Skip to main content

Designating a Donation on the Face of a Check

Question:

I have read that donors should not write the name of a missionary directly on their checks to churches or mission agencies.  Rather, they should include it on a separate piece of paper.  I have always believed this to be an urban legend.  Isn't the real issue whether the church or agency has direct control over the gift, and therefore gifts would still be deductible even if the missionary's name was written on the check?

Answer:

You are absolutely correct; this is a myth. While it may give an appearance of impropriety, the question at issue here is not the designation, but rather control over the gift. A designation becomes an issue if it is made in such a way that it serves personal purposes. A donor who writes the missionary's name on the check does not endanger the deductibility of the gift, as long as 1) the missionary has already been identified by the church as a worthy recipient or 2) the church subsequently confirms, of its own volition, that worthiness. In other words, it is (or becomes) the church's decision to support the missionary. As noted earlier, the key in this situation is control. If the church/organization has identified the missionary as a target of support, then the organization is exercising control over those gifts, and they are deductible. 

However, if after making the gift, a donor is still able to direct the use of the funds, the gift is most likely not deductible. A church or mission agency must avoid becoming a conduit, particularly for someone who may otherwise be expected to assist the recipient regardless of a charitable motivation. For example, a father who donates to a church school seeking for the donation to cover his child's education should not receive credit for a charitable contribution. 

For more details on this issue, follow the links below:

Comments

  1. I appreciate this post. I had come to the same conclusion but it helps to have someone with your expertise say the same thing.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Qualified Small Employer HRAs

On December 13, 2016, President Obama signed the 21st Century Cures Act, allowing qualified small employers to offer Health Reimbursement Arrangements (HRA) that follow certain terms.

After the Affordable Care Act was passed, the IRS originally determined that an HRA was not a qualified group health plan. The Cures Act overrules this decision. HRAs are again an option for qualifying small employers.

To be eligible, the small employer must have fewer than 50 employees and must not offer a group health plan to any of its employees.

The Qualified Small Employer Health Reimbursement Arrangement (QSEHRA) must be subject to the following terms.
No salary reduction contributions may be made (i.e., 100% employer-funded).Employer must receive proof of employee’s minimum essential coverage.Reimbursements must be for qualifying medical expenses.Reimbursements for any year cannot exceed $4,950 (or $10,000 for family coverage), which will be adjusted annually for inflation.Employer must offer the …

Revised Form I-9 Released

The U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services released a revised Form I-9. All new hires after January 21, 2017, must complete the revised Form I-9. All prior released versions of Form I-9 will be invalid for new hires.

Employers are required to have a completed hard copy of Form I-9 on file for each employee. Current employees do not need to re-complete the revised form.

More information on Form I-9 can be found on the USCIS website.

Housing Allowance when Bartering for Rent Payments

Question:

If a minister rents his principal residence, but he performs services (mowing the lawn, repairing the roof, etc.) in lieu of rent, can he still qualify the rent amount for a housing allowance tax benefit?

Answer:

Of course, bartering income is taxable. The Internal Revenue Code interprets that above situation as follows: tenant/minister receives taxable income for the fair market value of the services he provides, andtenant/minster pays landlord for renal of residence. The minister in this case reports taxable income for services provided in lieu of rent. It is also likely subject to self-employment tax. He may then claim as qualifying housing allowance expense equal to the amount he "pays" for rent of his personal residence. Essentially, there is no difference than if the minister and his landlord simply traded checks.

See a past MinistryCPA post regarding this topic: http://ministrycpa.blogspot.com/2016/09/services-to-church-in-lieu-of-rent-of.html