ACQNET: The effect of recent federal legislation on gifts-in-kind (LONG)

From: Eleanor Cook <cookei_at_appstate.edu>
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2006 14:41:00 -0500
To: acqnet-l_at_listproc.appstate.edu
Date:  Thu, 26 Oct 2006 11:11:05 -0700
From:  Frank Carothers (UC-Berkeley) <fcarothe_at_library.berkeley.edu>
Subject:  The effect of recent federal legislation on gifts-in-kind

[ *IMPORTANT NOTE:  Please see updated posting sent on 2/5/07
regarding this topic --Eric Lease Morgan and the ACQNET Editorial
Board]


Dear Colleagues,

As many of you are probably aware, important changes in the regulations 
governing gifts-in-kind
were approved by Congress in August 2006.  The changes promise to have a 
fairly serious impact
on library gift programs. Early this week, after consultation with 
attorneys at Berkeley's Office of
Planned Giving, I completed a report for my administration, outlining 
changes in the regulations and
suggesting some responses.  A slightly modified form of the report 
follows below.  I am very
interested in hearing how you are adjusting your program to the new 
rules governing gifts-in-kind,
and would welcome comments on the response I've outlined for Berkeley.

With best regards,

Frank
Frank Carothers
UC Berkeley Library

Amendments to federal tax code passed in Congress this August in section 
1215 of the Pension Protection Act of 2006 (PPA'06)

         
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=109_cong_bills&docid=f:h4enr.txt.pdf 
<http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=109_cong_bills&docid=f:h4enr.txt.pdf> 


will impose significant changes to policy and practice regarding 
acceptance and processing of large gifts-in-kind (i.e., those gifts of 
books and journals with an appraised value of more than $5000, or 
smaller gifts that are part of a series of gifts of books and journals 
made by a single donor in a single tax year and having an aggregate 
value of more than $5000).  What follows here is my effort to evaluate 
the ramifications of the amendments, and some preliminary conclusions 
and recommendations.  Relevant sections of Title 26 (Internal Revenue 
Service)
 
         http://uscode.house.gov/pdf/2004/2004usc26.pdf

are pages 593-594, 596, and 2745.

As you know, gifts are normally deductible at their full fair market 
value unless put to "unrelated use" by the donee organization (26 CFR 
1.170A-1(c)(1)).  "Unrelated use" is defined as use in a manner that is 
"unrelated to the purpose or function constituting the basis of the 
charitable organization's exemption under section 501." (26 CFR 
1.170A-4(b)(3)).  Sale, exchange, or other disposal is an unrelated 
use.  The amendments pose a major administrative problem for library 
gift programs because they introduce a new requirement for the 
comprehensive recording and reporting of those parts of large gifts put 
to unrelated use.  They also represent something of a public relations 
problem because they will inevitably reduce the amount of the donor's 
allowable tax deduction for those gifts.
 
Briefly, the Act amends sections 170(e) and 6050L(a) of the tax code to:
 

   1. Reduce donors' deduction to their basis in the gifted property
      (or, per 26 CFR 1.170A-1(c)(1), to the fair market value of the
      gifted property if that is less than the donor's basis),
         1. "if the use by the donee is unrelated to the purpose or
            function constituting the basis for its exemption under
            section 501" (26 USC 170(e)(1)(B)(i)(I), as amended by the
            PPA'06);
         2. or, in the case of "applicable property" (where "applicable
            property" refers, by definition (26 USC 170(e)(7)(C)), to
            large gifts, as described above), for items that are "sold,
            exchanged, or otherwise disposed of by the donee before the
            last day of the taxable year... " (26 USC
            170(e)(1)(B)(i)(II), as amended by the PPA'06);
         3. or, in the case of applicable property, for items that are
            disposed of by "sale, exchange, or other disposition by the
            donee ... after the last day of the taxable year of the
            donor in which such property was contributed, and ... before
            the last day of the 3-year period beginning on the date of
            the contribution of such property... (26 USC 170(e)(7)(B) -
            26 USC 170(e)(7)(B)(ii), as amended by the PPA'06);
   2. require that if "the donee of any charitable deduction property
      sells, exchanges, or otherwise disposes of such property within 3
      years after its receipt, the donee shall make a return showing ...
      a description of the donee's use of the property, ... and a
      statement indicating whether the use of the property was related
      to the purpose or function constituting the basis for the donee's
      exemption under section 501." (26 USC 6050L(a)(1), 26 USC
      6050L(a)(1)(F) - 26 USC 6050L(a)(1)(G), as amended by the PPA'06)
      (where "charitable deduction property" refers, by definition (26
      USC 6050L(a)(2)(A)), to large gifts, as described above); and
   3. stipulate that "any person who identifies applicable property ...
      as having a use which is related to a purpose or function
      constituting the basis for the donee's exemption under section 501
      and who knows that such property is not intended for such a use
      shall pay a penalty of $10,000." (26 USC 6720B, as amended by the
      PPA'06).

 
The majority of gifts-in-kind made to most libraries are valued for tax 
purposes at less than $5000.  The amendments will not affect these.  
Though the principle of "unrelated use" obtains in respect to the 
deductibility of these gifts (as does that of "reasonable expectation," 
which I won't address here), they are exempt from the donee reporting 
requirement per 26 USC 6050L(a)(2)(A), which explicitly applies the 
requirement to large gifts only.  It is neither necessary nor desirable 
to change procedures regarding gifts valued for tax purposes at less 
than $5000, assuming those procedures are in compliance with existing law.

However, the amendments will have a significant impact both on libraries 
and on donors in the case of large gifts.  Not only do they extend the 
time limit for reporting the sale or other disposal of these gifts, but 
they also broaden the reporting requirement to include each item of 
which these gifts are composed.  Prior to passage of the PPA'06, 
regulations required only that sale or disposal of those parts of a 
large gift individually appraised at $500 or more be reported on Form 
8282 if the sale or disposal occurred within two years of the date of 
the gift.  The new regulations require that a donee organization report 
sale or disposal of any part of a large gift if sale or disposal occurs 
within three years of the date of the gift.  The regulations do allow, 
as an alternative to that report, a statement of the intended use of the 
gift and a certification that the intended use has become impossible to 
implement, but I do not believe that this will often apply, at least to 
gifts accepted for the Main and Subject Specialty Libraries at UC 
Berkeley.  They further tacitly permit storage of large gifts for three 
years, though in most cases whether storage of books for three years, 
uncataloged and unavailable for public use, constitutes a related use 
seems doubtful to me; and may, in fact, be construed as collusion with 
donors to secure a higher tax deduction.

Finally, the amended regulations stipulate that any person who knowingly 
misrepresents the use to which a large gift is put (for example, by 
failing to report sale or other disposal of any part of such a gift) is 
subject to a penalty of $10,000 (26 USC 6720B).

The effective date for most of these provisions is August 17, 2006.

I do not believe that these amendments impose changes on library policy 
and procedure for acceptance, review, and disposal of gifts valued at 
less than $5000.  They will, however, have a significant impact on large 
gifts made to libraries.  We are faced with a record-keeping requirement 
that we cannot possibly meet, and the prospect of reducing the 
deductions claimed by our donors.  For the Main and Subject Specialty 
Libraries at Berkeley I have suggested the following steps:
 

    * update the section on "Appraisals and income tax deductions" at
      the Gifts webpage ( http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/Gifts/gifts.html)
      with a statement to the effect that "Not all books given to the
      Library can be added to University collections and thus be put to
      "related use" as required in the federal tax code as a
      precondition to allowance of a tax deduction for the full fair
      market value of the gift volume.  An inventory of those books from
      your gift that are added to the Library's holdings will normally
      be available through the Library's catalog (Pathfinder) within six
      months of the date of your gift [see item 3, below], and will be
      retrievable by a search for (donor's name) in the "association
      file" on the Advanced Search page .  While the Library will add to
      its collections as many volumes from your gift as possible, it is
      unable to provide the kind of documentation now required to
      support claims of tax deduction exceeding $5000 under sections
      170(e)(1)(B)(i)(I) - 170(e)(1)(B)(i)(II) and 170(e)(7)(A) -
      170(e)(7)(D) of the federal tax code [supply link?].  Donors are
      advised to seek the advice of a tax consultant before claiming a
      deduction for their gift on their federal tax return;"
    * supply this statement with our letter of acknowledgement for all
      gifts for which the Library's use is not explicitly stated
      (normally, all but very small gifts);
    * with donor approval, insert an association note into the
      GLADIS/Pathfinder record for every gift volume added to the
      Library's collections.  That will, at the least, give the Library
      (and our donors) a list of items added to our holdings;
    * discuss the new tax regulations in every conversation with
      potential donors before accepting gifts;
    * when appropriate, encourage donors to limit their claim to less
      than $5000;
    * make no adjustment to our procedure for gifts valued at less than
      $5000;
    * prohibit, except with approval of the AUL & Director of
      Collections, long-term storage of large gifts;
    * when necessary, decline gifts valued at more than $5000 rather
      than engage in burdensome reporting.

 
Special cases will, naturally, warrant special action.
 
These steps may reduce the number of large gifts-in-kind made to the 
Library, as donors may prefer to make their gifts to organizations that 
can add a greater percentage of the items given or can promise fuller 
record-keeping, or that simply avoid mention or are unaware of the new 
reporting regulations.  They will also add a step to the cataloging of 
gift books, though I hope that addition of an association note will not 
excessively complicate our catalogers' lives.  They will, however, keep 
the UC Berkeley Library in compliance with income tax regulations until 
the next revision.



--------------------------------------------------------------
For information about ACQNET's editorial policies,
how to subscribe/unsubscribe, and access to Archives, see:

 http://www.acqweb.org

--------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Sun Oct 29 2006 - 16:20:16 EST