Advocate: The Problem With Charitable Giving
The op-ed that I chose was in the New York Times, written by Dr. Aaron E. Carroll and Dr. Peter B. Bach. It can be described as an Advocate because it strongly advocates against the Tax deduction that people get when they donate to non-profits.
Thesis: The US government should not allow tax deductions for donations to non-profits.
Point #1: When the government gives out tax deductions, it results in lost income for governmental programs. Lost income means that taxpayers end up paying more money or having to cut programs that could have been funded with the hypothetical tax revenue. "That leaves the rest of us either to pick up the slack or go without the investments that our government could have made with those funds."
Point #2: The wealthiest Americans are the ones receiving the vast majority of these tax breaks. "In 2016, half of all the tax dollars deducted as a result of charitable gifts in New York State were deducted by the top 0.5 percent of tax filers, who earned $1 million or more. The bottom 60 percent of tax filers were responsible for 5 percent."
Point #3: "Finally, you have to itemize deductions to get almost any reduction in taxes from giving. Nearly all wealthy people do so, but it’s rare among lower-income people. The new tax law will make it even rarer; the Tax Policy Center predicts that it will reduce the number of households that take the charitable deduction to 16 million from 37 million."
The article was well-written and had good points. However, at some points, it turns a bit into a diatribe, especially when the authors seemed to insinuate that NYU's medical school having no tuition was a bad thing because it resulted in lost tax revenue.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/27/opinion/donation-tax-deduction.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fopinion&action=click&contentCollection=opinion®ion=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=5&pgtype=sectionfront
Thesis: The US government should not allow tax deductions for donations to non-profits.
Point #1: When the government gives out tax deductions, it results in lost income for governmental programs. Lost income means that taxpayers end up paying more money or having to cut programs that could have been funded with the hypothetical tax revenue. "That leaves the rest of us either to pick up the slack or go without the investments that our government could have made with those funds."
Point #2: The wealthiest Americans are the ones receiving the vast majority of these tax breaks. "In 2016, half of all the tax dollars deducted as a result of charitable gifts in New York State were deducted by the top 0.5 percent of tax filers, who earned $1 million or more. The bottom 60 percent of tax filers were responsible for 5 percent."
Point #3: "Finally, you have to itemize deductions to get almost any reduction in taxes from giving. Nearly all wealthy people do so, but it’s rare among lower-income people. The new tax law will make it even rarer; the Tax Policy Center predicts that it will reduce the number of households that take the charitable deduction to 16 million from 37 million."
The article was well-written and had good points. However, at some points, it turns a bit into a diatribe, especially when the authors seemed to insinuate that NYU's medical school having no tuition was a bad thing because it resulted in lost tax revenue.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/27/opinion/donation-tax-deduction.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fopinion&action=click&contentCollection=opinion®ion=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=5&pgtype=sectionfront
Comments
Post a Comment