The Dark Money Subsidy? Tax Policy and Donations to Section 501(c)(4) Organizations

IF 1 3区 社会学 Q3 ECONOMICS
Brian Galle
{"title":"The Dark Money Subsidy? Tax Policy and Donations to Section 501(c)(4) Organizations","authors":"Brian Galle","doi":"10.1093/aler/ahaa009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article presents the first empirical examination of giving to §501(c)(4) organizations, which have recently become important players in U.S. politics. Unlike gifts to charity, donations to a 501(c)(4) are not legally deductible. Yet, gifts to c(4) organizations are highly elastic to the after-tax price of charitable giving. At the lower end of the observed tax price range, c(4) giving falls with tax price, consistent with the hypothesis that giving to c(3) and c(4) organizations are substitutes. Over the top quarter of the distribution of tax price, however, gifts to c(4) organizations are negatively correlated with the after-tax price of giving to charity. That is, donors appear to respond as though the deduction subsidized their gift to a c(4). Donor responses to benefits for which they are not eligible may reflect the low salience of legal limitations or deliberate overclaiming. These results imply subsidies for charity can crowd out or in donations to c(4) organizations, with potential implications for U.S. politics. I cannot observe whether donors claim tax deductions for ineligible gifts, so the net results for the Treasury are unclear.","PeriodicalId":46133,"journal":{"name":"American Law and Economics Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/aler/ahaa009","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Law and Economics Review","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/aler/ahaa009","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

This article presents the first empirical examination of giving to §501(c)(4) organizations, which have recently become important players in U.S. politics. Unlike gifts to charity, donations to a 501(c)(4) are not legally deductible. Yet, gifts to c(4) organizations are highly elastic to the after-tax price of charitable giving. At the lower end of the observed tax price range, c(4) giving falls with tax price, consistent with the hypothesis that giving to c(3) and c(4) organizations are substitutes. Over the top quarter of the distribution of tax price, however, gifts to c(4) organizations are negatively correlated with the after-tax price of giving to charity. That is, donors appear to respond as though the deduction subsidized their gift to a c(4). Donor responses to benefits for which they are not eligible may reflect the low salience of legal limitations or deliberate overclaiming. These results imply subsidies for charity can crowd out or in donations to c(4) organizations, with potential implications for U.S. politics. I cannot observe whether donors claim tax deductions for ineligible gifts, so the net results for the Treasury are unclear.
黑钱补贴?税收政策和对第501(c)(4)节组织的捐赠
本文首次提出了对§501(c)(4)组织捐款的实证研究,这些组织最近已成为美国政治中的重要参与者。与慈善捐赠不同,对501(c)(4)的捐赠在法律上是不能扣除的。然而,对c(4)组织的捐赠对慈善捐赠的税后价格具有高度弹性。在观察到的税收价格范围的低端,c(4)捐赠随着税收价格的下降而下降,这与给予c(3)和c(4)组织是替代的假设是一致的。然而,在税收价格分配的前四分之一以上,对c(4)个组织的捐赠与慈善捐赠的税后价格呈负相关。也就是说,捐赠者的反应似乎是,他们的捐赠得到了补贴,达到了c(4)。捐助者对其不符合资格的福利的答复可能反映了法律限制的不显著性或故意夸大索赔。这些结果表明,对慈善机构的补贴可能会挤掉对非营利组织的捐款,这对美国政治有潜在的影响。我无法观察捐赠者是否要求对不符合条件的捐赠进行减税,因此财政部的净结果尚不清楚。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
期刊介绍: The rise of the field of law and economics has been extremely rapid over the last 25 years. Among important developments of the 1990s has been the founding of the American Law and Economics Association. The creation and rapid expansion of the ALEA and the creation of parallel associations in Europe, Latin America, and Canada attest to the growing acceptance of the economic perspective on law by judges, practitioners, and policy-makers.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信