 21.8 Sierra Club, Inc. v. Commissioner, § 3.5(g) Signom v. Commissioner, §§ 3.1(a), 3.1(c) Silver, Estate of v. United States, § 19.2(a) Silverman v. Commissioner, § 10.1(a) Simmons v. Commissioner, §§ 9.7, 9.7(c), 9.7(d), 9.7(e), 21.3(a), 21.5(c) Singer Co. v. United States, § 3.1(c)

Riggs v. Del Drago, § 8.3(a) Riley v. National Federation of the Blind of North Carolina, Inc., § 25.8 Rimmer v. Commissioner, § 10.1(a) Rio Properties, Inc. v. Rio Int’l Interlink, § 21.3(a) Ritchie v. American Council on Gift Annuities, §§ 5.9, 14.8 Roark v. Commissioner, §§ 17.6(a), 21.3(b) Roberts v. United States Jaycees, § 1.3(c) Robertson v. United States, § 3.1(a) Robinette v. Helvering, § 11.4 Robinson, Estate of v. Commissioner, § 10.14(a) Robson v. Commissioner, § 10.1(a) Rockefeller v. Commissioner, § 10.3 Rolfs v. Commissioner, § 3.1(c) Roman v. Commissioner, § 21.8 Rome I Ltd. v. Commissioner, § 9.7(g) Roney, Estate of v. Commissioner, § 8.3(b) Rosen v. Commissioner, § 12.4(i) Rothman v. Commissioner, §§ 9.7(e), 21.5(c) Roughen v. Commissioner, § 6.0 Rowley v. Commissioner, § 10.14(b) RP Golf, LLC v. Commissioner, §§ 9.7, 21.3(a), 21.3(b) Ruddel v. Commissioner, § 3.1(c) Runyon v. McCrary, § 1.3(c) Russell v. Yale University, § 10.4(d) Ryan v. Commissioner, §§ 3.1(a), 3.1(c) S. C. Johnson & Son, Inc. v. Commissioner, §§ 3.1(h), 4.8 Saltzman v. Commissioner, §§ 9.15, 9.15(c), 9.15(f) Sammons v. Commissioner, § 9.31 Samuel P. Hunt Trust v. United States, § 12.1(a) ■

97

■

blast

02/03/2017

10:10:27

Page 98

CUMULATIVE TABLE OF CASES

Street, Estate of v. Commissioner, § 8.3(b) Strock, Estate of v. United States, § 8.6(b) Stubbs v. United States, § 3.1(c) Styles v. Friends of Fiji, § 10.4(d) Summers v. Commissioner, § 3.1(a) Suna v. Commissioner, § 3.1(a) SWF Real Estate, LLC v. Commissioner, § 10.1(a) Symington v. Commissioner, §§ 9.7, 10.1(a) Tallal v. Commissioner, §§ 10.1(a), 10.14(e) Tamulis, Estate of v. Commissioner, §§ 8.6(c), 12.1(c), 21.2(e) Tatum v. Commissioner, §§ 4.8, 8.2(n) Taylor v. Commissioner, §§ 9.14, 21.8 Taynton v. United States, § 3.1(n) Tennessee Baptist Children’s Homes, Inc. v. United States, §§ 3.1(j), 3.4(a) Tempel v. Commissioner, § 9.7(e) Terre Haute First Nat’l Bank v. United States, § 8.3(b) Terrence Investments, Ltd., Deerbrook Construction, Inc. v. Commissioner, § 10.1(a) Thomason v. Commissioner, §§ 10.5, 18.3 Thompson v. Commissioner, § 9.19(a) Tidler v. Commissioner, § 6.13 Tobjy v. Commissioner, § 18.2 Todd v. Commissioner, §§ 4.5(b), 10.1(a), 12.1(c), 21.5(c) Transamerica Corp. v. United States, §§ 3.1(a), 3.1(e) Trinidad v. Sagrada Orden de Predicadores de la Provincia del Santisimo Rosario de Filipinas, § 1.3(a) Tripp v. Commissioner, §§ 3.3(b), 10.5

Sklar v. Commissioner, § 3.1(c) Skripak v. Commissioner, §§ 3.1(b), 3.2, 9.1(a), 10.1(a) Smith v. Commissioner, §§ 6.6, 9.15(c), 21.2, 21.3(a), 21.5(c), 21.7 Smith v. Organization of Foster Families, § 1.3(c) Smithers v. St. Luke’s-Roosevelt Hospital Center, § 10.4(d) Snyder v. Commissioner, §§ 3.1(b), 3.1(e), 10.1(a), 10.14(e) Sound Health Association v. Commissioner, § 3.3(b) South Carolina v. Baker, § 1.3(a) Spiegel, Estate of v. Commissioner, § 6.2 Spies v. United States, § 10.14(a) St. Louis Union Trust Co. v. United States, § 1.3(a) St. Martin Evangelical Lutheran Church v. South Dakota, § 3.4(a) Stanley v. Georgia, § 1.3(c) Stanley v. Illinois, § 1.3(c) Stanley Works, The v. Commissioner, §§ 9.7(e), 10.1(a) Stark v. Commissioner, §§ 9.19(a), 10.1(a) Stark v. United States, § 11.4 Starkey, Estate of v. United States, § 8.6(a) State of South Carolina v. Baker, § 1.3(a) State Police Ass’n v. Commissioner, §§ 3.5(f), 10.2 Stephenson v. Commissioner, § 10.14(b) Stjernholm v. Commissioner, § 6.0 Stone v. Commissioner, § 10.14(b) Story III v. Commissioner, § 6.7 Stotler v. Commissioner, § 10.1(a) Strasburg v. Commissioner, § 10.1(a) Strasser v. Commissioner, § 10.1(a)

■

98

■

blast

02/03/2017

10:10:27

Page 99

CUMULATIVE TABLE OF CASES

Village of Schaumberg v. Citizens for a Better Environment, § 25.8 Villareale v. Commissioner, § 21.3(a) Viralam v. Commissioner, §§ 3.3(a), 10.14(a) Wachter v. Commissioner, § 9.7(a) Waco Lodge No. 166, Benevolent & Protective Order of Elks v. Commissioner, § 10.14(a) Wall v. Commissioner, §§ 9.7(a), 9.7(d) Walz v. Tax Commission, § 1.3(a) Wandry v. Commissioner, § 9.31 Waranch v. Commissioner, § 9.19(a) Ward v. Commissioner, § 9.31 Wardwell, Estate of v. Commissioner, §§ 3.1(a), 3.1(c) Warfield v. Bestgen, § 14.9 Warren, Estate of v. Commissioner, § 8.6(b) Watson v. Commissioner, § 6.8 Wegner v. Lethert, § 3.1(c) Weiner v. Commissioner, §§ 17.6(a), 21.3(b) Weingarden v. Commissioner, § 1.5 Weiss v. Commissioner, §§ 3.1(e), 10.1(a), 10.14(e) Weitz v. Commissioner, §§ 3.2, 10.1(a) Welch v. Helvering, §§ 2.16(a), 21.8 Well v. Commissioner, § 3.1(a) Wells Fargo Bank v. United States, §§ 8.6(c), 8.7 Welti v. Commissioner, § 18.2 Wendy L. Parker Rehabilitation Found., Inc. v. Commissioner, § 3.3(b) West Coast Ice Co. v. Commissioner, § 10.14(a) Whitaker v. Commissioner, § 3.1(a) White v. Brodrick, § 4.2 Whitehouse Hotel Limited Partnership v. Commissioner, § 9.7(e)

Trompeter, Estate of v. Commissioner, § 10.1(a) Trout Ranch LLC v. Commissioner, §§ 10.1(a), 12.4(l) True v. United States, § 4.8 Turner v. Commissioner, § 9.7(d) Tuttle v. United States, § 17.3 U.S. CB Radio Ass’n, No. 1, Inc. v. Commissioner, § 23.2 United Cancer Council, Inc. v. Commissioner, § 23.1(c) United States v. American Bar Endowment, §§ 3.1(a), 3.1(n) United States v. American College of Physicians, § 3.5(a) United States v. Bajakajian, § 10.14(a) United States v. Benedict, § 9.31 United States v. Boyle, § 10.14(a) United States v. Correll, § 9.15 United States v. Dean, §§ 10.4(b), 11.4 United States v. Freeman, § 10.14 United States v. Knapp Brothers Shoe Mfg. Corp., § 3.1(k) United States v. Mitchell, § 3.1(e) United States v. Parker, § 10.1(a) United States v. Proprietors of Social Law Library, § 3.3(b) United States v. Provident Trust Co., § 10.4(b) United States v. Ryerson, § 17.1 United States v. Stapf, § 8.3(b) United States v.Windsor, § 2.25 Unvert v. Commissioner, § 12.4(i) Urbauer v. Commissioner, § 3.1(c) Van Dusen v. Commissioner, §§ 3.3(a), 9.15, 9.15(c), 21.5(c) Vanicek v. Commissioner, § 21.8 Van Zelst v. Commissioner, § 10.1(a) Veterans of Foreign Wars, Dep’t of Mich. v. Commissioner, § 22.1 Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States, Dep’t of Mo., Inc. v. United States, § 22.1 ■

99

■

blast

02/03/2017

10:10:27

Page 100

CUMULATIVE TABLE OF CASES

Wien Consol. Airlines, Inc. v. Commissioner, § 10.4(e) Winn v. Commissioner, § 18.2 Winokur v. Commissioner, §§ 6.0, 8.2(k), 9.1(a), 9.1(b), 15.2(a) Winters v. Commissioner, § 3.1(a) Wisconsin v. Yoder, § 1.3(c) Witt, Estate of v. Fahs, § 6.2 Wolfe v. Commissioner, § 3.1(a) Wood, Estate of v. Commissioner, § 3.1(c) Woodbury v. Commissioner, § 7.7(b) Wood-Mosaic Co. v. United States, § 6.14 Woods v. Commissioner, § 6.0

■

Woodworth, Estate of v. Commissioner, § 10.4(b) Wortmann v. Commissioner, § 10.1(a) Wright v. Commissioner, § 21.4 Wurtsbaugh v. Commissioner, § 6.0 Yoshihara v. Commissioner, § 3.1(c) Young v. Commissioner, § 3.1(a) Zabel v. United States, § 8.3(b) Zablocki v. Redhail, § 1.3(c) Zarlengo v. Commissioner, §§ 6.13A, 9.7(a) Zavadil v. Commissioner, § 3.2 Zeidler v. Commissioner, § 21.8 Zmuda v. Commissioner, § 10.1(a)

100

■

blast01

02/03/2017

9:16:59

Page 101

Cumulative Table of IRS Revenue Rulings and Revenue Procedures Revenue Rulings

Sections

Revenue Rulings

Sections

53–194 54–465 54–549 54–580 55–4 55–138 55–192 55–275 55–410 55–531 56–403 56–508 56–509 57–449 57–462 58–240 58–261 58–279 58–372 59–160 59–195 60–367 61–46 61–66 62–113 63–252 64–174 64–175 64–182 65–298 66–79 66–302 67–30 67–137 67–236 67–246 67–376 67–446 68–69 68–113 68–174 68–296 68–432 68–484

10.3 6.2 3.1(a) 3.1(a) 9.15 4.2 10.9(a) 4.2, 10.3 4.9, 6.0 4.2 3.3(b) 9.15, 9.15(f) 9.15 3.3(b) 9.14 9.15(b), 9.15(c) 15.3 9.15 17.3 9.15 17.3 3.3(b) 9.15, 9.15(a) 10.5 10.5, 18.4 18.3, 18.5 3.3(b) 3.3(b) 23.1(c) 3.3(b) 18.4 11.4 9.17 3.1(g) 9.14 3.1(c), 22.1, 23.1(a) 6.2 3.1(d) 4.2 9.14 6.7 3.1(k) 3.1(a), 21.3(a) 10.5

68–504 69–56 69–80 69–90 69–93 69–545 69–573 70–452 70–519 71–135 71–216 72–194 72–243 72–395 73–571 73–597 73–610 74–19 74–39 74–149 74–224 74–241 74–246 74–322 74–481 74–523 74–572 75–65 75–66 75–74 75–196 75–348 76–8 76–38 76–89 76–96 76–143 76–165 76–196 76–204 76–232 76–244 76–270 76–273

3.3(b) 8.3(b) 20.1 3.1(d) 6.0 3.3(b), 3.4(a) 3.3(b) 8.6(a), 12.2(k) 9.15 9.15(c) 6.3 10.4(a) 12.3(e), 12.7 12.9, 12.12(b) 12.1(a) 9.15 12.1(a) 12.3(a) 12.3(f) 12.3(e) 3.4(a) 15.2(a) 3.1(d) 9.17 12.3(h) 19.2(c) 3.4(a) 18.4 3.1(d) 3.3(b) 3.3(b) 6.0 12.2(e), 12.3(e) 6.3, 6.7 9.15 3.1(j) 9.23, 17.3 15.2(a) 13.2(h) 3.3(b) 3.1(c) 3.3(b) 12.2(d), 12.3(d) 3.7

■

101

■

blast01

02/03/2017

9:16:59

Page 102

CUMULATIVE TABLE OF IRS REVENUE RULINGS AND REVENUE PROCEDURES

Revenue Rulings

Sections

Revenue Rulings

Sections

76–280 76–310 76–357 76–371 76–416 76–440 76–467 76–543 77–73 77–160 77–169 77–217 77–246 77–275 77–285 77–305 77–374 77–454 77–471 77–491 78–38 78–80 78–84 78–85 78–95 78–101 78–105 78–152 78–181 78–189 78–197 78–303 78–309 79–81 79–243 79–249 79–256 79–315 79–323 79–368 79–419 79–428 80–38 80–69 80–77 80–80 80–99 80–104 80–123 80–186

12.1(a) 12.3(a) 15.2(a) 12.2(g), 12.3(g) 3.4(a) 3.4(a) 12.3(a) 15.2(a) 12.2(d), 12.3(d) 4.9 15.2(a) 7.7(b) 3.3(b) 16.9 12.2(d), 12.3(d) 15.2(a) 8.6(a), 12.12, 12.12(k) 11.4 12.1(a) 8.6(b) 6.3, 6.7 9.17 3.3(b) 3.3(b) 3.4(a) 16.5 12.2(d), 12.3(d), 13.2(b) 8.6(b) 6.9 3.1(a) 3.1(i), 4.8 15.2(b) 3.4(a) 10.5, 13.2(b), 13.2(c) 12.2(e) 10.4(a) 4.4(a) 3.1(b) 3.1(d) 12.2(g), 12.3(g) 4.4(a) 12.2(a), 12.3(a) 12.2(g), 12.3(g) 10.1(a) 3.1(c), 3.1(d) 11.4 9.17 12.3(a) 12.1(a), 12.9 12.4(a)

80–200 80–233 80–286 80–335 81–163 81–282 81–284 81–307 82–38 82–105 82–128 82–165 82–197 82–216 83–19 83–29 83–104 83–158 84–1 84–61 84–97 85–8 85–13 85–20 85–23 85–49 85–57 85–69 85–99 85–184 86–41 86–60 86–63 87–37 87–127 88–27 88–37 88–81 88–82 89–31 89–51 89–90 90–103 92–47 92–48 92–57 92–107 92–108 93–8 96–3

3.3(b) 10.1(a) 3.3(b) 6.4 9.20 9.23 3.3(b) 3.1(d) 13.5, 13.7 3.7 12.2(e), 12.9 12.1(a), 12.2(e), 12.9 6.9 8.2(k) 12.1(a) 9.3(c) 3.1(c) 15.2(a) 9.14 9.15, 10.3 15.2(a) 9.3(c) 2.7 13.11 8.6(a), 15.2(a) 16.2 13.5 13.2(b) 10.1(c)(8) 10.2, 10.9(a) 9.31 8.2(k) 3.1(a), 3.1(c) 15.2(a) 13.7 16.3 9.23, 15.3 12.1(a), 12.9 16.7 8.6(b) 9.13(b), 9.18 9.7(g) 13.5, 13.7 9.22(a) 12.1(a) 12.1(a) 13.9(a) 3.1(h), 13.9(b) 3.1(h), 13.9(b) 11.4

■

102

■

blast01

02/03/2017

9:17:0

Page 103

CUMULATIVE TABLE OF IRS REVENUE RULINGS AND REVENUE PROCEDURES

Revenue Rulings

Sections

Revenue Rulings

Sections

96–11 96–38 98–61 2000–43 2002–20 2002–67 2003–28

6.16 13.9(b) 8.2(h), 8.5 6.15 12.2(d), 12.3(d) 9.27(d), 10.1(c)(3), 21.3(a) 9.6(a), 9.23, 9.28, 10.1(c), 10.4(a), 15.3

2003–43 2003–123 2004–5 2005–28 2006–58 2008–16 2008–41

6.15 9.7, 9.22(a) 9.22(a) 3.1(j) 12.4(k) 6.15 12.6

Revenue Procedures

82–23 82–61 88–3 88–53 88–54 90–12 91–3 92–94 96–15 97–52 97–58 98–61 99–3 2002–70 2003–53 2003–54 2003–55 2003–56 2003–57 2003–58 2003–59 2003–60 2003–76 2003–85 2005–24 2005–52

Revenue Procedures

Sections

22.3 9.15(a) 13.5 13.5 13.5 22.1 12.9 20.4(f) 10.1(b) 3.1(d) 9.14 2.6, 2.8(a), 2.8(c), 2.15 13.5 2.5(c), 2.6, 2.7(a), 2.7(c), 2.15, 8.2(h), 8.5 12.9 12.8 12.8 12.8 12.8 12.8 12.8 12.9 9.17 2.15(c) 12.2(d), 12.3(d) 12.9

■

2005–53 2005–54 2005–55 2005–56 2005–57 2005–58 2005–59 2006–50 2006–53 2007–45 2007–46 2008–4 2008–45 2008–46 2008–66 2009–54 2010–40 2010–51 2011–33 2014–1 2014–3 2014–4 2014–9 2015–53 2016–42

103

■

Sections

12.9 12.9, § 12.12(b) 12.9 12.9 12.9 12.9 12.9 9.30 App. E, App. F, App. G 16.1 16.1 12.7 16.6 16.6 2.5(c), 2.7(c), 2.15, App. E, App. F, App. G 9.17 2.6, 2.7(a), 8.2(h), App. E, App. F, App. G 9.17 3.7 11.3 12.7, 13.5 12.7 3.7 2.5(c), 2.6, 2.7(a), 2.7(c), 2.15(a), 8.2(h) 12.2(k)

blast01

02/03/2017

9:17:0

Page 104

blast02

02/03/2017

9:18:5

Page 105

Cumulative Table of IRS Private Determinations Cited in Text

Private Letter Rulings and Technical Advice Memoranda

Sections

7802001 7842062 7903079 7938001 7944054 8015017 8110016 8202137 8204220 8333019 8408051 8408054 8417019 8420002 8526015 8535019 8536061 8601033 8601041 8605003 8605008 8608042 8616020 8626065 8705041 8706011 8714050 8725058 8736020 8745013 8748001 8817004 8822035 8826012 8832003 8836033 8836040 8839029

6.14 12.9 10.9(a) 19.2(c) 10.9(a) 15.2(a) 15.2(b) 15.2(b) 15.3 15.3 18.3 18.3 10.9(a) 6.8 9.20 15.3 12.10 11.2 13.5 8.7(c) 9.7 3.1(c) 13.7 7.18(a) 10.9(a) 6.2 18.3 3.1(n) 16.3 12.1(a) 19.2(c) 8.6(c) 12.3(a) 10.9(a) 22.1 3.1(h) 10.9(a) 18.3

Private Letter Rulings and Technical Advice Memoranda 8930001 9004030 9015049 9037021 9042043 9101010 9110016 9118012 9119011 9143030 9147007 9147040 9152036 9204036 9205031 9233053 9237020 9240017 9243043 9247018 9247030 9250041 9252023 9303007 9309029 9309034 9311018 9316051 9321057 9322025 9322031 9327006 9329017 9332033 9335017 9335022 9335057

■

105

■

Sections 4.4(a) 3.1(c) 9.20 3.3(a) 14.3(b) 12.2(d), 12.3(d) 17.4 3.1(c) 3.1(c) 12.3(d) 3.1(g), 23.3(a) 17.4 15.3 12.3(g) 12.3(f) 12.10 9.10(c) 12.1(a) 9.15 4.5(b) 3.3(b), 10.5 3.1(h) 7.14, 12.3(d), 12.3(e) 7.6(a), 7.7(a), 8.2(a), 8.2(g), 8.2(k), 10.4(b), 15.3 12.9 12.9 13.2(e), 13.5 3.3(b) 9.3(b) 8.7 12.1(a) 8.6(c) 15.2 13.3(a) 9.12, 10.7 10.9(a) 6.9

blast02

02/03/2017

9:18:5

Page 106

CUMULATIVE TABLE OF IRS PRIVATE DETERMINATIONS CITED IN TEXT

Private Letter Rulings and Technical Advice Memoranda 9338015 9340043 9341008 9342026 9350009 9351001 9403030 9405003 9406013 9412004 9413020 9417005 9419021 9423001 9424040 9431001 9434018 9436035 9443001 9443004 9447028 9452020 9452026 9501004 9504012 9506015 9511007 9512016 9516047 9522021 9531003 9547004 9550026 9623035 9631004 9631005 9633006 9633007 9634019 9635001 9642020 9642037 9652004 9652011 9702040 9703028

Sections

Private Letter Rulings and Technical Advice Memoranda

Sections

3.7 12.3(f) 12.1(a) 12.9 3.1(g) 8.3(b) 12.3 3.1(a) 13.2(b) 13.5 12.3(h) 12.1(a) 12.1(a), 12.3(f) 3.1(c) 4.5(b) 9.19(a) 12.3(a) 13.7 3.6 10.4(b) 3.1(d) 4.8 4.8, 12.4(c) 12.4(a) 12.4(b) 12.3(a) 12.4(d) 12.4(e) 3.3(b) 12.10 8.7 12.1(b) 9.22(b) 3.1(j), 6.11, 10.9, 21.1(b) 3.3(b) 9.3(b) 12.1(a) 12.1(a) 9.10(c) 3.5(g) 13.2(e), 13.11 13.5 3.5(g) 12.1(a) 3.3(b) 20.1

9704028 9714010 9718030 9728022 9729024 9733015 9734057 9741047 9743004 9804036 9818009 9818027 9818042 9821029 9828001 9829053 9838028 9839024 199914040 199925043 199927010 199929050 199933029 199939021 199952071 199952035 200003005 200003013 200003059 200004001 200012061 200020060 200029031 200029033 200034019 200035014 200037053 200038050 200045038 200052026 200052035 200108012 200108035 200112022 200116007 200119005

3.3(b) 12.10 12.2(d), 12.3(d) 9.8(c) 3.1(d) 10.9(a) 16.3 3.3(b) 12.10 12.1(a), 12.3(a), 12.4(i) 9.10(c) 12.1(a) 8.2(h) 12.1(a) 6.9 10.9(a) 9.10(c) 12.2(d), 12.3(d) 3.3(b) 19.2(a) 3.7 10.9(a) 9.7(e), 10.9(a) 10.9(a) 12.3(f) 12.3(a), 12.5(a) 9.3(b), 9.3(d) 10.9(a) 3.7 3.1(c) 3.1(c) 17.6(b) 12.4(b) 3.7 12.2(e) 12.1(b) 3.1(j) 12.3(j) 12.1(b) 12.3(h), 12.4(i) 12.2(e) 9.23 12.3(a) 4.5(b) 8.3(b) 4.4(b), 7.18(a)

■

106

■

blast02

02/03/2017

9:18:5

Page 107

CUMULATIVE TABLE OF IRS PRIVATE DETERMINATIONS CITED IN TEXT

Private Letter Rulings and Technical Advice Memoranda

Sections

200122025 200124010 200127023 200142011 200143011 200202032 200202034 200203034 200204022 200205008 200208019 200208039 200209020 200213021 200218008 200219012 200223013 200228001 200229046 200230005 200233005 200234019 200241044 200243050 200243057 200245058 200250029 200251010 200252026 200304025 200306002 200307084 200310024 200311033 200312003 200324023 200329031 200414011 200418002 200437040 200445023

8.2(k), 15.3 12.7 12.3(e) 10.4(b) 9.7 10.4(c) 4.9, 12.1(b) 12.1(b) 12.3(d) 10.1(a), 12.3(j) 6.16, 9.6 12.7 17.3, 17.4 3.1(c) 12.4(i) 12.4(i) 9.1(b), 9.1(c), 15.3 3.1(n) 12.1(b) 9.27(d), 10.2, 21.3(a) 12.4(i) 9.10(b) 4.9 3.1(m) 9.27(d), 10.1(c)(3), 10.14(e) 12.4(b) 10.5 12.4(i) 12.4(i) 12.7 8.3(b) 3.1(a), 3.1(m) 12.7 3.4(b) 6.10 8.2(k), 12.3(d) 13.2(e) 12.3(i), 12.11(c) 8.3(b) 3.4(a) 3.1(h), 8.2(k)

■

Private Letter Rulings and Technical Advice Memoranda

Sections

200525014 200530007 200534022 200601003 200610017 200614032 200617026 200702031 200703037 200728026 200735027 200746010 200845007 200922013 200931059 200945022 201004022 201032002 201040021 201043041 201048045 201109030 201110020 201113036 201117005 201126007 201132011 201216045 201222004 201222005 201222006 201245025 201318003 201325018 201420010 201421023 201437004 201450016 201514010 201539032 201611002 201616002 201636042

12.7 6.10 3.1(n) 12.4(i) 9.23 12.7 12.2(g) 4.5(b) 12.4(j) 12.6 12.8 8.6(c) 7.18(a) 12.7 18.4 3.1(j) 8.6(b) 8.2(n) 12.4(l), 12.10 12.8 9.7(b) 9.7(b) 9.7(b) 18.5 12.9 12.9 4.3 16.5 9.7(h) 13.6, 13.8 13.6, 13.8 3.1(c) 4.4(c) 12.7 12.4(m) 16.7 3.1(n) 13.7 9.7(b) 18.4 9.22(a) 10.7 12.4(j)

107

■

blast02

02/03/2017

9:18:5

Page 108

CUMULATIVE TABLE OF IRS PRIVATE DETERMINATIONS CITED IN TEXT

General Counsel Memoranda

Sections

35319 37444 39664 39748 39875 39877

18.4 18.4 9.7(g) 3.1(h) 3.1(h) 3.1(c)

■

Chief Counsel Advice Memoranda

Sections

200623063 200628026 200738013 200850027 201014056 201042023 201105010 201120022 201120027 201143018 201226021 201319010 201334039 201343021 201414014 201543013 201651013

3.1(c), 10.14(e) 3.7 10.1(c) 7.4, 7.18(a) 9.7(c), 21.3(c) 9.22(a) 3.1(b) 21.3(c) 21.3(a) 7.4 7.19(d) 10.1(a) 10.1(c) 2.7 9.3(b) 10.7 9.22

108

■

blast03

02/03/2017

9:18:53

Page 109

Cumulative Table of IRS Private Letter Rulings, Technical Advice Memoranda, and General Counsel Memoranda

The following pronouncements from the Internal Revenue Service, issued privately in connection with specific cases and referenced to indicate the extent of IRS activity in a particular area and/or to reflect the thinking of the IRS on a particular topic, are coordinated to footnotes of individual chapters. (IRC § 6110(k)(3) states that these determinations are not to be used or cited as precedent.) Citations are to IRS private letter rulings, technical advice memoranda, and general counsel memoranda directly pertinent to the material discussed. Seven-number items (and, since 1999, nine-number items) are private letter rulings and technical advice memoranda; five-number items are general counsel memoranda. Chapter 2 Footnote 98

The United States Tax System: An Overview 9226003

Chapter 3 Fundamental Concepts Footnote 80 87 88 94 111 136 170 192 208 221 222 271 288

9528022 200004001 9423001 9119012 200335017 9233053 9807030 200445024 9413020 200142019 200817018, 201027015 200837050 201641021

■

109

■

blast03

02/03/2017

9:18:53

Page 110

CUMULATIVE TABLE OF IRS PRIVATE LETTER RULINGS

291 293

294 301 302 320 407 559 584 Chapter 4 Footnote 31 46 52 55 73 88 93 107 Chapter 5 Footnote 7 Chapter 6 Footnote 49 53 61

7909026, 8620017, 8709069, 8733007, 8810048, 9141011, 9325038, 9328033, 9338014, 9342052, 9420035, 9424024, 9426027, 9430039 8607037, 8608039, 8617120, 8625056, 8645030, 8645031, 8645032, 8611041, 8647072, 8651031, 8701008, 8713028, 8717020, 8720018, 8721008, 8721063, 8722033, 8740009, 8743007, 8803058, 8806040, 8816063, 8823033, 8828058, 8830073, 8835020, 8837084, 8838052, 8844028, 8844029, 8847061, 9017014, 9018007, 9022008, 9033050, 9041060, 9045045, 9131056, 9136008, 9138010, 9439009, 9625047, 9638019, 9642036, 9718027, 200128005, 200151015 8615069, 8622026, 9315002, 200530016, 200743033 8705041 (withdrawn (8826012) but not retroactively (8836040)), 8730059, 8755078 9429013 9733015 9402028, 9512015 9318017, 9442017 9338021 Gifts of Money and Property 9147049 200223013, 200223014 9247018, 9320007, 9435007, 9441032, 9440034, 9441032, 9511041, 9513010 9435007, 9436042, 9437031, 9444029, 9450009, 9450010, 9450024, 9501031, 9509037, 9510050–9510052, 9510063, 9513010, 9734034, 9746050, 9812030 200821024 200038050, 200335017 201543019 9333050 Fundamentals of Planned Giving 200714025 Timing of Charitable Deductions 199915037, 200141018, 200141019, 200202034 200112064, 200112065 200230029 ■

110

■

blast03

02/03/2017

9:18:53

Page 111

CUMULATIVE TABLE OF IRS PRIVATE LETTER RULINGS

72 82 85

199908039 9747040 9335022

Chapter 7 Percentage Limitations Footnote 29 51 61 67

200223013, 200223014 9713017 9611047, 9814032 9436039

Chapter 8 Estate and Gift Tax Considerations Footnote 34 47 49 57 67 79 82 95 105

108 109 113 115 127 189 193 199 209 210

200533001 200223013, 200223014, 200324023 8725082, 8851030, 9322017, 9430039, 9842004, 199911050, 200747001 9331015, 9348012, 9406030, 9407014, 9409017, 9529039, 200149016 200445024 200437032 201032010 200120002, 200120003, 200202032, 200223013, 200223014, 200230018, 200252077 8704004, 8725082, 8727004, 8751002, 8810004, 8839043, 8851029, 8901007, 9101010, 9101026, 9119006, 9127047, 9145005, 9149005, 9151012, 9244001, 9322026, 9341008, 9351001, 9404002, 9409001, 9430039, 9521011, 9521034, 9532026, 9616001, 9630008, 9634025, 9818009, 9821044, 199925043, 199944038, 200001010, 200024016, 200026010, 200418002, 200505008 199903001 200733007, 200825014 200802010 9326003 9406013 200350012 200127038, 200252077 9812014 201450003 200539022

■

111

■

blast03

02/03/2017

9:18:53

Page 112

CUMULATIVE TABLE OF IRS PRIVATE LETTER RULINGS

212

213 215 220 225 234 245 246 249 251 257 Chapter 9 Footnote 1 6 25 40 57

8609055, 8617013, 8617016, 8639054, 8639072, 8644048, 8647036, 8649060, 8703069, 8721014, 8730035, 8737088, 8744014, 8749027, 8749071, 8753028, 8805002, 8807013, 8817004, 8821053, 8828054, 8828083, 8834050, 8844033, 8845012, 8849050, 9004011, 9014023, 9019040, 9020020, 9021034, 9038033, 9041074, 9101027, 9107010, 9110044, 9135032, 9137031, 9151022, 9211013, 9312020, 9326049, 9326056, 9339006, 9341003, 9344011, 9345014, 9347013, 9349010, 9407024, 9433022, 9507018, 9515029, 9516040, 9517020, 9517043, 9519028, 9520041, 9523030, 9526031, 9527040, 9529042, 9535025, 9550036, 9611019, 9613012, 9616032, 9635018, 9642010, 9642039, 9648042, 9716019, 9719013, 9725013, 9728007, 9733014, 9736023, 9740008, 9741022, 9745007, 9802036, 9804019, 9811021, 9816002, 9821009, 9845001, 9851023, 9852034, 9853014, 199903015, 199906011, 199915058, 199923013, 199924029, 199927040, 199935046, 199936010, 200020034, 200024014, 200027014, 200027015, 200201026, 200215042, 200227015, 20023022, 200233008, 200234038, 200302029, 200305023, 200306008, 200306009, 200340001, 200402012, 200428013, 200430012, 200532022, 200535006, 200535007, 200605001, 200622005, 200632013, 200726005, 200840030, 201125007, 201333006, 201340012 9549016, 199941004, 200122045 9252017 9243039, 9623019 200818033 8844033 9728026 9526027, 9532026 9532026 9443004 9443001 Special Gift Situations 9152036 9303007 200223014 8737002 (withdrawn by 9623006 and revoked by 9734004), 9528022 200627002

■

112

■

blast03

02/03/2017

9:18:54

Page 113

CUMULATIVE TABLE OF IRS PRIVATE LETTER RULINGS

155

157 160 162 165 172 192 194 311 392 424 550 563 575 632 705 712 764 789

8605008, 8623037, 8625013, 8626029, 8626075, 8630056, 8713016, 8721017, 8722047, 8729061, 8753015, 8810009, 8810024, 9052038, 9239002, 9420008, 199927014, 199933029, 200208019 9318017, 9603018, 199927014, 199952037 9537018 9318017, 9407005, 9420008, 9632003, 9736016 9318027 200418005 9407005 9603018 9251022 9253038, 9341008, 9634019, 9723038 9818009, 199939039, 200002011 9540002 8613047, 8639045, 8713077, 8806084, 8830064, 9528022 9329017 201225004, 201246003 9436039 200108013, 200108014 200230007 200230007

Chapter 10 Other Aspects of Deductible Giving Footnote 96 143 170 184 206

200207026 9029018 9303007 200223013, 200223014 9318017

Chapter 11 Valuation of Partial Interests Footnote 19

9342026, 9419006, 9421047, 9424025, 9445010

Chapter 12 Charitable Remainder Trusts Footnote 9 14 18 26 33

9034010, 9831004 9252023, 9253055 9511007, 9511029 9633008–9633013 8903019 ■

113

■

blast03

02/03/2017

9:18:54

Page 114

CUMULATIVE TABLE OF IRS PRIVATE LETTER RULINGS

45 56 67 102 109 115 116 117 132 161 165 166 172 173 195 204 207 210 212 220 221 222 223 224 225 229 241 243 244 258 261 274 293 297 303 305 307 309

9617036, 9617037 200301020, 200333013, 200524013, 200525008, 200539008 200045038, 200109006, 200120016, 200143028, 200204022, 200301020 9839024 9339018 9326049, 200204022 9252043, 9331043 9445010 9252023 9529039, 9817010, 201332011 8825095, 8828041 9434018 200150019 200002029, 200218008 9331015 200240012 9710008 (rev’g 9619044), 9710009 (rev’g 9619042), 9710010 (rev’g 9619043), 9839024 9252023, 9423020, 9442017 9339018 200304025 9252023, 9423020 9326049 9331043 9445010 199918046 200414011 200414011 200802024 200630006, 200631006, 200633011, 200802024, 201249002 200207026 199918046, 200813006, 200813023 9629009, 9707027, 9712031, 9827017, 199929033 9609009, 9643014 (revised and replaced by 9711013) 199907013 200811003, 200818002 200338006, 200422005, 200441019, 200425027, 200825017, 201011034, 201048031, 201133004, 201426006 200422005, 200447033, 200532022, 200535007, 200601024, 200827011–200827013, 200829015, 200829016, 200831002 200704035, 200704036, 200710013–200710016, 200711025–200711039, 200723031, 200732021, 200732022, ■

114

■

blast03

02/03/2017

9:18:54

Page 115

CUMULATIVE TABLE OF IRS PRIVATE LETTER RULINGS

310 338 339 340 390 419

428 (last sentence)

200733032, 200733033, 200749023, 200803019, 200803020, 20080619, 200807017, 200810026–200810028, 200810030, 200816034, 200816035, 200817038, 200818025, 200818026, 200821034, 200821035, 200824021, 200824023, 200850048, 200850049, 200904025, 200904037, 200905030, 200905031, 200906053–200906056, 200913063, 200913065, 200919055–200919057, 200922061, 200951037, 200952059, 201003023, 201003024, 201007063, 201011035, 201016082, 201016083, 201016085, 201016086, 201022022 200702036, 200702040, 200702041, 200703037, 201636043 9818027, 9826021, 9826022, 200244011 200229046 200233006, 200233007 200744019, 200808018 200441024, 200552015, 200616035, 200725044, 200733014, 200739004, 200802032, 200802033, 200809044, 200816032, 200816033, 200817039, 200824022, 200827009, 200833012, 200841040, 200841041, 200846037, 200922014–200922027 8601043, 8602011, 8603026, 8603032, 8603033, 8603037, 8604008, 8604034, 8604053, 8605009, 8605017, 8606016, 8606043, 8606046, 8607109, 8608034, 8609057, 8609064, 8609065, 8610019, 8610020, 8610026, 8610030, 8610067, 8611017, 8611062, 8613006 (re 7842062), 8613016, 8613030, 8614015, 8614023, 8616013, 8617036, 8618013, 8618015, 8618016, 8618028, 8618037, 8620026, 8621005, 8621032, 8622009, 8622027, 8622037, 8623020, 8624013, 8625030, 8625032, 8625043, 8626099, 8628016, 8629016, 8629055, 8630012, 8631015, 8631024, 8631034, 8632026, 8633032, 8633045, 8634010, 8634017, 8634024, 8634044, 8636027, 8636048, 8636050, 8636099, 8637071, 8637073, 8637079, 8637084, 8638021, 8638037, 8638058, 8639015, 8639025, 8639027, 8641040, 8642076, 8642095, 8643058, 8644013, 8644014, 8644042–8644044, 8644063, 8644064, 8644069, 8645039, 8645048, 8645058, 8647007, 8647008, 8647027, 8649041, 8649059, 8650029, 8650031, 8650050, 8560064, 8651030, 8651063, 8651073, 8652041, 8652069, 8701035, 8701039, 8702011, 8702018, 8702038–8702041, 8702044, 8703024, 8703029, 8704011, 8704031, 8704032, 8705023, 8705024, 8706027, 8706029, 8706046, 8706054, 8707023, 8707052, 8708009, 8708019, 8708026, 8708047, 8708062, 8709017, 8709031, 8709041, 8709050, 8709057, 8709059, 8710040, 8710041, 8712029, 8712037, 8712038, 8712014, 8713017, 8713063–8713065, 8714040, 8715024, 8715025, ■

115

■

blast03

02/03/2017

9:18:54

Page 116

CUMULATIVE TABLE OF IRS PRIVATE LETTER RULINGS

445 449 457 476

8715034, 8715043, 8720035, 8721007, 8721024, 8722044, 8722071, 8722105, 8723015, 8723020, 8723040, 8724011, 8724012, 8724032, 8725023, 8727022, 8727023, 8727029, 8727032, 8727034–8727036, 8727038–8727040, 8727053, 8727067, 8729015, 8729017, 8729031, 8729032, 8730027, 8730030–8730032, 8730066, 8731050, 8731051, 8731061, 8731062, 8732026, 8733016, 8733026, 8735027, 8737012, 8737088, 8739021, 8739022, 8740016, 8740018, 8742023, 8743006, 8743066, 8744039, 8745015, 8748063, 8749052, 8750012, 8752012, 8753009, 8801004, 8801016, 8803028, 8803073, 8804032, 8805022, 8805036, 8805037, 8805055, 8806045, 8807014, 8807020, 8807021, 8808013, 8808021, 8808039, 8808043, 8808079, 8809036–8809039, 8809045, 8809048, 8809058, 8810037, 8811012, 8811013, 8816058, 8816059, 8817021–8817024, 8818021, 8819014, 8819021, 8819023–8819025, 8819035, 8820037, 8820065, 8821007, 8821014, 8821019, 8822022, 8822023, 8823019, 8823020, 8823031, 8823047, 8825074, 8825075, 8826031, 8828036, 8828038, 8828040, 8828042, 8828053, 8830085, 8836018, 8836022, 8836029, 8837037, 8837038, 8837041, 8838032, 8838065, 8839023, 8839064, 8841049, 8841051, 8844034, 8845016, 8646035, 8847027–8847029, 8847046, 8847069, 8849068, 8850019–8850023, 8852008, 8903041, 8903042, 8903050, 8903064, 8903069, 8904009, 8906046, 8907013, 8909042, 8909058, 9001058, 9002048, 9004010, 9005066, 9006010, 9008012, 9008044, 9008046, 9009018, 9009019, 9009040, 9009047, 9009048, 9012052, 9012056, 9014033, 9015025, 9015027, 9016015, 9016016, 9016068, 9016069, 9018015, 9018041, 9019016, 9019035, 9019043, 9020024, 9021018, 9021044, 9022014, 9022049, 9023013, 9023031, 9023033, 9024030, 9024033, 9025008, 9027023, 9028001, 9029006, 9031004, 9032020, 9032029, 9033009, 9034011, 9034035, 9035043, 9040048, 9042009, 9042056, 9043025, 9043038, 9044048, 9045042, 9048006, 9048050, 9051013, 9052054, 9104034, 9106008, 9110047, 9127030, 9132043, 9133012, 9134014, 9138024 9339018, 9413020, 9452020 9442017 9623018 8601093, 8604053, 8609060, 8616090, 8616012, 8616014, 8616089, 8617062, 8621049, 8643046, 8649022, 8712008, 8736021, 8736022, 8806029, 9023033, 9143038, 9216006

■

116

■

blast03

02/03/2017

9:18:54

Page 117

CUMULATIVE TABLE OF IRS PRIVATE LETTER RULINGS

Chapter 13 Pooled Income Funds Footnote 37 200214017, 200214018 62 (last 8601046–8603031, 8603043, 8603045, 8603055, 8603068, sentence) 8604052, 8604071, 8607014, 8607036, 8609056, 8609058, 8609066, 8609068, 8610021, 8611033, 8611051, 8611061, 8613021, 8614017, 8615012, 8615016, 8615017, 8615019, 8615020, 8615029, 8617009, 8617020, 8617021, 8618014, 8618029, 8618038, 8620009, 8620032, 8621031, 8621045, 8621046, 8621051, 8621053, 8622008, 8622014, 8622035, 8623014, 8624027, 8624030, 8624036, 8624057, 8625021, 8625024, 8627026, 8627028, 8627031, 8629017, 8629034, 8630077, 8631020, 8632015, 8633033, 8634042, 8634043, 8634047, 8647094, 8638018, 8638064, 8641043, 8642048, 8643063, 8647009, 8647014, 8648065, 8648067, 8649047, 8649048, 8650032, 8650034, 8650036, 8652060, 8652062, 8702042, 8702043, 8703035, 8703063, 8703070, 8704012, 8704013, 8704016, 8705020, 8705028, 8706017, 8706026, 8706047, 8706056, 8706064, 8707048, 8707053, 8708010, 8708034, 8709040, 8710036, 8710038, 8710042, 8710048, 8710069, 8710070, 8712015, 8712016, 8712030–8712032, 8712040, 8713050, 8713079, 8714041, 8715015, 8715016, 8715028, 8718033, 8718052, 8720036, 8720064, 8721051, 8721054, 8721064, 8722018, 8722055, 8722058, 8723014, 8724016, 8724031, 8725059, 8727052, 8729007, 8729033, 8729046, 8730015, 8730028, 8730034, 8731006, 8731018, 8731019, 8731049, 8732032, 8737051, 8737066, 8739028, 8739029, 8741013, 8741031, 8741056, 8742024, 8743036, 8743040, 8743042, 8744008, 8744037, 8745009, 8745020, 8747063, 8753010, 8801023, 8803027, 8803032, 8803036, 8803037, 8803039, 8804041, 8804074, 8804076, 8805027, 8805030, 8805031, 8805039, 8805040, 8807019, 8807068, 8807069, 8807077, 8808020, 8808022, 8808024, 8809046, 8809054, 8809056, 8810025, 8810038, 8810063, 8810083, 8811014, 8811022, 8811035, 8811042, 8812030, 8812053, 8812056, 8815007, 8815039, 8816049, 8817035, 8807067, 8817068, 8818014–8818016, 8818018, 8818020, 8818024, 8819031, 8819036, 8820011, 8820025, 8820038, 8820042, 8821010, 8821011, 8821013, 8821016, 8821031–8821038, 8821040–8821043, 8821045, 8821048–8821052, 8821055, 8822007, 8823046, 8823048, 8823055, 8823080, 8823083, 8823090, 8825072, 8825076, 8828037, 8828039, 8828044,

■

117

■

blast03

02/03/2017

9:18:54

Page 118

CUMULATIVE TABLE OF IRS PRIVATE LETTER RULINGS

63 65 67 68 76

80 85 96 97

8828052, 8830028, 8834035, 8834036, 8834038, 8834049, 8834053, 8834058, 8836021, 8836043, 8836044, 8837032, 8837040, 8837051, 8838031, 8839055–8839057, 8839063, 8839074, 8839086, 8845013, 8846026, 8846027, 8846034, 8846036, 8847022, 8847031, 8847057, 8847058, 8847062, 8849063, 8849065, 8849066, 8903067, 8903070, 8904013, 8904055, 8904056, 8906019, 8909015, 8909033, 8911038, 9002042, 9128023, 9402020, 9412004 201222006–22022011 9248017 9402030, 9412004 201222007–201222011 8712046, 8713044–8713048, 8736008, 8752048, 8803042, 8823082, 8828068, 8830042, 8830044–8830045, 8831023–8831024, 8838033, 9026017, 9027036, 9029053, 9030041–9030042, 200608002, 200608003 9334020 201222007–201222011 9542011 9345007

Chapter 14 Charitable Gift Annuities Footnote 17 26 28 31 33

39826 200847014 9042043, 9407007 200847014 9407007, 9527033, 200230018

Chapter 15 Other Gifts of Remainder Interests Footnote 7 9 44 65

9436039, 9538040 9436039, 9714017 9728016, 200438028 200223014

Chapter 16 Charitable Lead Trusts Footnote 15

9304020, 9311029, 9335014, 9331015, 9348012, 9402026, 9406030, 9407014, 9501036, 9533017, 9534004, 9539009, 9604015, 9604016, 9624029, 9629009, 9631021, 9633027, 9642039, 9713017, 9716023, 9718032, 9721006, 9725012,

■

118

■

blast03

02/03/2017

9:18:54

Page 119

CUMULATIVE TABLE OF IRS PRIVATE LETTER RULINGS

29 44 46 59 62 66

9737023, 9750020, 9808031, 9808035, 9810019, 9821030, 199903045, 199908002, 199917068, 199922007, 199927010, 199927031, 199936031, 199947022, 199952044, 200011012, 200021020, 200043029, 200043039, 200108032, 200138018, 200149016, 200218029, 200240027, 200339018, 200516005, 200536013, 200648025, 201323007 9331015, 9748009 201345033, 201345034 201421024 9326049, 9331015 9415009, 9431051 8736020

Chapter 18 International Giving by Individuals during Lifetime Footnote 18 23 26

201215011, 201438032 8622011 9250041

Chapter 19 International Giving by Individuals through Estates Footnote 19 39 57

200252032, 200302005, 200901023, 200905015 200905015 200226012

Chapter 21 Substantiation and Appraisal Requirements Footnote 28

9528022

Chapter 22 Disclosure Requirements Footnote 51

9315001

■

119

■

blast03

02/03/2017

9:18:54

Page 120

blast04

02/03/2017

9:20:0

Page 121

Table of Cases Discussed in Bruce R. Hopkins’ Nonprofit Counsel

Note: The following cases, referenced in the text, are discussed in greater detail in one or more issues of the author’s monthly newsletter, Bruce R. Hopkins’ Nonprofit Counsel, as indicated. Case

Book Section(s)

Newsletter Issue(s)

Addis v. Commissioner

3.1, 17.6(a), 21.3(b)

Akers v. Commissioner Allen v. Commissioner Alli v. Commissioner Anselmo v. Commissioner Arbini v. Commissioner Atkinson v. Commissioner Atkinson, Estate of v. Commissioner Averyt v. Commissioner

10.1(a) 3.1(b), 3.1(c), 10.14(e) 21.6 9.1(a), 9.2, 10.1(a) 10.1(a) 9.7, 10.14(a), 21.5 8.6(c) 21.4

Balsam Mountain Investments LLC v. Commissioner Belk v. Commissioner

9.7(a)

Sept. 2002, Sept. 2004, May 2011 Dec. 1986 Apr. 1991 Apr. 2015 Apr. 1984, June 1985 Sept. 2001 Feb. 2016 Oct. 2000, Dec. 2002 Sept. 2012, Dec. 2012, May 2016 May 2015

Belmont, Estate of v. Commissioner Bergquist v. Commissioner Biagiotti v. Commissioner Bischel v. United States Boltar, LLC v. Commissioner Bond v. Commissioner Boone Operations Co., LLC v. Commissioner Bosque Canyon Ranch, LP v. Commissioner Brinley v. Commissioner Broad v. Commissioner Brooks v. Commissioner Brownstone v. United States Bruzewicz v. United States Burke v. United States Carpenter v. Commissioner Carroll v. Commissioner Cave Buttes, LLC v. Commissioner Chandler v. Commissioner Chiu v. Commissioner Christiansen, Estate of v. Commissioner

9.22A 6.5, 10.1(a), 10.14(a) 9.1(a) 3.1(f) 10.1(a) 3.1(e) 9.19, 21.4

Apr. 2013, Aug. 2013, Feb. 2015, May 2015 Apr. 2015 Sept. 2008 Dec. 1986 May 2006 June 2011 May 1993, June 2009 June 2013

9.7(a), 21.5(c) 3.1(a) 10.1(a) 10.14(a), 21.3 9.22 21.5(c) 3.1(a), 8.3(b) 9.7(d) 9.7(d) 9.19(a), 21.5(c) 9.7 9.2 8.3(b), 9.31, 10.4(e)

Sep. 2015 Aug. 1984, Apr. 1986 Dec. 1986 Aug. 2013 Mar. 2017 June 2009 Aug. 1993 Mar. 2012, Sep. 2013 July 2016 Nov. 2016 July 2014 July 1985 May 2008

9.7

■

121

■

blast04

02/03/2017

9:20:1

Page 122

TABLE OF CASES DISCUSSED IN BRUCE R. HOPKINS’ NONPROFIT COUNSEL

Case

Book Section(s)

Newsletter Issue(s)

Cohan v. Commissioner Commissioner v. Simmons Consolidated Investors Group v. Commissioner Cor v. Commissioner Costello v. Commissioner

10.14(a), 21.4 9.7, 21.5 3.1, 3.3, 9.19, 21.1, 21.2

Mar. 2012 Aug. 2011 Mar. 2010

21.3 3.1(a), 10.14(a), 21.3(a), 21.5 21.4, 21.5 16.4

Dec. 2013 July 2015 Apr. 2013 May 1992, Dec. 1993

9.22

Mar. 2017

3.1(a), 9.19(a) 3.1(a), 10.3 3.1(b), 10.14(a), 22.2 21.3(a) 9.22A 9.22A 10.10 9.2 9.7(c), 10.1(a), 10.14(a), 21.5(c) 21.3 9.7

July 2015 July 1990 May 2008 Sep. 2011 June 2016 Dec. 2015 Aug. 1984 Dec. 1986 July 2012 July 2012 Jan. 2014

9.22 8.6(c) 10.1(c) 10.14(a), 21.5 21.5 3.1(i), 6.5 21.2, 21.3 24.12 21.3(a) 9.7, 21.5 2.5 21.3, 21.4 8.3(b), 8.6 9.7(b) 9.7(d) 9.7, 10.14(a) 10.4(a) 9.14, 10.14(e) 9.7(a)

Mar. 2017 Dec. 2008 Apr. 2012 Jan. 2011 Apr. 2013 June 1999 Nov. 2011 June, 2014 May 2016 Dec. 2011, Nov. 2013 Dec. 2011 Apr. 2012 Sept. 2007 April 2016 Sept. 2005, Mar. 2007 Jan. 2014 Sep. 2013 June 1985 Oct. 1997

3.1(i), 4.3, 4.8, 9.11, 9.23, 15.3 7.7(b) 3.1(b), 10.14(a), 23.4 3.1(c)

Apr. 1993, Mar. 1994, Nov. 1997, Sept. 1999 Oct. 1984 May 2011 Jan. 2013

Crimi v. Commissioner Crown Income Charitable Fund, Rebecca K. v. Commissioner Crown Income Charitable Fund v. Commissioner Davis v. Commissioner Davis v. United States Derby v. Commissioner DiDinato v. Commissioner Dieringer v. Commissioner DiMarco, Estate of v. Commissioner Dolese v. Commissioner Dubin v. Commissioner Dunlap v. Commissioner Durden v. Commissioner 81 York Acquisition, LLC v. Commissioner Emanuelson v. United States ESB Financial v. United States Esgar Corporation v. Commissioner Evans v. Commissioner Evenchik v. Commissioner Ferguson v. Commissioner Fernandez v. Commissioner Frank Aragona Trust v. Commissioner French v. Commissioner Friedberg v. Commissioner Friedman v. Commissioner Gaerttner v. Commissioner Galloway v. United States Gemperle v. Commissioner Glass v. Commissioner Gorra v. Commissioner Graev v. Commissioner Grant v. Commissioner Great Northern Nekoosa Corporation and Subsidiaries v. United States Greene v. United States Grynberg v. Commissioner Gundanna v. Commissioner Gunkle v. Commissioner

■

122

■

blast04

02/03/2017

9:20:1

Page 123

TABLE OF CASES DISCUSSED IN BRUCE R. HOPKINS’ NONPROFIT COUNSEL

Case

Book Section(s)

Newsletter Issue(s)

Hall, Estate of v. Commissioner Harbison v. United States Hearst Corporation, The v. United States Herman v. United States Hernandez v. Commissioner Hill v. Commissioner Hopkins v. Hopkins Hubert, Estate of v. Commissioner

8.6(c) 8.6(c), 8.7 10.1(a)

Feb. 1990 May 2001 Aug. 1993, Sept. 1993

9.7(c), 9.7(d) 3.1(a) 10.10 17.4 8.6(b)

Jan. 2000 July 2015 Sept. 2004 Dec. 1992 Dec. 1993, May 1997, Jan. 1998, Mar. 1999 July 2009 Nov. 1986 Mar. 2011 Dec. 2012 Aug. 2015 Mar. 2006 Dec. 1991 Jan. 2008, June 2009 Dec. 2014 Mar. 1993 Apr. 2006 July 2010, June 2011, June 2014, July 2015 Sept. 2009

Hughes v. Commissioner Hunter v. Commissioner Igberaese v. Commissioner Irby v. Commissioner Isaacs v. Commissioner Jackson, Estate of v. United States Johnson, Estate of v. United States Jones v. Commissioner Kalipodis v. Commissioner Kamilche Company v. United States Kaplan v. Commissioner Kaufman v. Commissioner

10.1(c) 4.4(a) 21.8 9.7, 21.3–21.5 21.3–21.5 8.6(c) 8.6(c) 3.1(f), 9.12 3.2(b) 3.1(e) 2.8, 6.13 9.7(d), 9.7(a), 9.7(e), 10.14(a) 9.7(d), 10.1(a), 10.14

Kiva Dunes Conservation, LLC v. Commissioner Klauer v. Commissioner Klavan v. Commissioner Koftinow v. Commissioner Krapf v. United States Kunkel v. Commissioner La Meres, Estate of v. Commissioner Legg v. Commissioner Linzy v. Commissioner Logan v. Commissioner Lord v. Commissioner Mast v. Commissioner McLennan v. United States

4.18, 9.19(e) 3.1(d), 10.1(a), 10.14 9.1(a) 10.1(a) 21.3, 21.4, 21.8 3.1(a) 10.14(a) 10.14, 21.3, 21.4 9.18 21.5 10.1(a) 3.1(a), 9.7(h)

Mecox Partners, LP v. United States Minnick v. Commissioner Mitchell v. Commissioner

6.13A 9.7(d) 9.7(d)

Mitchell, Estate of v. Commissioner Mohamed v. Commissioner Mountanos v. Commissioner Musgrave v. Commissioner Neonatology Associates, P.A. v. Commissioner Newhall Unitrust, Leila G. v. Commissioner

10.1(a) 21.3, 21.5(c) 3.1(e), 9.7, 10.1(a) 3.1(l) 10.14(a)

July 2010 Sept. 1993 Dec. 1986 Nov. 1992 June, 2015 Apr. 1992 Feb. 2016 Jan. 2012 Oct. 1994 Nov. 2010 June 1989 July 1991, Dec. 1991, Aug. 1993 May 2016 Feb. 2013 June 2012, Feb. 2013, Mar. 2015 July 2001 July 2012 Aug. 2013 Dec. 2000 Sept. 2002

12.8

Mar. 1997

■

123

■

blast04

02/03/2017

9:20:1

Page 124

TABLE OF CASES DISCUSSED IN BRUCE R. HOPKINS’ NONPROFIT COUNSEL

Case

Book Section(s)

Newsletter Issue(s)

1982 East, LLC v. Commissioner Osborne v. Commissioner Oxford Orphanage, Inc. v. United States Palmer Ranch Holdings, LLC v. Commissioner Palumbo, Estate of v. United States Partita Partners, LLC v. United States Patel v. Commissioner Petter, Estate of v. Commissioner Pollard v. Commissioner Reisner v. Commissioner RERI Holdings I, LLC v. Commissioner Richardson v. Commissioner Rio Properties, Inc. v. Rio International Interlink Roark v. Commissioner Robinson, Estate of v. Commissioner Rockefeller v. Commissioner Rolfs v. Commissioner Rome I Ltd v. Commissioner Rothman v. Commissioner RP Golf, LLC v. Commissioner Sandler v. Commissioner Schaefer, Estate of v. Commissioner Scheidelman v. Commissioner

9.7(c) 9.7(h), 10.1(a) 8.6(c)

June 2011 Dec. 1986 Dec. 1985

3.1(a), 9.7, 10.1(a)

July 2014, April 2016, Dec. 2016 May 2011 Jan. 2017 Aug. 2012, Mar. 2013 Oct. 2011, Jan. 2013 Apr. 2013 Jan. 2015 July 2014 Feb. 1985 May 2002

8.7(b) 9.7 10.14(a) 3.1(a) 3.1(b) 7.8(b), 10.14 10.1(a) 3.3(b), 6.5 21.3(a) 3.1, 17.6(a), 21.3(b) 10.14(a) 10.3 9.18, 9.23 9.7(g) 9.7(e), 21.5(c) 9.7, 21.3(b), 21.4 4.4(a), 10.1(a) 12.12(b) 3.1(m), 9.7(e), 10.1(a), 10.14(a), 21.5(c)

Schrimsher v. Commissioner Seventeen Seventy Sherman Street Signom v. Commissioner Silver, Estate of v. Commissioner Simmons v. Commissioner Sklar v. Commissioner

21.3(b) 3.1(b) 3.1(a), 3.1(c) 19.2(a) 21.3(a) 3.1(c)

Skripak v. Commissioner Smith v. Commissioner Starkey, Estate of v. Commissioner Strieter, In re Strock, Estate of v. United States Styles v. Friends of Fiji SWF Real Estate, LLC v. Commissioner Tamulis, Estate of v. Commissioner Terrene Investments, Ltd., Deerbrook Construction, Inc. v. Commissioner Todd v. Commissioner Transamerica Corporation v. United States Trout Ranch, LLC v. Commissioner Turner v. Commissioner

9.1(a) 6.6, 21.2, 21.5(c) 8.6(a) — 8.6(b) 10.4(d) 10.1(a) 12.1(c), 21.2(e) 10.1(a)

Feb. 2005 Nov. 2010 June 1984 Jan. 2011, Apr. 2012 July 1991 Aug. 2012, Oct. 2012 Dec. 2012, May 2016 Dec. 1986 Oct. 2015 Oct. 2010, Aug. 2012, Oct. 2012, Mar. 2013, Nov. 2013, Aug. 2014 May 2011, May 2016 Aug 2014 Sept. 2000 July 2003 May 2016 Apr. 2002, Mar. 2006, Feb. 2009 Apr. 1985 Dec. 1986, Feb. 2008 July 1999, Nov. 2000 July 2015 June 1987 May 2009, May 2011 June 2015 Jan. 2008 Oct. 2007

4.5(b), 10.1(a), 12.1(c) 3.1(a), 3.1(e)

July 2002 June 1990

10.1(a) 9.7(d)

Mar. 2011, Oct. 2012 Aug. 2006

■

124

■

blast04

02/03/2017

9:20:1

Page 125

TABLE OF CASES DISCUSSED IN BRUCE R. HOPKINS’ NONPROFIT COUNSEL

Case

Book Section(s)

Newsletter Issue(s)

United States v. American Bar Association United States v. McClain Van Dusen v. Commissioner

3.1(a)

July, 2015

9.7(e), 10.1(c) 3.3(a), 9.15, 9.15(c), 21.5(c) 21.3 3.3(a), 10.14(a) 9.7(a) 9.7(d) 9.31, 10.4(e) 8.6(b) 1.5 8.6(c), 8.7 21.8 9.7(e)

Sep. 2011 Aug. 2011

Villareale v. Commissioner Viralam v. Commissioner Wachter v. Commissioner Wall v. Commissioner Wandry v. Commissioner Warren, Estate of v. Commissioner Weingarden v. Commissioner Wells Fargo Bank v. United States Wesley v. Commissioner Whitehouse Hotel Limited Partnership v. Commissioner Winokur v. Commissioner Woodbury v. Commissioner Wortmann v. Commissioner Zavadil v. Commissioner

9.1(a), 15.2(a) 7.7(b) 10.1(a) 3.2

■

125

■

May 2013 May 2011 May 2014 Aug. 2012 Jan. 2013 May 1993 June 1986, Oct. 1987 July 1991, Oct. 1993 Dec. 2015 June 2009, Oct. 2010, Dec. 2012 Oct. 1988 May 1990 Mar. 2006 Nov. 2013

blast04

02/03/2017

9:20:1

Page 126

blast05

02/03/2017

9:21:0

Page 127

Cumulative Table of IRS Revenue Rulings Discussed in Bruce R. Hopkins’ Nonprofit Counsel

Note: The following IRS revenue rulings, referenced in the text, are discussed in greater detail in one or more issues of the author’s monthly newsletter, Bruce R. Hopkins’ Nonprofit Counsel, as indicated. Rev. Rul.

Book Section(s)

Newsletter Issue

70–452 76–96 77–374 82–38 82–128 84–1 84–132 85–8 85–23 85–49 85–57 85–69 85–99 86–60 86–63 88–37 88–81 88–82 89–31 89–51 90–103 92–107 92–108 93–8 2002–67 2003–28 2008–41 2011–28

12.2(k) 3.1(h) 12.2(k) 13.5, 13.7 12.9 9.14 3.1(b) 9.3(c) 8.7(a), 15.2(a) 16.2 13.5 13.2(b) 10.1(c)(8) 8.2(k), 12.2(j) 3.1(a), 3.1(b) 9.23, 15.2(a) 12.1(a), 12.9 16.7 8.7(b) 9.13(b), 9.18 13.5, 13.7 13.9(a) 3.1(g), 13.9(b) 3.1(g), 13.9(b) 9.25, 10.1(c), 21.1(b) 9.23, 9.28, 10.1(c), 10.4(a), 15.3 12.6 3.1(h)

Oct. 2016 Jan. 2010 Oct. 2016 June 1985 Apr. 1993 Feb. 1984 Oct. 1984 Mar. 1985 Apr. 1985 July 1985 June 1985 July 1985 Sept. 1985 June 1986 June 1986 Sept. 1988 Dec. 1988 Dec. 1988 Apr. 1989 July 1989 Feb. 1991 Feb. 1993 Feb. 1993 Feb. 1993 Jan. 2003 Apr. 2003 Sept. 2008 Jan. 2010

■

127

■

blast05

02/03/2017

9:21:0

Page 128

blast06

02/03/2017

9:22:1

Page 129

Cumulative Table of Private Letter Rulings and Technical Advice Memoranda Discussed in Bruce R. Hopkins’ Nonprofit Counsel

Note: The following IRS private letter rulings and technical advice memoranda, referenced in the text, are discussed in greater detail in one or more issues of the author’s monthly newsletter, Bruce R. Hopkins’ Nonprofit Counsel, as indicated. PLR/TAM 8536061 9110016 9250041 9252023 9506015 9703028 9733015 9818009 9818042 9828001 199929050 200004001 200012061 200020060 200112022 200119005 200230005 200251010 200306002 200307084 200329031 200341002 200408031 200414011 200418002 200438028 200445023 200445024 200524014 200525008 200530007 200533001 200534022 200610017

Book Section(s) 12.10 17.4 3.1(g) 7.14, 12.3(d), 12.3(e) 12.3(a) 20.1 10.9 9.10(c) 8.2(h) 6.9 10.9 3.1(b) 3.1(b) 17.6(b) 4.5(b) 4.4(b) 7.18(a) 9.27(d), 10.2, 21.3(a) 12.4(i) 8.3(b) 3.1(a), 3.1(l) 13.2(e) 8.2 12.8 12.3, 12.11(c) 10.1(a) 15.3 3.1(9), 8.2(k) 3.1(f), 8.2(k) 8.12 8.12 6.10 8.2(g), 8.2(h), 8.2(k) 3.1(m) 9.23, 10.4

■

129

■

Newsletter Issue Dec. 1985 May 1991 Jan. 1993 Apr. 1993 Mar. 1995 Apr. 1997 Oct. 1997 July 1998 July 1998 Nov. 1998 Oct. 1999 May 2000 June 2000 Aug. 2000 May 2001 July 2001 Oct. 2002 Feb. 2003 June 2003 Apr. 2003 Sept. 2003 Dec. 2003 Apr. 2004 June 2004 July 2004 Dec. 2004 Jan. 2005 Jan. 2005 Sept. 2005 Sept. 2005 Dec. 2005 Nov. 2005 Nov. 2005 May 2006

blast06

02/03/2017

9:22:1

Page 130

CUMULATIVE TABLE OF PRIVATE LETTER RULINGS

PLR/TAM 200649027 200702031 200703037 200905015 200931059 200945022 201004022 201027015 201032002 201040021 201117005 201125007 201126007 201132011 201215011 201216045 201245025 201246003 201249002 201321012 201326018 201345031 201405018 201437004 201438032 201514010 201616002 201636042 201641021

Book Section(s) 12.4(i) 4.5(b) 12.4(j) 8.3(b) 18.3 3.1(h) 8.7(b) 3.1(j), 3.1(m) 8.2(n), 8.3(b) 12.2 12.9 8.7(c) 12.9 4.3 18.3 16.5 31.1(b) 8.3 12.3(j) 12.3(j) 12.7 18.3 9.7(b) 3.1(n) 27.17(a) 9.7(b) 10.7 12.4(j) 3.3(a)

■

130

Newsletter Issue Feb. 2007 Mar. 2007 Mar. 2007 Apr. 2009 Oct. 2009 Jan. 2010 Apr. 2010 Sept. 2010 Nov. 2010 Dec. 2010 July 2011 Sept. 2011 Sept. 2011 Oct. 2011 June 2012 June 2012 Jan. 2013 Jan. 2013 Feb. 2013 Aug. 2013 Sep. 2013 Jan. 2014 Apr. 2014 Nov. 2014 Nov. 2014 June 2015 June 2016 Nov. 2016 Dec. 2016

■

blast07

02/03/2017

9:22:39

Page 131

Table of Charitable Giving Law Tax Reform Proposals

The principal source of specific tax reform proposals at the present is the proposed Tax Reform Act of 2014, introduced by the then-Chairman of the House Committee on Ways and Means Dave Camp (who has retired from Congress). This proposal (Camp Proposal) was never introduced as a bill; it was published, on February 26, 2014, as a discussion draft. Tax reform proposals are in the Administration’s proposed budget for fiscal year 2016, in items of tax law revision legislation that are pending in the current (114th) Congress, and in the July 2015 Report of the Business Income Tax Working Group to the Senate Committee on Finance (Working Group Report). Tax reform proposals directly affecting the tax law pertaining to private foundations and assorted related proposals are inventoried below. I. Tax Reform Proposals Affecting Charitable Giving Law A. Retroactive Deductibility of Charitable Gifts 1. Present law: An individual may claim an itemized deduction for charitable contributions (IRC § 170(a)(1)). To be eligible for deduction, a contribution must be made by the last day of the tax year for which a return is filed (id.). For a calendar-year taxpayer, a contribution, to be deductible for the gift year, must be made on or before December 31 to be included on a tax return for that tax year, which must be filed by April 15 of the following year (absent one or more extensions). 2. Proposal: Individuals would be permitted to deduct charitable contributions made after close of a tax year but before April 15 for year covered by return (Camp Proposal § 1403). B. Harmonization of Deduction Limitations 1. Present law: A charitable contribution deduction for a year is limited to a certain percentage of an individual’s adjusted gross income (AGI) for that year. (This is the contribution base (IRC § 170(b)(1)(G).) This AGI limitation varies depending on the type of property contributed and the type of charitable donee. In general, money contributed to public charities, private operating foundations, and certain nonoperating private foundations may be deducted up to an amount equal to 50 percent of the

■

131

■

blast07

02/03/2017

9:22:39

Page 132

TABLE OF CHARITABLE GIVING LAW TAX REFORM PROPOSALS

donor’s AGI (IRC § 170(b)(1)(A)). Contributions that do not qualify for this limitation (e.g., contributions to private foundations) may be deducted in an amount up to the lesser of 30 percent of AGI or the excess of the 50-percent-of-AGI limitation for the tax year over the amount of charitable contributions subject to the 30-percent limitation (IRC § 170(b)(1)(B)). Capital gain (appreciated) property contributed to public charities, private operating foundations, and certain nonoperating private foundations may be deducted up to 30 percent of AGI (IRC § 170(b)(1)(C)). Capital gain property contributed to nonoperating private foundations and certain other charitable donees may be deducted in an amount up to the lesser of 20 percent of AGI or the excess of the 30-percent-of-AGI limitation over the amount of property subject to the 30-percent limitation for contributions of capital gain property (IRC § 170(b)(1)(D)). 2. Proposal: 50-percent and 30-percent limitations on deductibility would be harmonized at single limit of 40 percent (Camp Proposal § 1403). 3. Proposal: 30-percent and 20-percent limitations on deductibility would be harmonized at single limit of 25 percent (id.). 4. Administration’s budget: It is proposed to consolidate all AGI limitations to 30 percent, except that 50 percent limit for gifts of money to public charities would be retained. C. Charitable Deduction Floor 1. Present law: Current law does not include a floor under the charitable contribution deduction. 2. A two-percent adjusted gross income floor would be imposed under deductible contributions made by individuals, meaning that charitable gifts would be deductible only to the extent they exceed 2 percent of the individual’s AGI. This reduction in the deduction would apply to charitable contributions in the following order: first, to contributions subject to the 25percent-of-AGI limitation; second, to conservation contributions (IRC § 170(h)); and, third, to contributions subject to the 40-percent limitation. (Camp Proposal § 1403). D. Contributions of Property 1. Present law: Generally, gifts of capital gain property give rise to a charitable deduction equal to the fair market value of the property at the time of the gift (Reg. § 1.170A-1(c)(1)). 2. Proposal: Charitable deduction for most gifts of types of property would be confined to donor’s adjusted basis. For the following types of property, however, the deduction would ■

132

■

blast07

02/03/2017

9:22:39

Page 133

TABLE OF CHARITABLE GIVING LAW TAX REFORM PROPOSALS

be based on the fair market value of the property less any ordinary gain that would have been realized if the property had been sold by the taxpayer at its fair market value: tangible property related to the purpose of the charitable donee, a qualified conservation contribution (IRC § 170(h)(1)), a qualified inventory contribution (IRC § 170(e)(3)(A)), qualified research property, and publicly traded stock. (Camp Proposal § 1403). In the case of inventory contributed solely for the care of the ill, needy, or infants, the present-law rule that provides a twicebasis valuation for the charitable deduction (IRC § 170(e)(3)) would be preserved (id). E. Qualified Conservation Contributions 1. Present law: Qualified conservation contributions (IRC § 170(h) (1)) are deductible, generally subject to the 30-percent-of-AGI limitation. Farmers and ranchers making conservation easements gifts, however, are allowed charitable deductions up to 100 percent of AGI (IRC § 170(b)(1)(E)(iv)(I)), although that law expired at the close of 2014 (IRC § 170(b)(1)(E)(vi)). 2. Proposal: This percentage limitation as to conservation easement gifts by farmers and ranchers would be made permanent (Camp Proposal § 1403). 3. This limitation would be made permanent under America Gives More Act (H.R. 644), which passed House of Representatives on February 12, 2015. 4. Administration’s budget: This limitation would be made permanent. 5. A proposal in the Working Group Report would make these rules permanent. 6. The Working Group Report suggested provisions “designed to ensure that conservation easements are properly valued and serve a legitimate conservation purpose.” F. Conservation Easements on Golf Courses 1. Present law: Current statutory law as to the deductibility of gifts of conservation easements (IRC § 170(h)) is silent on the matter of use of the encumbered property as a golf course. 2. Proposal: A charitable deduction would not be permitted in instances where the eased property is reasonably expected to be used as a golf course (Camp Proposal § 1403). 3. Administration’s budget proposal includes proposal denying deduction for gifts of easements on golf courses. G. Other Conservation Easement Proposals in Administration Budget 1. Tighten standards for organizations that are eligible to receive deductible easement gifts. ■

133

■

blast07

02/03/2017

9:22:39

Page 134

TABLE OF CHARITABLE GIVING LAW TAX REFORM PROPOSALS

2. Donor would be required to provide detailed description of conservation purpose or purposes that are to be furthered. 3. Definition of eligible conservation purposes would be modified. 4. Penalties would be imposed on organizations and managers that attest to values they know or should know are substantially overstated or that receive contributions that do not serve eligible conservation purpose. 5. Additional reporting of information about contributed conservation easements and the fair market values. 6. Deduction for contributions for gifts of historic preservation easements would be limited. 7. Piloting of alternative conservation credit which would be allocated to charities eligible to receive easement gifts in their communities; thereafter credits would be allocated to donors. Land trust organizations would select easements with conservation values. H. College Athletic Event Seating Rights 1. Present law: A charitable deduction of 80 percent of the amount paid for the right to purchase tickets for athletic events conducted by tax-exempt educational institutions is available (IRC § 170(l)). 2. Proposal: This college and university athletic event seating rights charitable deduction rule would be repealed (Camp Proposal § 1403). 3. Administration’s budget proposal includes repeal of this law. I. Intellectual Property Phantom Deduction Rule 1. Present law: A maker of a qualified intellectual property contribution (IRC § 170(m)(8)) is allowed a charitable deduction for the gift of the intellectual property and for certain percentages of subsequent qualified donee income that is allocable to the gifted intellectual property (IRC § 170(m)(3)). 2. Proposal: Income from intellectual property contributed to charity would no longer be deductible as additional contribution(s) (Camp Proposal § 1403). J. Charitable Distributions from Individual Retirement Accounts 1. Present law: An exclusion from gross income is available for otherwise taxable distributions from a traditional or Roth individual retirement account in the case of qualified charitable distributions; this exclusion may not exceed $100,000 per taxpayer per tax year (IRC § 408(d)(8)(A), which expired at close of 2014).

■

134

■

blast07

02/03/2017

9:22:39

Page 135

TABLE OF CHARITABLE GIVING LAW TAX REFORM PROPOSALS

K.

L.

II. Tax A.

2. This body of law would be made permanent under America Gives More Act (H.R. 644), which passed House of Representatives on February 12, 2015. 3. This provision would be extended for two years (through 2016) by tax extenders legislation approved by the Senate Committee on Finance on July 23, 2015. 4. A proposal in the Working Group Report would make this provision permanent. 5. The Working Group Report addressed the matter of expanding the scope of excludible distributions, such as those to donoradvised funds, supporting organizations, and private foundations, and/or increasing or removing the annual dollar limit on excludible distributions (currently, $100,000). Charitable Gifts of Food Inventory 1. Present law: A person engaged in trade or business is eligible to claim an enhanced deduction in the case of certain contributions of food inventory (IRC § 170(e)(3)(ii), which expired at close of 2014). 2. This law would be made permanent under America Gives More Act (H.R. 644), which passed House of Representatives on February 12, 2015. 3. This provision would be extended for two years (through 2016) by tax extenders legislation approved by the Senate Committee on Finance on July 23, 2015. S Corporation Basis Adjustment 1. Present law: The amount of a shareholder’s basis reduction in stock of S corporation, by reason of charitable contribution made by the corporation, is equal to shareholder’s pro rata share of adjusted basis of contributed property (IRC § 1367(a) (2), which expired at close of 2014). 2. This law would be made permanent under America’s Small Business Tax Relief Act (H.R. 636), which passed House of Representatives on February 13, 2015. 3. This provision would be extended for two years (through 2016) by tax extenders legislation approved by the Senate Committee on Finance on July 23, 2015. Reform Proposals Affecting Public Charity Law Type II and Type III Supporting Organizations 1. Present law: One of the several ways a tax-exempt charitable (IRC § 501(c)(3)) organization can be a public charity (IRC § 509 (a)) is to qualify as a supporting organization (IRC § 509(a)(3)). Four basic tests must be satisfied for supporting organization

■

135

■

blast07

02/03/2017

9:22:39

Page 136

TABLE OF CHARITABLE GIVING LAW TAX REFORM PROPOSALS

status, one of which is the relationship test. Pursuant to this test, an organization must be (1) operated, supervised, or controlled by one or more qualified supported organizations (usually a form of public charity) (known as a Type I supporting organization); (2) supervised or controlled in connection with one or more qualified supported organizations (Type II supporting organization); or (3) operated in connection with one or more qualified supported organizations (Type III supporting organization). The classification of a supporting organization depends on how close its relationship is to the supported organization(s), with Type I supporting organizations having the closest relationship (being akin to a parent-subsidiary arrangement). 2. Proposal: Federal tax law authorizing Type II and Type III supporting organizations would be repealed (Camp Proposal § 5304). Thus, these entities would be required to either qualify as a public charity on another basis or be private foundations. B. Intermediate Sanctions Rules 1. Present law: Penalty excise taxes may be imposed on disqualified persons who improperly benefited from excess benefit transactions with applicable tax-exempt organizations and on managers of the organization who participated in the transactions knowing they were improper (IRC § 4958). A rebuttable presumption of reasonableness arises under certain circumstances with respect to these transactions (Reg. § 53.4958-6). Participation of an organization manager in a transaction is ordinarily not considered knowing for these purposes to the extent that, after making full disclosure of the factual situation to an appropriate professional, the organization manager relies on a reasoned written opinion of that professional with respect to elements of the transaction that are within the scope of the professional’s expertise (Reg. § 53.4958-1(d)(4)). 2. Proposal: Rebuttable presumption of reasonableness and professional advice reliance safe harbor rule for managers would be eliminated. C. Definition of Disqualified Person 1. Present law: For purposes of the intermediate sanctions rules, the term disqualified person means (1) any person who was, at any time during the five-year period ending on the date of the transaction involved, in a position to exercise substantial influence over the affairs of the organization, (2) a member of the family of an individual in the foregoing category, and (3) an entity in which individuals described in the preceding two categories own more than a 35-percent interest (IRC § 4958(f)(1)(C)). ■

136

■

blast07

02/03/2017

9:22:39

Page 137

TABLE OF CHARITABLE GIVING LAW TAX REFORM PROPOSALS

2. Proposal: This definition of disqualified person would be expanded to include athletic coaches and investment advisors (Camp Proposal § 5201). D. Donor-Advised Funds 1. Present law: A donor-advised fund is a fund or account (1) that is separately identified by reference to contributions of one or more donors, (2) that is owned and controlled by a sponsoring organization, and (3) as to which a donor or donor advisor has, or reasonably expects to have, advisory privileges with respect to the distribution or investment of amounts held in the fund by reason of the donor’s status as a donor (IRC § 4966(d)(2)(A)). 2. Proposal: Donor-advised funds would be required to distribute contributions within five years of receipt; penalty would be imposed for failure to meet this payout rule (Camp Proposal § 5203). E. Private Colleges and Universities Investment Income Tax 1. Present law: No category of public charity is required to pay tax on its net investment income. A few other types of tax-exempt organizations, such as social clubs (IRC § 501(c)(7) entities) and political organizations (IRC § 527 entities) are subject to such a tax, as are private foundations (see I A). 2. Proposal: Large private colleges and universities would be subject to 1 percent excise tax on their net investment income (Camp Proposal § 5206). F. Proposed Agricultural Research Organizations 1. Present law: There is no existing law for agricultural research organizations. They would be modeled on present law providing for medical research organizations (IRC § 170(b)(1)(A)(iii)), and thus would be public charities (IRC § 509(a)(1)) and be eligible for charitable contributions at the higher percentage limitations. 2. Proposal: Provision for these organizations would be created (proposed Charitable Agriculture Research Act (S. 908)). To qualify, an agricultural research organization would have to be engaged in the continuous active conduct of agricultural research (as defined in the Agricultural Research, Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977) in conjunction with a landgrant college or university or a non-land-grant college or university. For a contribution to this type of organization to qualify for the 50-percent limitation, during the calendar year in which a contribution is made to the organization it must be committed to spend the contribution for this type of research before January 1 of the fifth calendar year which begins after the ■

137

■

blast07

02/03/2017

9:22:39

Page 138

TABLE OF CHARITABLE GIVING LAW TAX REFORM PROPOSALS

date of enactment. An agricultural research organization would be permitted to use the expenditure test (IRC § 501(h)) for purposes of determining whether a substantial part of its activities consist of carrying on propaganda, or otherwise attempting, to influence legislation.

■

138

■

bindex

02/03/2017

9:24:39

Page 139

Cumulative Index

Absence of value transferred, § 3.1(d) Acceptance, of gifts, §§ 3.6, 24.7(b)(21) Accounting method, § 2.10 Accounting period, annual, § 2.9 Accrual method of accounting, §§ 2.10, 6.14 Accumulated earnings taxes, § 2.22 Acquisition indebtedness, § 14.6 Adjusted basis, § 2.14(b) Adjusted gross income, § 2.4 Advertising, § 3.1(f) Agents, gifts by means of, § 10.2 Agricultural research organizations, § 3.4(a) Allocation: of basis (bargain sales), § 9.19(b) pooled income funds, income from charity, partial allocation to, § 13.3(b) units of participation, § 13.3(a) reallocation of deductions, § 10.10 Alternative minimum tax, §§ 2.18, 10.6 American Jobs Creation Act of 2004, §§ 21.1, 21.5 American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012, §§ 7.12A, 7.12B Annual accounting period, § 2.9 Annual gift tax exclusion, § 8.2(h) Annuities, charitable gift, see Charitable gift annuities Annuities, gross estate, § 8.3(a)

■

Annuity interest, §§ 5.7(a), 5.4(b), 9.23, 16.2 Annuity trusts, charitable remainder, see Charitable remainder annuity trusts Anticipatory income assignments, § 3.1(h) Antitrust laws, § 14.8 Applicable insurance contracts: in general, § 17.7 reporting requirements, § 24.11 Appointment, powers of: general power, § 8.2(d) gross estate, § 8.3(a) Appraisals: requirements, § 21.5 value, appraised, § 2.14 Appreciated property gifts, §§ 5.2, 7.1 Appreciation, §§ 2.14(e), 4.2 Archaeological artifacts, contributions of, § 24.7(b)(17) Arm’s-length transactions, § 2.14 Art, works of: as gifts, §§ 9.1(a), 24.7(b)(2) fractional interests in, § 9.1(b) as loans, §§ 8.2(g), 9.1(c) valuation of, § 10.1(b) Arts, promotion of the, § 3.2(b) Ascertainability, § 8.8 Assets, capital, § 2.16(a) Assignment: of income, § 3.1(g) of pooled income fund units, § 5.5(b)

139

■

bindex

02/03/2017

9:24:40

Page 140

CUMULATIVE INDEX

Assignment (Continued) Associations, §§ 2.8, 3.3(a) Auctions, charity, see Charity auctions Audit guidelines, IRS: checksheet, § 23.1(c) guidance, audit, § 23.1(d) historical background, § 23.1(a) Special Emphasis Program, § 23.1(b) Automobile expenses, deductibility of, § 9.17 Auxiliaries (of churches), § 3.4(a) Availability of charitable deduction, § 3.1(a-1) Bargain sales, § 3.1(b) basis, allocation of, § 9.19(b) and carryover rules, § 9.19(d) and deduction reduction rule, § 9.19(c) definition, § 9.19(a) Basis: adjusted, § 2.14(b) for bargain sales, § 9.19(b) definition of, § 2.14(a) of gifted property, § 8.2(j) of transferred property, § 8.3(d) Benefit events, § 23.2 Benefits, incidental, § 3.1(c) Boorstin, Daniel J., § 1.3(a) Brackets, income tax, § 2.15 Burden of proof rules, § 21.8 Business, § 3.4(b) Business expense deductions, §§ 2.5(a), 10.7 Business leagues, § 1.3(b) C corporations, §§ 2.8, 3.2, 6.14, 24.2, 24.7(a) Calendar year, § 2.9

■

Capital assets, §§ 2.16(a), 7.6(a) Capital gains, §§ 2.16(b), 2.20 Capital losses, § 2.16(b) Carrybacks, § 2.17 Carryovers, § 2.17 Charitable family limited partnerships, § 9.26 Charitable Gift Annuity Antitrust Relief Act of 1995, § 14.8 Charitable income trusts, § 16.9 Charitable lead trusts: general rules, § 16.1 income interests, § 16.2 income tax charitable deduction, § 16.3 and percentage limitation rules, § 16.6 and private foundation rules, § 16.7 tax treatment of, § 16.4 testamentary use of, § 16.5 valuing charitable deduction, § 16.11 Charitable remainder annuity trusts: additional contributions, § 12.2(h) annuity amount, maximum, § 12.2(c) annuity amount, minimum, § 12.2(b) annuity amount, payment of, § 12.2(a) annuity, period of payment, § 12.2(f) charitable deduction, §§ 12.2(j), 12.12(a) permissible income recipients, § 12.2(d) permissible remainder interest beneficiaries, § 12.2(g) remainder interest, minimum value of, § 12.2(i) Charitable remainder trusts: distributions, tax treatment of, § 12.5 division of, § 12.6 early termination of, § 12.7

140

■

bindex

02/03/2017

9:24:40

Page 141

CUMULATIVE INDEX

estate tax aspects of, § 5.4(h) general rules for, § 5.4(a) gift amount, determination of, § 12.4(h) gift tax aspects of, § 5.4(g) income recipients, permissible, §§ 12.2(d), 12.3(d) international transfers, § 19.2(d) issues, § 12.4 life insurance, § 17.6(c) mandatory provisions, § 12.9 options, transfers of, § 12.4(a) period of payment, §§ 12.2(f), 12.3(f) pooled income funds vs., § 13.10 private foundation rules, § 12.10 in real estate investment trusts, § 12.4(k) remainder interest, minimum value of, §§ 12.2(i), 12.3(i) scriveners’ errors, § 12.4(i) tangible personal property, transfers of, § 12.4(c) taxation of, § 12.8 tax treatment of distributions from, § 12.5 terminology of, § 12.1(a) time for paying income amount, § 12.4(g) trustees, change of, § 12.4(b) trust requirement for, § 12.1(b) university endowment investment sharing, § 12.4(j) unmarketable assets, valuation of, § 12.4(f) wealth replacement trusts, § 12.11 Charitable remainder unitrusts: additional contributions, § 12.3(h) charitable deduction, §§ 12.3(j), 12.12(a)

■

permissible income recipients, § 12.3(d) permissible remainder interest beneficiaries, § 12.3(g) remainder interest, minimum value of, § 12.3(i) types of, § 12.3(a) unitrust amount, maximum, § 12.3(c) unitrust amount, minimum, § 12.3(b) unitrust amount, payment of, § 12.3(a) unitrust amount, period of payment, § 12.2(f) Charitable sales promotions, § 25.4 Charitable sector, statistical profile of, § 1.4 Charitable split-dollar life insurance plans: deduction denial rules, § 17.6(b) in general, § 17.6(a) IRS notice regarding, § 17.6(c) penalties, § 17.6(b) Charitable tax shelters, § 1.6 Charities, § 3.2(b) Charity auctions: acquirers of items, deduction for, § 9.13(c) as businesses, § 9.13(a) donors of items, deduction for, § 9.13(b) quid pro quo rules for, § 9.13(e) reporting rules for, § 9.13(g) sales tax rules for, § 9.13(f) substantiation rules for, § 9.13(d) Check, money gifts by, § 6.2 Churches, §§ 1.3(a), 3.3(a) Circular gifts, § 3.1(d)

141

■

bindex

02/03/2017

9:24:40

Page 142

CUMULATIVE INDEX

Clothing: gifts of, §§ 9.25, 24.7(b)(4) substantiation requirements, § 21.7 Collectibles, contributions of, § 24.7(b)(11) Commercial co-venturing, § 25.4 Commingling, in pooled income funds, § 13.2(c) Commission on Private Philanthropy and Public Needs (Filer Commission), §§ 1.3(a), 1.4 Commodity futures contracts, contribution of, § 9.11 Common fund foundations, § 3.3(b) Community beautification and maintenance, § 3.2(b) Community foundations, § 3.3(a) Community trusts: in general, § 3.3(a) pooled income funds of, § 13.9(b) Completion, requirement of, § 3.1(k) Computer technology and equipment, contribution of, § 9.5 Conditional gifts: enforcement of, § 10.4(d) material conditions deductibility, § 10.4(c) nondeductibility, § 10.4(a) negligible conditions, § 10.4(b) Conduit foundations, § 3.4(b) Conduit restriction, § 18.3 Conservation easements, permanent, § 8.3(b) Conservation purposes, gifts of real property for: definition of conservation purpose, § 9.7(c) and donative intent, § 9.7(h)

■

exclusivity requirement, § 9.7(d) organizations, qualified, § 9.7(b) qualified real property interests, § 9.7(a) rehabilitation tax credit, relationship to, § 9.7(g) substantiation requirement, § 9.7(f) valuation, fair market, § 9.7(e) Consideration, § 3.1(a) Contemporaneous written acknowledgment, § 21.3(a) Contributed property, reporting on dispositions of, § 24.10 Contribution base, § 7.2 Conventions (of churches), § 3.3(a) Copyright interest, timing of gifts of, § 6.6 Cornuelle, Richard C., § 1.3(a) Corporate distributions, taxation of, § 2.21 Corporate sponsorship rules, § 23.3 Corporations: appraisal requirements, § 21.5 C corporations, §§ 2.8, 3.2, 6.14, 24.2, 24.7(a) foreign affiliates, giving by, § 20.2 gifts by, § 6.13 international giving by charitable organizations, grants to, § 20.4(e) charitable purpose, § 20.4(b) from foreign affiliate to overseas charity, § 20.2 funds from U.S. corporationrelated foundation to foreign charity, grant of, § 20.4 goods/services, gift of, § 20.3 grantee categories, overseas, § 20.4(d)

142

■

bindex

02/03/2017

9:24:40

Page 143

CUMULATIVE INDEX

IRS simplified procedure, § 20.4(f) non-charitable organizations, grants to, § 20.4(g) responsibility, expenditure, § 20.4(c) taxable expenditures, § 20.4(a) to U.S. charity for overseas use, § 20.1 as legal fictions, § 2.8 and percentage limitations carryover rules, §§ 7.18(b), 7.19(a) general rules, § 7.18 (a) taxable income, § 7.3 S corporations, § 3.2 sponsorship rules in general, § 23.3(a) qualified payments, § 23.3(b) as taxpaying entity, § 2.8(b) tax rate system for, § 2.15 timing of gifts by, § 6.13 transfers to foreign, § 19.2(a) Cost basis, § 2.14(a) Cost method, § 2.13 Cost or market method, § 2.13 CRATs, see Charitable remainder annuity trusts Creations of donor, gifts of, § 9.12 Credit card(s): money gifts by, § 6.3 rebate plans, §§ 3.1(h), 6.11 Credits tax: foreign, § 2.21 in general, § 2.20 CRTs, see Charitable remainder trusts CRUTs, see Charitable remainder unitrusts Curti, Merle, § 1.3(a) Curtesy interests (in estate), § 8.3(a)

■

Death taxes, § 12.4(e) Debt: forgiveness of, § 3.1(d) gifts of property subject to, § 9.20 Debt-financed property, § 14.6 Deductions: automobile, § 9.27 business expense, § 2.5(a) charitable. See also Timing business expense deduction, interrelationship with, § 10.7 in general, § 1.1 definition of, § 2.5(a) itemized, § 2.5(c) personal expense, § 2.5(b) reallocation of, § 10.10 standard, § 2.6 Deduction reduction rule, §§ 4.4(b), 4.5(a), 4.6(a), 4.6(c), 9.19(c), 9.24, 9.28(b) Deferred giving, § 5.3 Deferred payment gift annuities: in general, § 14.3(a) tuition annuity programs, § 14.3(b) Democracy in America (Alexis de Tocqueville), § 1.3(a) Dependent exemption, § 2.7(b) Depreciation: deduction for, § 2.19 pass through of (pooled income funds), § 13.7 Destination of income test, § 3.4(a) De Tocqueville, Alexis, § 1.3(a) Disclosure requirements: in general, § 22.1 non-charitable organizations, § 22.3 quid pro quo contributions, § 22.2 state, § 25.11

143

■

bindex

02/03/2017

9:24:40

Page 144

CUMULATIVE INDEX

Disclosure requirements (Continued) Discounts, § 3.1(b) Disregarded entities, gifts to, § 10.9(b) Dividends, §§ 2.20, 3.1(i) Donative intent, §§ 3.1(a), 9.7(h) Donees: charitable, § 3.3(b) gift reporting by, § 24.5 Donee Information Return (Form 8282), App. D Donor, meaning of, § 3.2 Donors, identification of, § 18.2(g) Donors’ creations, gifts of, § 9.12 Donor-advised funds, §§ 3.1(f), 23.4 Donor-directed funds, § 3.1(f) Donor ownership, absence of, § 3.1(e) Donor recognition, § 3.1(e) Double taxation, § 2.8 Dower interests (in estate), § 8.3(a) Drugs, contributions of, § 24.7(b)(13) Earmarking restriction, § 18.3 Easements, gifts of, § 9.7 Economic development corporations, local, § 3.2(b) Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001, §§ 2.5(c), 2.7(c), 2.15, 8.4, 8.5 Education, advancement of, § 3.2(b) Educational institutions, § 3.3(a) Educational organizations, § 3.2(b) Effective rate of taxation, § 2.15 Election: doctrine of, § 7.7(b) timing of, § 7.7(f) Electronic substantiation, § 21.3(a) Employees, in nonprofit sector, § 1.4 Employee benefit programs, § 1.3

■

Employee hardship programs, § 3.1(l) Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), § 9.10(c) England, § 1.3(a) Entire interest in property, gift of undivided portion of, § 15.3 ERISA (Employee Retirement Income Security Act), § 9.10(c) Estate(s): administration expenses, § 8.3(b) balancing, estate, § 8.6(f) contributions by, § 9.22A and credit maximizing trusts/ transactions, § 8.6(e) freezing of, § 8.6(b) gross, §§ 8.3(a), 8.3(c) reduction of, § 8.6(a) retained life, § 8.3(a) special valuation rules for, § 8.6(b) as taxpaying entity, § 2.8(c) Estate tax: and ascertain ability, § 8.8 and basis of transferred property, § 8.3(d) charitable gift annuities, § 14.4 with charitable remainder trusts, § 5.4(h) deferral of, § 8.6(c) in general, § 8.1 gross estate under, §§ 8.3(a), 8.3(c) international giving charitable remainder trusts, testamentary, § 19.2(d) foreign corporation, transfer to, § 19.2(a) foreign government, transfer to, § 19.2(b)

144

■

bindex

02/03/2017

9:24:40

Page 145

CUMULATIVE INDEX

noncitizen residents, giving by, § 19.4 trustee, transfer to, § 19.2(c) and remainder interests in general, § 8.7(a) reformations, § 8.7(c) will contests, § 8.7(b) retirement plan accounts, charitable contributions from, § 9.10(e) taxable estate under, § 8.3(b) and timing of valuation, § 8.3(c) Exchanges: like kind, § 2.14(f) of stock, § 2.14(f) Exclusions from income, § 2.3 Executive branch, App. A Exemption(s): dependent, § 2.7(b) personal, § 2.7(a) phase out of, § 2.7(c) from state regulation, § 25.7 Expenditure responsibility, § 20.4(c) Expenditure test, § 3.3(b) Factors affecting deductibility, § 3.6 Facts and circumstances test, § 3.3(a) Fair market value, §§ 2.14, 4.2, 9.7(e), 10.1 Fairness, § 1.6 Farm, contribution of remainder interests in, § 15.2(b) Farmers, conservation contribution deduction for, § 9.7(j) Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, § 9.3(e) Federal tax law, incentives for charitable giving in, § 1.6 FIFO (first-in, first-out) method, § 2.13

■

$50 Test, App. E Fifty percent limitation: carryover rules for, § 7.5(b) electable, § 7.7 general rules for, § 7.5(a) and general thirty percent limitation, § 7.10 and special thirty percent limitation, § 7.9 Filer Commission, see Commission on Private Philanthropy and Public Needs First Amendment, § 1.3(c) First-in, first-out (FIFO) method, § 2.13 Fiscal year, § 2.9 Flat tax, §1.6 Flip charitable remainder unitrusts (FLIPCRUTs), §§ 12.1(a), 12.3(a), 12.4(h) Food and Energy Security Act of 2008, §§ 9.7(i), 9.7(j) For use of charity, gifts, §§ 7.13, 10.3 Foreign charities, see International giving Foreign tax credits, §§ 2.24, 9.29 Forms: 990, §§ 24.5, 24.5(a), 24.7(b) 990-EZ, §§ 24.5, 24.5(b), 24.5(c) 990-N, § 24.5 990-PF, § 24.5 990-T, § 24.6 1040, §§ 24.1, 24.7(a) 1041, §§ 24.5(a) 1041-A, § 24.13 1065, §§ 24.4, 24.7(a) 1065-B, §§ 24.4, 24.7(a) 1098-C, §§ 24.5(a), 24.8

145

■

bindex

02/03/2017

9:24:40

Page 146

CUMULATIVE INDEX

Forms (Continued) 1120, §§ 24.2, 24.7(a) 1120S, §§ 24.3, 24.7(a) 5227, § 24.13 8282, §§ 24.5(a), 24.7(a), 24.7(b)(20), 24.10, App. D 8283, §§ 24.6, 24.7, 24.7(a), 24.7(b) (19), 24.10, App. C 8871, § 24.5(c) 8872, § 24.5(c) 8899, §§ 24.5(a), 24.9 For-profit entities, § 1.2 Foundations: common fund, § 3.3(b) community, § 3.3(a) conduit, § 3.3(b) private, see Private foundations private operating, § 3.3(b) supporting, § 3.3(a) Fractional interests, gifts of, §§ 9.1(b), 15.3(b) Fragmentation rule, § 3.4(b) Fraternal beneficiary organizations, § 1.3(b) Freedom of association, § 1.3(c) Freedom of expressive association, § 1.3(c) Freedom of intimate association, § 1.3(c) Freezes, estate, § 8.6(b) Fundraising: cost limitations, § 25.8 IRS audit guidelines, § 23.1 special events, § 23.2 state regulation of contractual requirements, § 25.10 cost limitations, fundraising, § 25.8 disclosure requirements, § 25.11 exemptions from, § 25.7

■

in general, § 25.1 historical background, § 25.2 police power of states, § 25.3 prohibited acts, § 25.9 registration requirements, § 25.5 reporting requirements, § 25.6 terminology, § 25.4 Future interests, in tangible personal property, § 9.21 Gain(s), § 2.14. See also Capital gains and losses and adjusted basis, § 2.14(b) and appreciation, § 2.14(e) and basis, § 2.14(a) determination of, § 2.14(c) and realization of income, § 2.14(d) recognition of, § 2.14(f) rollover of, § 2.14(f) Gardner, John W., § 1.3(a) Gems, contributions of, §§ 9.2, 24.7(b)(10) General power of appointment, § 8.2(d) Generation-skipping transfer (GST) tax, § 8.5 Generation-skipping transfers, § 8.6(d) Ghoul trusts, § 16.8(a) Gift(s): of art works, § 9.1(a) circular, § 3.1(d) of commodity futures contracts, § 9.11 completed, § 3.1(j) of computer technology and equipment, § 9.5 conditional material conditions, §§ 10.4(a), 10.4(c) negligible conditions, § 10.4(b) of creations of donor, § 9.12 definition of, §§ 3.1, 8.2(a)

146

■

bindex

02/03/2017

9:24:40

Page 147

CUMULATIVE INDEX

earmarking of, § 10.5 factors affecting deductibility of charitable, § 3.6 of gems, § 9.2 in general, § 1.1 of insurance, § 17.3 of inventory amount of reduction of charitable contribution, § 9.3(f) basic rules for, § 9.3(a) book inventory, special rules, § 9.3(i) Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, compliance with, § 9.3(e) food inventory, special rules, § 9.3(h) recapture, exclusion of, § 9.3(g) transfer of contributed property, restrictions on, § 9.3(c) use, restrictions on, § 9.3(b) written statement requirement, § 9.3(d) mandatory, § 3.1(l) money, §§ 4.1, 6.2, 6.3, 6.4 to non-charitable organizations, § 10.9 of partial interests, § 9.23 planned, see Planned giving of property, see Property rules for, § 3.1(a) of scientific research property, § 9.4 of stock, §§ 9.8, 9.9 taxable, §§ 8.2(f), 8.2(g) and terrorism, § 10.11 for use of charity, § 10.3 Gift acceptance policy, § 24.7(b)(21) Gift annuities, charitable, see Charitable gift annuities

■

Gift reporting: by C corporations, § 24.2 on dispositions of property, § 24.10 by donees in general, § 24.5 by individuals, § 24.1 intellectual property, § 24.9 of noncash gifts, § 24.7 by partnerships, § 24.4 by S corporations, § 24.3 in unrelated business context, § 24.6 vehicles, § 24.8 Gift tax: annual exclusion, § 8.2(h) basis of gift property for, § 8.2(j) charitable gift annuities, § 14.4 with charitable remainder trusts, § 5.4(g) and deductions from taxable gifts, § 8.2(k) and definition of gift, § 8.2(a) disclaimers under, § 8.2(a) exclusions under, § 8.2(g) in general, § 8.1 imposition of, § 8.2(b) international giving, §§ 19.3, 19.4(b) liability for, § 8.2(l) non-gift transfers, § 8.2(e) and powers of appointment, § 8.2(d) scope of, § 8.2(c) split gifts between spouses, § 8.2(m) taxable gifts under, § 8.2(f) valuation of transfers for, § 8.2(i) Good will, § 2.12(d) Government(s): entities, governmental, § 1.2 lessening of burdens of, § 3.3(b)

147

■

bindex

02/03/2017

9:24:40

Page 148

CUMULATIVE INDEX

Government(s) (Continued) transfers to foreign, § 19.2(b) units, governmental, § 3.4(a) Grantor trust rules, § 3.7 Gravesites, § 3.1(d) Gross estate: in general, § 8.3(a) timing of valuation of, § 8.3(c) Gross income: adjusted, § 2.4 in general, §§1.6, 2.1, 2.2 Group-term life insurance, § 17.2(b) GST (generation-skipping transfer) tax, § 8.5 Guaranteed annuity interests, § 9.22 (c) Health, promotion of, § 3.2(b) Health care institutions, § 3.3(a) Heartland, Habitat, Harvest, and Horticulture Act of 2008, §§ 7.12A, 7.12B Henle, Robert J., §1.3(a) Historical artifacts, contributions of, § 24.7(b)(15) Hospitals, § 3.3(a) Household items: gifts of, §§ 9.25, 24.7(b)(4) substantiation requirements, § 21.7 IDEA (Individuals with Disabilities Education Act), § 3.1(d) Incidental benefits, § 3.1(c) Income: adjusted gross, § 2.4 anticipatory assignments of, § 3.1(g) concept of, § 2.1 exclusions from, § 2.3

■

gross, §§ 2.1, 2.2 ordinary, § 2.16(b) pooled, see Pooled income funds realization of, § 2.14(d) of tax-exempt organizations, § 1.4 tax treatment of, § 2.15 taxable, § 2.7 taxation of, § 2.15 trust definition of, §§ 12.3(a)(iv), 12(d), 13.8 unrelated business, see Unrelated business income rules Income in respect of decedent (IRD), §§ 9.10 (a), 9.10(b), 9.22(a) Income interest: charitable lead trusts, § 16.2 charitable remainder trusts, §§ 12.2(a)-(c), 12.3(a)-(c) in property, § 5.3 Income tax, §§ 1.1, 9.10(c) Income Tax Treaty (Canada-United States), §18.6 Individuals: gift reporting by, § 24.1 as taxpayers, § 2.8(a) Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), § 3.1(d) Institutions, § 3.3(a) Insubstantiality threshold, inflationadjusted: $50 Test, App. E $25 Test, App. F Insufficient consideration, transfers for, § 8.3(a) Insurable interest, § 17.4 Intangible personal property, § 2.12(d) Intangible religious benefit, § 21.3(a)

148

■

bindex

02/03/2017

9:24:40

Page 149

CUMULATIVE INDEX

Intellectual property: gift reporting by, § 24.9 gifts of, §§ 9.28, 24.7(b)(6) Interest rates, monthly federal, App. H Internal Revenue Code sections, App. B Internal Revenue Service audits, not conditions precedent, § 10.4(e) International giving: by corporations charitable organizations, grants to, § 20.4(e) charitable purpose, § 20.4(b) from foreign affiliate to overseas charity, § 20.2 funds from U.S.-corporation related foundation to foreign charity, grant of, § 20.4 goods/services to foreign charity, gift of, §20.3 grantee categories, overseas, § 20.4(d) IRS simplified procedure, § 20.4(f) non-charitable organizations, grants to, § 20.4(g) responsibility, expenditure, § 20.4(c) taxable expenditures, § 20.4(a) to U.S. charity for overseas use, § 20.1 estate tax rules charitable remainder trusts, testamentary, § 19.2(d) foreign corporation, transfer to, § 19.2(a) foreign government, transfer to, § 19.2(b) noncitizen residents, giving by, § 19.4 trustee, transfer to, § 19.2(c) foreign corporation, transfer to, § 19.2(a) gift tax rules, §§ 19.3, 19.4(b)

■

by individuals during lifetime conduit restriction, § 18.3 earmarking restriction, § 18.3 foreign donees, control over, § 18.4 in general, §§ 18.1, 18.5 legislative background, § 18.2 treaty provisions, § 18.6 by individuals through estates estate tax rules, §§ 19.2, 19.4(a) in general, § 19.1 gift tax rules, §§ 19.3, 19.4(b) noncitizen residents, giving by, § 19.4 Internet, gifts by means of, § 6.17 Itemized deduction limitation, § 2.5(c) Inventory, gifts of: amount of reduction of charitable contribution, § 9.3(f) basic rules for, § 9.3(a) book inventory, § 9.3(i) Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, compliance with, § 9.3(e) food inventory, § 9.3(h) in general, §§ 2.13, 24.7(b)(12) recapture, exclusion of, § 9.3(g) transfer of contributed property, restrictions on, § 9.3(c) use, restrictions on, § 9.3(b) written statement requirement, § 9.3(d) Investment Advisors Act of 1940, § 5.9 Investment Company Act of 1940, §§ 5.9, 14.9 Involuntary conversions, § 2.14(f) IRD, see Income in respect of decedent Itemized deductions, limitation on, § 2.5(c)

149

■

bindex

02/03/2017

9:24:40

Page 150

CUMULATIVE INDEX

Inventory, gifts of (Continued) Jewelry, contributions of, § 24.7(b)(10) Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003, §§ 2.15, 2.16(b) Joint interests, § 8.3(a) Judiciary branch, App. A Land transfers, § 3.1(b) Last-in, first-out (L1FO) method, §§ 2.13, 9.3(f) Law firms, public interest, § 3.2(b) Lead trusts, charitable, see Charitable lead trusts Letters of credit, timing of gifts of, § 6.8 Library of Congress, § 3.1(d) License to use patent, gifts of, § 9.6 Life income interests (pooled income funds): in general, § 13.2(b) termination of interest, § 13.2(h) Life insurance: charitable deduction for gifts related to, § 17.3 charitable gift annuities, § 17.6(b) charitable remainder trusts, § 17.6(b) charitable split-dollar plans charitable deduction denial rules, § 17.6(b) in general, § 17.6(a) IRS notice regarding, § 17.6(c) penalties, § 17.6(b) in general, § 17.1 gross estate, § 8.3(a) interest, insurable, § 17.4 partial interests, § 17.6(b) policies, § 17.2(a) types of, § 17.2(b)

■

and unrelated debt-financed income, § 17.5 valuation of, § 17.2(c) LIFO method, see Last-in, first-out method Like kind exchanges, § 2.14(f) Limited liability companies, § 2.8 Liquidity, § 2.14 Listing reliance rules, §§ 3.6, 3.6A Loans, of art works, §§ 8.2(g), 9.1(b) Lobbying activities, denial of deduction for, § 10.8 Local economic development corporations, §3.2(b) Long-term capital gains, § 2.16(c) Long-term capital gain property, gifts of, §§ 4.3, 7.1 Lotteries, payments for, § 3.1(b) Low-cost article definition, inflation-adjusted, App. G Lyman, Richard W., § 1.3(a) Mandatory payments, § 3.1(l) Marital estate tax deductions, § 8.3(b) Marital gift tax deduction, § 8.2(k) Medical care, §§ 3.3(a), 8.2(g) Medical research organizations, § 3.3(a) Medical supplies, contributions of, § 24.7(b)(13) Mill, John Stuart, §1.3(a) Money gifts: in general, §§ 4.1, 6.1 timing of check, gifts by, § 6.2 creditcard, gifts by, § 6.3 telephone, gifts by, § 6.4

150

■

bindex

02/03/2017

9:24:40

Page 151

CUMULATIVE INDEX

as sector of society, § 1.2 tax-exempt organizations vs., § 1.2 Nonstandard contributions, § 24.7(b)(21) Nontaxable entities, § 2.8 Notes, timing of gifts by means of, § 6.7

Multi-organization pooled income funds: community trusts, § 13.9(b) national organizations, § 6 13.9(a), 13.9(c) Neilsen, Waldemar A., § 1.3(a) Net income charitable remainder unitrusts (NICRUTs), §§ 12.1(a), 12.3(a), 12.4(g), 12.4(h) Net income make-up charitable remainder unitrusts (NIMCRUTs), §§ 12.1(a), 12.3(a), 12.4(g), 12.4(h) NICRUTs, see Net income charitable remainder unitrusts NIMCRUTs, see Net income make-up charitable remainder unitrusts Nominal appreciation, § 2.14(e) Noncash Charitable Contributions (Form 8283) Noncash contributions: reporting requirement, §§ 10.16, 24.7 substantiation requirements, § 21.4 Noncharitable organizations: deductible gifts to, § 10.9 disclosure by, § 22.3 international giving by corporations to, § 20.4(g) Nonprofit Almanac: Dimensions of the Independent Sector, § 1.4 Nonprofit organizations, § 1.3 for-profit organizations, § 1.2 public policy rationale for tax-exempt status of, § 1.3(a) rationales for tax-exemption eligibility of, § 1.3 rules for creation of, § 1.2

■

O’Connell, Brian, § 1.3(a) Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993, § 10.6 One taxpayer rule, § 20.2 On Liberty (John Stuart Mill), § 1.3(a) Operating expenditures (nonprofit organizations), § 1.4 Option, property subject to, § 6.9 Ordinary income: element, ordinary income, § 4.4(b) in general, § 2.16(b) gifts of ordinary income property deduction reduction rule, § 4.4(b) definition, § 4.4(a) in general, § 4.4 inapplicability, special rules of, § 4.4(c) Partial interests: gifts of, §§ 5.3, 9.23 life insurance, § 17.6(d) monthly federal interest rates used in valuation of, App. H valuation of general actuarial valuations, § 11.3 nonstandard actuarial factors, § 11.4 standard actuarial factors, § 11.2 statutory law, § 11.1 Partnerships: in general, § 2.8 gift reporting by, § 24.4 gifts by, §§ 6.16, 24.7(a)

151

■

bindex

02/03/2017

9:24:40

Page 152

CUMULATIVE INDEX

Partnerships (Continued) Payroll deduction plans: in general, 3.1(a)(i) recordkeeping requirements, § 21.3(a) Penalties, §§ 10.14, 17.6(c) Pension Protection Act of 2006, §§ 3.4, 6.15, 9.10(e), 17.7, 21.1, 21.5, 21.6 Pension rights, waiver of, § 8.2(g) Percentage limitations: blending of, § 7.14 carryback rules for, § 7.15(b) carryover rules for corporations, §§ 7.18(b), 7.19(a) fifty percent limitation, § 7.5(b) in general, § 7.4(b) net operating losses, § 7.15(a) thirty percent limitation, §§ 7.6(b), 7.8(b) twenty percent limitation, § 7.12(b) charitable lead trusts, § 16.6 and contribution base of individual, § 7.2 corporations carryover rules for, §§ 7.18(b), 7.19(a) general rules for, § 7.18(a) taxable income of, § 7.3 fifty percent limitation carryover rules for, § 7.5(b) electable, § 7.7 general rules for, § 7.5(a) and general thirty percent limitation, § 7.10 and special thirty percent limitation, § 7.9 in general, § 7.1 general rules for, § 7.4(a) information requirements, § 7.17

■

net operating loss carryovers carryback rules, §§ 7.15(b), 7.19(b) carryover rules, §§ 7.15(a), 7.19(a) for corporations, §§ 7.19(a), 7.19(b), 7.19(c) for individuals, §§ 7.15(a), 7.15(b) spouses, rules for, § 7.16 thirty percent limitation carryover rules for, §§ 7.6(b), 7.8(b) and fifty percent limitation, §§ 7.9, 7.10 general, §§ 7.8(a), 7.8(b), 7.10, 7.11 general rules for, §§ 7.6(a), 7.8(a) special, §§ 7.9, 7.11 twenty percent limitation carryover rules for, § 7.12(b) general rules for, § 7.12(a) use of charity gifts for, § 7.13 Permanent conservation easements, § 8.3(b) Perpetual conservation restrictions, § 9.7(a) Personal benefit contracts, reporting requirements, § 24.12 Personal exemption, § 2.7(a) Personal expense deductions, § 2.5(b) Personal holding company taxes, § 2.22 Personal property, § 2.12(b) intangible, § 2.12(d) tangible, § 2.12(c) future interests in, § 9.21 timing of gifts of, § 6.11 Personal residence, contribution of remainder interests in, § 15.2(a) Phase out of exemptions, § 2.7(c) Philanthropy, § 1.3(a) Philanthropy Protection Act of 1995, § 5.9

152

■

bindex

02/03/2017

9:24:40

Page 153

CUMULATIVE INDEX

Planned giving, § 1.1 alternative forms of, § 5.8 appreciated property gifts, § 5.2 charitable gift annuities, see Charitable gift annuities charitable lead trusts, see Charitable lead trusts charitable remainder trusts, see Charitable remainder trusts core concepts, § 5.3 in general, § 5.1 pooled income funds, see Pooled income funds and securities laws, § 5.9 types of planned gifts, § 5.3 Pleasure, limitation on deduction due to, § 9.16 Pledges, charitable, § 4.9 Pluralism, § 1.3(a) Police power (of states), § 25.3 Political organizations, transfers to, § 8.2(g) Pooled income funds: allocation of income from charity, partial allocation to, § 13.3(b) units of participation, § 13.3(a) beneficiaries, tax status of, § 13.8 charitable contribution deduction for transfers to, § 13.11 charitable deduction, determination of, § 5.5(d) charitable remainder trusts vs., § 13.10 commingling of property in, § 13.2(c) deemed rates of return for transfers to new, App. I depreciation, pass-through of, § 13.7

■

distributions from, §§ 5.5(c), 5.5(e) exempt securities, prohibition on, § 13.2(d) in general, § 5.5(a) income of beneficiaries of, § 13.2(g) instruments for creation of, § 5.5(g) life income interest, termination of, § 13.2(h) life income interests, § 13.2(b) maintenance of, § 13.2(e) mandatory provisions with, § 13.5 multi-organization community trusts, § 13.9(b) national organizations, §§ 13.9 (a), 13.9(c) and private foundation rules, § 13.6 remainder interests, § 13.2(a) seeding of, § 5.5(h) tax status of, § 13.8 tax treatment of, § 5.5(e) termination of life income interest, § 13.2(h) terminology of, § 13.1(a) transfers, recognition of gains/ losses on, §13.4 trustee, selection of, § 5.5(f) trustees, prohibition on, § 13.2(f) units of, valuation/assignment of, § 5.5(b) Poverty, relief of, § 3.2(b) Powers of appointment (gross estate), § 8.3(a) Preamble to the Statute of Charitable Uses, §1.3(a) Premiums, life insurance, § 17.2(a) Principal-agent doctrine, §§ 6.15, 9.25, 10.2 Prior-month election rule, § 11.1

153

■

bindex

02/03/2017

9:24:40

Page 154

CUMULATIVE INDEX

Private foundations, § 3.4(c) charitable lead trust as, §§ 5.7(f), 16.7 charitable remainder trusts as, § 12.10 pooled income funds, rules for, § 13.6 Private inurement doctrine, § 1.2 Private operating foundations, § 3.4(b) Private voluntary organizations, § 20.1 Probability-of-Exhaustion Test, § 12.2(k) Profits, §1.2 Progressivity (of tax law), § 1.6 Prohibited material restrictions, § 3.1(f) Property: appreciation element in gifts of, § 4.2 capital gain, gifts of general deduction reduction rule, § 4.5(a) long-term capital gain, §§ 4.3, 7.1 stock, qualified appreciated, § 4.5(b) contributions of use of, § 9.18 debt, subject to, § 9.20 debt-financed, § 14.6 fair market value of, § 4.2 future interests in tangible personal, § 9.21 in general, §§ 2.12, 4.2 gifts of, §§ 4.2-4.6 intangible personal, § 2.12(d) ordinary income deduction reduction rule, § 4.4(b) definition, § 4.4(a) in general, § 4.4 in applicability, special rules of, § 4.4(c) personal, § 2.12(b) pledges, charitable, § 4.9

■

real, § 2.12(a) scientific research, § 9.4 and step transaction doctrine, § 4.8 tangible personal, § 2.12(c) future interests in, § 9.21 timing of gifts of, § 6.11 for unrelated use definition of unrelated use, § 4.6(b) general rule, § 4.6(a) use of, § 9.18 valuation of, see Valuation variations in application of rules for gifts of, § 4.7 Protecting Americans from Tax Hikes Act of 2015, §§ 3.4(a), 6.15, 7.12A, 7.12B, 8.2(g), 9.3(b), 9.10(e), 12.12(b) Public associations, § 1.3(a) Public charitable organizations, §§ 3.4(a), 7.1 Public interest law firms, § 3.3(b) Public international organizations, § 20.4(d) Publications, contributions of, § 24.7(b)(3) Publicly supported organizations, § 3.4(a) Public policy doctrine, §§ 1.3(a), 3.3(b), 9.31 QTIP (qualified terminable interest property), § 8.3(b) Qualified appraisal, § 21.5(a) Qualified appraiser, § 21.5(b) Qualified appreciated stock, § 4.5(b) Qualified conservation contributions, § 24.7(b)(8) Qualified conservation easements, § 8.3(b)(iv)

154

■

bindex

02/03/2017

9:24:40

Page 155

CUMULATIVE INDEX

Qualified contingencies, §§ 12.2(k), 12.12(c) Qualified disclaimers, § 8.2(n) Qualified elementary or secondary educational contributions, § 9.5 Qualified employer securities, §§ 12.2(g), 12.3(g) Qualified gratuitous transfers, §§ 12.2(g), 12.3(g) Qualified mineral interests, § 9.7(d) Qualified reformations, § 8.6(c) Qualified terminable interest property (QTIP), § 8.3(b) Quid pro quo contribution rules: charity auctions, § 9.13(e) disclosure requirements, §§ 22.1, 22.2 in general, § 3.1(b) Raffles, payments for, § 3.1(b) Ranchers, conservation contribution deduction for, § 9.7(j) Real appreciation, § 2.14(e) Real estate mortgage investment conduit, gifts by corporations holding interest in, § 7.18(a) Realization of income, § 2.14(d) Reallocation of deductions, § 10.10 Real property, gifts of: for conservation purposes definition of conservation purpose, § 9.7(c) and donative intent, § 9.7(h) exclusivity requirement, § 9.7(d) organizations, qualified, § 9.7(b) qualified real property interests, § 9.7(a) rehabilitation tax credit, relationship to, §9.7(g)

■

substantiation requirement, § 9.7(f) valuation, fair market, § 9.7(e) in general, §§ 2.12(a), 3.1(d), 24.7(b)(9) timing of, § 6.12 Rebates, credit card, §§ 3.1(h), 6.11 Recapture: of charitable deduction, § 4.6(c) of contributions by trust, § 9.22(f) inventory, gifts of, § 9.3(g) Receipt requirements: $250 or more, contributions of, § 21.3(a) less than $250, contributions of, § 21.2 Recipients, charitable, § 1.1 Recognition, §§ 2.14(f), 3.1(e) Recommendatory rights, § 3.1(f) Registered historic districts, structure or area in, § 9.7(c) Registration requirements, state, § 25.5 Regularly carried on, § 3.4(c) Regulated investment companies, gifts by, § 7.18(a) Rehabilitation tax credit, § 9.7(g) Relation-back doctrine, § 6.2 Religion, advancement of, § 3.2(b) Religious organizations, § 3.2(b) Remainder interests: beneficiaries of remainder interests CRATs, § 12.2(g) CRUTs, § 12.3(g) entire interest in property, undivided portion of, § 15.3 in farm, § 15.2(b) in general, §§ 5.3, 8.7(a), 15.1

155

■

bindex

02/03/2017

9:24:40

Page 156

CUMULATIVE INDEX

Remainder interests (Continued) minimum value of remainder interest CRATs, § 12.2(i) CRUTs, § 12.3(i) in personal residence, § 15.2(a) pooled income funds, § 13.2(a) reformations, § 8.7(c) will contests, § 8.7(b) Remainder trusts, charitable, see Charitable remainder trusts Reporting requirements: charity auctions, § 9.13(g) federal, ch. 24 state, § 25.6 Residence: contribution of remainder interests in, § 15.2(a) rollover of gain in, § 2.14(f) Retained life estates, § 8.3(a) Retirement plan accounts, charitable contributions from: income in respect of decedent, § 9.10(a) planning for, § 9.10(b) potential problems and solutions with, § 9.10(c) Revenue Act of 1913, § 1.3(a) Revenue Act of 1936, § 18.2 Revenue Act of 1938, § 18.2 Revenue Act of 1939, § 18.2 Revenue Act of 1992, § 20.2 Revocable transfers (gross estate), § 8.3(a) Rockefeller, John D., § 1.3(a) Rollover, of gain in residence, § 2.14(f) S corporation stock, gifts of: donee, consideration for, § 9.8(c) donor, considerations for, § 9.8(b) in general, §§ 9.8(a), 9.8(d)

■

S corporations, §§ 2.8, 3.2, 6.13, 6.15, 7.18(a), 9.8, 24.3, 24.7(a) Sales tax rules (charity auctions), § 9.13(f) Schedule M, Form 990, § 24.7(b) Science, advancement of, § 3.3(b) Scientific organizations, § 3.3(b) Scientific research property, gifts of, § 9.4 Scientific specimens, contributions of, § 24.7 Scrivener’s errors, § 12.4(i) SCRUTs, see Standard charitable remainder unitrusts SEC (Securities and Exchange Commission), §5.9 Section 306 stock, gifts of, §§ 4.4(a), 9.9 Securities. See also Stock in general, § 2.12(d) gifts of, § 24.7(b)(7) prohibition on exempt, in pooled income funds, § 13.2(d) timing of gifts of, § 6.5 Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), § 5.9 Securities Exchange Act of 1934, §§ 5.9, 14.9 Securities laws, §§ 5.9, 14.9 Seeding, of pooled income funds, § 5.5(h) Service provider organizations, § 24.7(b)(22) Services, contributions of, §§ 9.14, 20.3 Short-term capital gains, § 2.16(c) Social clubs, § 1.3 Social welfare, promotion of, § 3.2(b)

156

■

bindex

02/03/2017

9:24:40

Page 157

CUMULATIVE INDEX

Sole proprietorships, § 2.8 Special Emphasis Program, § 23.1(b) Special events, § 23.2 Special valuation rules (estates), § 8.6(b) Split-dollar life insurance plans, § 17.6 Split-interest trusts: filing requirements, § 24.13 in general, §§ 5.3, chs. 12, 13, 16, 21.3 Spouses: elective share laws, §§ 12.2(d), 12.3(d) and marital estate tax deductions, § 8.3(b) and marital gift tax deduction, § 8.2(k) and percentage limitations, § 7.16 split gifts between, § 8.2(m) Standard charitable remainder unitrusts (SCRUTs), §§ 12.1(a), 12.3(a) Standard deduction, § 2.6 State laws and regulations: fundraising contractual requirements, § 25.10 cost limitations, fundraising, § 25.8 disclosure requirements, § 25.11 exemptions from, § 25.7 in general, § 25.1 historical background, § 25.2 police power of states, § 25.3 prohibited acts, § 25.9 registration requirements, § 25.5 reporting requirements, § 25.6 terminology, § 25.5 sources of, App. A Statute of limitations, § 10.12 Stepped-up basis, § 2.14(a) Step transaction doctrine, §§ 4.8, 9.8(b)

■

Stock: exchanges of, § 2.14(f) qualified appreciated, § 4.5(b) Stock options, gifts of, § 6.10 Stockholders, dividends paid to charities as, § 3.1(i) Subsistence whaling expenses, § 9.30 Substantial compliance doctrine, §§ 12.1(c), 21.5(c) Substantial part test, § 3.3(b) Substantiation: $250 or more, contributions of, § 21.3 appraisal requirements, § 21.5 burden of proof rules, § 21.8 charity auctions, § 9.13(d) clothing and household items, § 21.7 conservation purposes, gifts of real property for, § 9.7(f) disclosure requirements, see Disclosure requirements electronic, § 21.3 less than $250, contributions of, § 21.2 noncash contributions, § 2l.4 reporting requirements, § 21.7 Successor member interests, gifts of, § 10.15 Supporting foundations, § 3.4(a) Supporting organizations, § 3.4(a) Survivorship whole life insurance, § 17.2(b) Sweepstakes, gifts in connection with, § 3.1(b) Tangible personal property, § 2.12(c) future interests in, § 9.21 timing of gifts of, § 6.11 transfers of (CRTs), § 12.4(c) Taxable estate, § 8.3(b)

157

■

bindex

02/03/2017

9:24:40

Page 158

CUMULATIVE INDEX

Taxable gifts: exclusions from, § 8.2(g) in general, § 8.2(f) Taxable income, concept of, § 2.7 Tax benefit rule, § 12.4(i) Tax brackets, § 2.15 Tax credits: foreign, §§ 2.24, 9.29 in general, § 2.23 Tax Extenders and Alternative Minimum Tax Relief Act of 2008, §§ 6.15, 9.3(h), 9.3(i), 9.5, 9.10(e) Tax-exempt organizations: categories of, § 1.5 defined, § 1.2 examples of, § 3.3(a) retirement plan accounts, charitable contributions from, § 9.10(c) statistical profile of, § 1.4 Tax-exempt status, § 3.3(a) Taxpayers, § 2.1 Tax Increase Prevention Act of 2014, §§ 6.15, 7.12B, 9.3(h), 9.10(e) Tax preferences, § 1.6 Tax Reform Act of 1986, § 2.16(b) Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010, §§ 6.15, 7.12A, 7.12B, 8.4, 8.4A, 9.3(h), 9.3(i), 9.5 Tax shelters, § 1.6 Tax year, § 2.9 Taxable entities, § 2.8 Taxidermy, contribution of, §§ 9.24, 24.7(b)(14) Telephone, money gifts by, § 6.4 Term life insurance, § 17.2(b) Terrorism, funding of, § 10.11

■

Thirty percent limitation: carryover rules for, §§ 7.6(b), 7.8(b) general limitation and fifty percent limitation, § 7.10 general rules, § 7.8(b) and special thirty percent limitation, § 7.11 general rules for, §§ 7.6(a), 7.8(a) special limitation and fifty percent limitation, § 7.9 general rules, § 7.8(a) and general thirty percent limitation, § 7.11 Tickets, right to purchase, gift for, § 3.1(b) Timing: and accounting method, § 2.11(a) and annual accounting period, § 2.1l(b) copyright interest, gifts of, § 6.6 corporations, gifts by, § 6.13 credit card rebates, gifts of, § 6.10 of gross estate valuation, § 8.3(c) and income taxation, § 2.11 letters of credit, gifts by, § 6.8 of money gifts by checks, § 6.2 by credit card, § 6.3 in general, § 6.1 by telephone, § 6.4 notes, gifts by means of, § 6.7 partnerships, gifts by, § 6.14 of payment of annuity amount (from charitable remainder trust), § 12.4(g) and percentage limitations, § 7.19(c) property subject to option, gifts of, § 6.9 real property, gifts of, § 6.12

158

■

bindex

02/03/2017

9:24:40

Page 159

CUMULATIVE INDEX

securities, gifts of, § 6.5 tangible personal property, gifts of, § 6.11 Total return investment principle, §§ 12.3(a)(iv), 13.8 Trade, § 3.4(b) Trade associations, § 1.3(b) Transactions of interest, § 10.15 Traveling expenses, limitation on deductibility of, § 9.15(a) Treaties, international: individuals during lifetime, giving by, § 18.6 individuals through estates, giving by, § 19.4(c) Trust(s): charitable lead trusts, see Charitable lead trusts charitable remainder, see Charitable remainder annuity trusts; Charitable remainder trusts community, § 3.3(a) contributions by general rules for, § 9.22(a) guaranteed annuity interests, § 9.22(b) limitations on deductibility of, § 9.22(f) recapture of, § 9.22(e) unitrust interests, § 9.22(c) valuation of, § 9.22(d) credit maximizing, § 8.6(e) grantor, § 3.8 income of, § 10.13 pooled income funds, § 5.5(g) reformations of, § 8.7(c) split-interest, § 5.3 as taxpaying entity, § 2.8(d) wealth replacement, § 12.9

■

Trustees: international transfers to, § 19.2(c) for pooled income funds, § 5.5(f) prohibition on, for pooled income funds, § 13.2(f) right to change (CRTs), § 12.4(b) Tuition, exclusion of, from gift tax, § 8.2(g) Tuition annuity programs, § 14.3(b) $25 Test, App. F Twenty percent limitation: carryover rules for, § 7.12(b) general rules for, § 7.12(a) Undivided portion of entire interest in property, gift of, § 15.3 Unified credit, § 8.4 Unified federal transfer tax, § 8.4 U.S. Congress, §§ 1.3,1.3(a), 1.6, 10.6, 11.1, 17.6(b), 17.6(c), App. A United States Olympic Team, § 3.1(b) U.S. Supreme Court, §§ 1.3(a), 1.3(c), 2.16(a), 3.1(a), 8.3(b), 8.8 Unit plan, § 13.3(a) Unitrust interests, §§ 5.7(a), 9.23, 12.3, 12.10(b) Unitrusts, charitable remainder, see Charitable remainder unitrusts Universal life insurance, § 17.2(b) University endowment investment sharing, § 12.4(j) Unreimbursed expenses, § 9.15 Unrelated business context, gift reporting in, §24.6 Unrelated business income rules, § 3.5 charitable gift annuities, § 14.5 and definition of unrelated business, § 3.5(d)

159

■

bindex

02/03/2017

9:24:40

Page 160

CUMULATIVE INDEX

Trustees (Continued) exempted activities in, § 3.5(f) income, exempted, § 3.5(g) regularly carried on requirement in, § 3.5(c) trade or business defined in, § 3.5(b) Unrelated debt-financed income: charitable gift annuities, § 14.6 life insurance, § 17.5 Unrelated use, gifts of property for: definition of unrelated use, § 4.6(b) general rule, § 4.6(a) Use of charity, gifts for, §§ 7.13, 10.3 Use of property, contributions of, § 9.18 Used vehicles, gifts of, § 9.27 Valuation: of art works, §§ 9.1(a), 10.1(b) conservation purposes, gifts of real property for, § 9.7(e) of contributions in trust, § 9.22(d) in general, §§ 2.14,10.1(a) of gift transfers basis of gifted property, § 8.2(j) in general, § 8.2(i)

■

of gross estate, § 8.3(c) of life insurance, § 17.2(c) of partial interests general actuarial valuations, § 11.3 nonstandard actuarial factors, § 11.4 standard actuarial factors, § 11.2 statutory law, § 11.1 of pooled income fund units, § 5.5(b) of remainder interests, § 16.10 special valuation rules, § 8.6(b) of vehicles, § 10.1(c) Value, absence of, § 3.1(d) Vehicles: contributions of, §§ 9.27, 24.7(5) gift reporting of, § 24.8 Voluntarism, § 1.3(a) Volunteering/volunteers, § 1.4 Wealth replacement trusts, § 12.11 Will contests, § 8.7(b)

160

■

WILEY END USER LICENSE AGREEMENT Go to www.wiley.com/go/eula to access Wiley’s ebook EULA.