Discussion:New Charitable Contribution Substantiation
From TaxAlmanac
| Revision as of 01:05, 17 August 2006 Jake (Talk | contribs) (New Discussion) ← Previous diff |
Revision as of 01:11, 17 August 2006 MSTguy (Talk | contribs) (It seems very in) Next diff → |
||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
| }} | }} | ||
| + | |||
| + | {{ForumReplyPost|UserID=MSTguy|Date=17 August 2006|Text=It seems very inequitable, though, to disallow a deduction to those people that do in fact pay cash out-of-pocket for charitable purposes. I hate to think that some otherwise charitable person might think twice before dropping that $10 into the salvation army bucket at christmas simply because now they have no substantiation for tax purposes. Oh well - I have a feeling many people aren't going to change either habit - giving the out-of-pocket cash or taking the deduction, which does in fact many times become an "estimate". }} | ||
Revision as of 01:11, 17 August 2006
Discussion Forum Index --> Tax Questions --> New Charitable Contribution Substantiation
| 17 August 2006 | |
| Kiplinger reports that as part of the new Pension tax bill Congress has added stricter substantiation requirements for charitable contributions.
MONEY: Effective 2007, to claim a deduction, a donor needs a cancelled check, bank record or a receipt from the charity listing the organizations name, date, and the amount of the contribution. A log or estimate is not sufficient. No longer can deduct that $10 bill you tossed in the Salvation Army bucket. GOODS. Effective on signing, donations of used clothing and household items limited. No deduction is allowed unless an item is in good condition or better or, if the item's value is over $500, an appraisal is supplied. IRS has been given the authority to deny any deduction for low value items such as socks and underwear. No details on what kind of a receipt is required. This should raise quite a bit of revenue from those who "overstate" and those who just don't keep good records. On the one hand I think this is a good move, but on the other hand I think about all of the bogus expenses Fortune 500 companies employer write off year in and year out. | |
| 17 August 2006 | |
| It seems very inequitable, though, to disallow a deduction to those people that do in fact pay cash out-of-pocket for charitable purposes. I hate to think that some otherwise charitable person might think twice before dropping that $10 into the salvation army bucket at christmas simply because now they have no substantiation for tax purposes. Oh well - I have a feeling many people aren't going to change either habit - giving the out-of-pocket cash or taking the deduction, which does in fact many times become an "estimate". | |
