this post was submitted on 17 Nov 2024
993 points (94.1% liked)

Comic Strips

12679 readers
3628 users here now

Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.

The rules are simple:

Web of links

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Bassman1805@lemmy.world 201 points 4 days ago (9 children)

Ah, this again.

The mega corporation did not receive any tax benefit from collecting donations. They are able to write off the amount of donations from their income, so that they aren't paying tax on the money they collected specifically to be donated.

  1. Company collects $1 donation from customer
  2. Company has $1 extra income
  3. Company donates $1 to charity
  4. Company writes that dollar off of their income.
  5. Company reports the exact same profit/loss as if they had not collected donations.
[–] sudoshakes@reddthat.com 10 points 3 days ago

That leaves out when the company prompting you charges an administration fee to collect part of that sum donated for their own profits.

It leaves out when they, like CVS did with the diabetes association charity collecting at checkouts, take the money as an IOU to the charity while making money out to offset loans in the near term.

It leaves out structuring of collected funds to allow a 503C arm of the corporation to have tax advantaged status while also specifically being chartered to help the for profit company that you are shopping at.

There are a variety of scummy practices employed by organizations collecting those funds and it absolutely can benefit them to do so.

[–] danc4498@lemmy.world 52 points 4 days ago (6 children)

I assumed this was true also, but I also believe the company is receiving some sort of kick back from this otherwise they wouldn’t be doing it.

[–] iAmTheTot@sh.itjust.works 130 points 4 days ago (2 children)

The "kick back" is good PR.

[–] Ethalis@jlai.lu 45 points 4 days ago (1 children)

And decision-makers at that company feeling good about themselves at no cost whatsoever for the company or themselves.

[–] thisbenzingring@lemmy.sdf.org 16 points 4 days ago (1 children)

exactly

its not really charity if you don't give something up

[–] kambusha@sh.itjust.works 14 points 4 days ago (1 children)

They really should match all donations.

[–] TheLowestStone@lemmy.world 6 points 4 days ago

The C-level executive should match all donations. Otherwise that's money that should be going to improving conditions for the workers.

[–] Serinus@lemmy.world 19 points 4 days ago

And, if it's a big enough portion of the charity's funding, influence over the charity. But not tax breaks.

[–] ininewcrow@lemmy.ca 49 points 4 days ago

The kickback is also in saying that they donated the money to charity .... which was collected from other people

It's like I asked you to donate money to a charity and I said I had to be the one to collect it .... then I take your money and donate it in my name ... basically, I took your generosity and claimed it as my own.

In many cases company's also understand that they can't openly do this because it would be too obvious ... instead they just ride the generosity gravy train ... they encourage people to donate to charities through their store/company/business ... then the company may or may not give their own contributions but they get to attach their name to the donated amounts.

It's like a billionaire selling you a can a beans and then asking you to donate a penny to a charity .... I always say no because the idiot billionaire could spare 1% of their wealth and give millions of dollars to charities everywhere, why the hell are you asking me?

I never give to charities through a store/company or business ... I give directly to charities on my own.

[–] very_well_lost@lemmy.world 24 points 4 days ago

It's a marketing thing. Stuff like this creates the illusion that they're good corporate citizens.

Of course, they could donate a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a percent of their own profits and make a much bigger impact, but that would set a bad precedent! Giving away your money is only for the working class!

[–] zante@slrpnk.net 13 points 4 days ago (1 children)

It’s true but it’s not the full story .

Who gets to go the charity dinner and presents the check to the orphanage?

Who gets in Time magazine for “taking a stand” for corporate responsibility?

A corporation is not capable of benevolence. Give directly to the charity yourself, you’ll get a sticker and sometime a free pen.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Kichae@lemmy.ca 26 points 3 days ago (1 children)

They do get a whole lot of advertising, social capital, and influnce over which causes get proped up, on the back of donating customers, while you're out a few bucks that you could have pooled for a single charity and gotten a tax receipt of your own for.

[–] spongebue@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago

They do get a whole lot of advertising, social capital, and influnce over which causes get proped up, on the back of donating customers

Sure, but that's not a tax write-off as originally said. Stick to the things that are actually things.

while you're out a few bucks that you could have pooled for a single charity and gotten a tax receipt of your own for

If your donations for the year exceed the standard deduction (hint: the standard deduction is about $15k. Most people take that instead of itemizing). Doesn't have to be one single donation, and if your receipt shows the donation (it should) and it's for a legitimate charity I don't see why you couldn't use that to deduct that donation if you itemize.

[–] TheBraveSirRobbin@lemmy.world 15 points 4 days ago (4 children)

Couldn't the CEO of the nonprofit be the spouse of the CEO and make a huge percentage of what they donate?

Not saying donating through a mega corporation is always bad, but I'd prefer to look into who I'm donating to rather than a split second thought at the end of a transaction.

[–] grepe@lemmy.world 10 points 3 days ago (1 children)

this! the megacorporation receives 500k donations, which they transfer to CEO's son's "charity" that spends 99% of it on the said son's salary. he buys another ferrari and the charity sends some flowers to a children cancer hospital.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Olhonestjim@lemmy.world 13 points 4 days ago

Yeah, because corporate charity is super regulated and never ever misused.

[–] iAmTheTot@sh.itjust.works 14 points 4 days ago (1 children)

They don't even report it as income, because it's not income. It's your donation, not the company's donation.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Sauerkraut@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 3 days ago

I hate how charities are run by rich assholes who pay themselves or their family and friends 6 to 7 figures while doing very little to actually help people

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] auzy@lemmy.world 48 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

My gym took $2 from everyone's account in a once off for charity unless you opted out.

And then bragged about all the money they raised in their marketing.

Yeah, by illegally stealing it from members

[–] jaschen@lemm.ee 20 points 3 days ago

Gym's. The original shitty subscription company.

[–] iAmTheTot@sh.itjust.works 66 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (11 children)

So sick and tired of this myth, how are Americans so goddamn ignorant of their own tax system that this continues to persist.

Corporations are evil for a million and one reasons. This isn't one of them.

[–] i_stole_ur_taco@lemmy.ca 43 points 4 days ago (6 children)

I know people who still repeat the line that earning more money will push them into a higher tax bracket and they’d end up with less money than if they stayed at their current income.

[–] iAmTheTot@sh.itjust.works 21 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Oh man don't even get me started on that one too. I knew some people that genuinely thought a bonus would make them earn less overall.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] NotAnotherLemmyUser@lemmy.world 7 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

So, there are some misconceptions about this on both sides. While some may misunderstand how tax brackets work, there absolutely are certain income thresholds where barely going over a certain amount will net you less money overall.


Edit: To clarify, you should accept the raise. In most cases all you need to do to avoid "losing money" at any of these points is to lower your AGI by contributing to an IRA, 401K, etc.


For example (using 2025 numbers here for a single filer):



  • Medicare Premium Increase (for those on medicare)
    @ $106k your medicare tax increases by $888, so you don't want a raise that puts you between $106k and $~107k
    @ $133k medicare tax increases by $1.3k, so you don't want a raise between $133k and $134k
    @ $167k medicare tax increases by $1.3k again
    @ $200k medicare tax increases by $1.3k again
    @ $500k medicare tax increases by $444... https://www.nerdwallet.com/article/insurance/medicare/what-is-the-medicare-irmaa



There are probably a few other taxes/credits I didn't include, but this is just a quick example with what I could look up at the moment.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] very_well_lost@lemmy.world 26 points 4 days ago

This myth is probably prevalent because corporations have spent the last 40 years squeezing every cheat and every advantage they can out of the system — to the point where anything that even smells like a "good gesture" is rightfully met with suspicion and contempt from the people they've been so blissfully exploring.

[–] edgemaster72@lemmy.world 18 points 4 days ago

how are Americans so goddamn ignorant

It's what we do best

[–] BlackPenguins@lemmy.world 14 points 4 days ago (3 children)

how are Americans so goddamn ignorant

I mean did you see who we just elected?

load more comments (3 replies)

Because when someone has been lying for a long time, any truth they might tell would be assumed to be lies, any good deed would be assumed to have an ulterier motive.

"Boy who cried wolf" basically.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] rational_lib@lemmy.world 28 points 3 days ago

Never trust a corporation, period. Their incentives are to maximize profits from whatever revenue streams they have, no matter what they tell you. There are ways they can do this that are at least in the gray area of legality,such as:

A class-action lawsuit was filed against CVS Health Corporation (CVS) in May 2022 accusing the company of “deceptive fund-raising in a campaign it held for the American Diabetes Association,” according to The Boston Globe. Also according to The Boston Globe article, “Prior to each customer’s transaction, a checkout screen prompts the customer with several options for pre-selected dollar amounts, as well as an opt-out option, allowing donations to the diabetes association. Yet, the plaintiff alleges, CVS did not forward donations to the diabetes association, but instead applied the donations toward a legally binding $10 million obligation CVS made to the diabetes association.”

Side note: I'm not an expert on these donations or anything, but rather the practice of corporations exploiting everything they can is so predictable that I knew all I had to do was search...

[–] Infomatics90@lemmy.ca 9 points 3 days ago (1 children)

and that's how you lose your job.

[–] DoucheBagMcSwag@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Not sure why you got down voted. Pretty sure that classifies as insubordination.

[–] Infomatics90@lemmy.ca 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Because I feel like some on here have the freedom to speak their mind and not worry about having food on the table tomorrow.

[–] DoucheBagMcSwag@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I was thinking the same thing

[–] Infomatics90@lemmy.ca 2 points 3 days ago

and let me be clear, I am for having a voice to speak out, but there's a point where it's like "ehhhhh I might be going a bit too far with this"

[–] AVincentInSpace@pawb.social 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

do they even get tax breaks from that?

[–] Jiggle_Physics@lemmy.world 10 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

No

When this happens you get a the receipt showing your donation to these charities. They can't take a program, where they collect donations on behalf of others, and then claim that intake was part of their income. This is something they use to put feel good PR in their ads, and cynically act like they do anything worth while for these people. They don't get a tax break for it though.

[–] lakemalcom10@lemm.ee 31 points 4 days ago

https://taxpolicycenter.org/taxvox/who-gets-tax-benefit-those-checkout-donations-0

Tldr: no, it doesn't work that way. They can't get any tax breaks from your money.

[–] KingJalopy@lemm.ee 10 points 4 days ago (4 children)

I've been told since you donate it's a tax write off for yourself and therefore the company can't double write it off on theirs. Not sure I believe that these companies follow the rules but that's what I've been told.

[–] moody@lemmings.world 5 points 4 days ago

When you make a donation, you will get a receipt for it and that's what you use to declare it on your taxes.

The company taking your donation will have a copy of that receipt showing that you made the donation and not them.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] P4ulin_Kbana@lemmy.eco.br 1 points 3 days ago

I would like a dollar.

load more comments
view more: next ›