Why Not REQUIRE All Tax Exempt Organizations To Publicly Disclose All Receipts/Disbursements?

[Blackhatjack]

If an organization is going to benefit from its tax exempt status, why not require them to publicly disclose every year the source and amount of all income it receives, and how the receipts were disbursed or retained?

If an organization does not want to to make this kind of disclosure --no problem, they give up their tax exempt status and pay tax on all receipts and do not have to disclose how those funds were disbursed or retained.

This would apply to ALL tax exempt organizations, including charitable and religious organizations.
There would be no discrimination against any particular organization since it would be a broadbased application not dependent on age, sex, race, national origin, political, etc.

Transparency in these organizations would help the public to track their actions, as opposed to their stated purposes.

Please feel free to post criticism of this idea. We need to discover weaknesses in any proposal, and hopefully make changes that will improve on any idea proposed.

[mtnester]

1. This is already done for tax exempt municipalities

EVERYTHING is done open records...everything...right down to the last dime I just spent on pens. ANd no harm has come of that.

I agree, tax exempt organizations should ALL do their business very out in the open.

[ThomCat]

2. It would be a violation of privacy

of the donors. The donors are entitled to rights that don't go away just because they're donating to a non-profit agency.
:shrug:

[Robbien]

4. Charitable tax-exempt orgs are required to list their donors

Public hospitals for instance send in their donor lists to the IRS.

It is just the non-charitable tax-exempt organizations which do not have to list their donors.

A big hole in the reporting system in my opinion.

[Blackhatjack]

6. It would apply to religious organizations across the board, and quasi-religious entities as well...

For example, the Focus on the Family, would be required to make public disclosures. It might help public taxpayers to more accurately assess the actions of this entity against its purported goals. This could be good or bad, but more information could not possibly be harmful in making that assessment.

If it applied to religious organizations, Catholic, Protestant, Islamic, Scientologists, etc. we would be in a position to see how those receipts are used to influence public policy. In many cases, adherents of each religious order have no accurate information how their contributions are actually being used --since they are not required to disclose that information to their membership or contributors.

There are other tax exempt organizations that are civic oriented which do not make public disclosures, which would be affected by such a requirement.

This would not be proposed to embarrass or out anyone for their association with particular groups. It really would be a decision for the entities to make when it comes to deciding which is more important, the tax exempt status or retention of confidential information, which would affect their members and contributors.

[Blackhatjack]

7. Contrary to your premise, there is no 'privacy right' that extends to anonymous gifting

No one has a 'privacy right' to make a gift anonymously. We already have numerous organizations that are required to make public disclosure of their donors, which has mentioned on this thread, and if you want to make an anonymous gift to any one of them it cannot be done.

[ThomCat]

8. Then I'm wrong.

Wouldn't be the first time. :shrug:

[ashling]

9. They can always choose to give to organizatioons

that pay taxes.

[EST]

3. Absolutely.

A point I've been making for more than forty years.

Transparency from top to bottom, all sides.

[OneBlueSky]

5. respectable nonprofits already do this . . .

as they are required to do by law . . .

if you run across a tax-exempt organization unwillng to FULLY disclose their finances, stay away . . .

[Blackhatjack]

10. It is your option 'stay away' but the entity's information remains undisclosed..

Certain religious organizations do make full public disclosures even though there is no law requiring it(ie. Billy Graham Foundation). Other religious organizations reveal nothing about the salaries and compensation paid to their top officials(ie. Executive Committe of the Southern Baptist Convention, Churches with a Board of Elders who handle all financial decisions, many MegaChurches, etc.)

So presently there is a wide range in the amount of information publicly disclosed by similar organizations.

The use of religious entities is not meant to concentrate on them to the exclusion of other charitable organizations. It is just easier to to compare and contrast groups people are familiar with in this context.

[Blackhatjack]

11. Rightwing Conserv Fundamentalists Were Shocked To Find Their $ funded gambling interests...

... funneled to Ralph Reed, and disclosed through the Jack Abramoff investigation.

We may not agree with the views of others, but others deserve to know that the tax exempt organizations purporting to represent their interests are receiving and spending those funds in ways they would never approve if publicly disclosed.

Transparency would actually help individuals donate to those tax exempt organizations that put into action the goals they want supported.

[donco6]

12. My school district does this already.

I don't see why others couldn't.

They'd actually have to keep their books, of course . . .