Nonprofits Talking Taxes

Earlier this month I attended a workshop at the Community Foundation of Santa Cruz County called "Show Me the Money: Nonprofits Talking Taxes." The workshop was conducted by Kim Klein, a well-known, much respected, and quite beloved fundraising consultant and trainer.

But "talking taxes"? Kim Klein is the grassroots fundraising guru, not an economist or policy wonk. But, as she explained at the start of the workshop, over the past several years of the recession-that-will-not-end, with each round of budget cuts at all levels of government, more and more public institutions were turning to private foundations and individual donors to fill the gap.

Nonprofits that have always relied on those sources were suddenly in competition with schools and libraries. Not to mention those nonprofits who had been reliant on government funding suddenly got the message about diversifying their fund development plan and were also doing their first fundraising letters and grant proposals. Of course, the funds available did not grow. In fact, many foundations (and many individual donors) have less resources to meet these rising needs.

Meanwhile, the nonprofit sector as a whole has been remarkably silent in the public discussion of government budget cuts, tax cuts, and the unwillingness of many to talk about new revenue. Those behind Nonprofits Talking Taxes believed that it's high time for the sector to get involved in this debate as if our organization's lives depended on it, because that's not far from the truth.

This is not simply a fight for those nonprofits who receive government funding; this is about all of us who care about what direction our society and our communities are heading. As has been said by many, a government budget is not simply a financial document, it is a direct reflection of a community's values. So what does the California State budget say about our values, that it sacrifices the jobs of teachers rather than inconvenience corporations?

The workshop was not all gloom and doom. Quite the opposite. Through humor and group participation, we learned more about the state budget, taxes, why all nonprofit professionals should care about it, and left feeling optimistic; that we can have some control and say over the future direction of our state.

For an example of how humor is used to talk about the topic, click here to take the "Nonprofit Tax Quiz" that Kim created (on Blue Avocado).

These workshops are free, and are available to any nonprofit group in California. For those elsewhere, I'm sure they'd be happy to provide some guidance to creating a Nonprofits Talking Taxes curriculum for your state.

Learn more at the Nonprofits Talking Taxes website.

Will Your Nonprofit Lose Charity Status on May 15?

It may be April, but this is no Fool's joke. Up to 25% of the nation's officially recognized 501(c)3 Nonprofit Organizations have never filed an IRS form 990; the nonprofit tax return. That's been fine, as those organizations with income of under $25,000 have always been exempt... until now.

While smaller groups may still not required to file on an annual basis, a provision of the Pension Protection Act of 2006 included a requirement that the Internal Revenue Service revoke the nonprofit status of organizations that fail to file for three years in a row. That third annual deadline is fast approaching.

The IRS has sent out notices to thousands of organizations that may be effected and, with the lightning speed of bureaucracy, the actual de-certifications may not happen till January, but there are still likely to be small community organizations that fall through the cracks, don't get informed, and wind up with no tax-exemption.

Don't let this be your organization! If you are working or volunteering with a small, community nonprofit, make sure they've completed an IRS 990 or quickly request an extension and begin work on your filing.

I have mixed feelings about this new requirement. The 990 is not an easy form to complete. To compare it to personal taxes, it's more like the 1040 long form with extra schedules than the 1040 EZ. It frequently requires the assistance of professional accountants to complete correctly.

For an organization with less than $25,000 of income, this is quite an expensive burden and a cost way out line with their other expenses. That fact, of course, once reported properly on the next year's 990, will make the organization look inefficient and earn them poor ratings with those who analyze over-head to program cost ratios.

On the other hand, our sector is often accused of unprofessionalism and told to "be more business like." Tougher 990 standards that apply to all nonprofits is one way in which we prove our ability to manage donated funds in a prudent and professional manner. The 990 is required transparency; it is the window into our financial affairs by which we demonstrate the value of our work.

And, frankly, my own feeling is that the majority of the organizations that will be de-certified as a result of these new rules have probably ceased operating long ago. The de-certs will likely include many start-ups that never started, one and two-person organizations that lost steam and disbanded, and other dreams and good ideas that never quite made it.

Clearing these non-organizations off the rosters of legitimate charities could only be a good thing, as it will leave a clearer picture of what organizations are active, and all the good work that they are doing.

When Incentives Turn into Disincentives

All of us in the nonprofit sector are aware (or, should be aware) that the Foundations who support us have a minimum 5% payout requirement to maintain their nonprofit status. That is, they have promised the IRS that their grants and related expenditures will equal at least 5% of the total value of their assets each tax year.

There are those of us (and if you read this blog regularly, you know I'm one) who consistently call on the foundations to grant out more than the minimum, particularly in years, such as this one, when social need for nonprofit services is high and individual donations are low.

A little less known than the 5% payout, is the excise tax that foundations pay on their investment earnings. Currently, it is generally a 2% tax. However, it is lowered to 1% in any year that a foundation grants out more than their five-year average. This was meant to be an incentive for higher payouts in times of need.

Of course, it is a one-year incentive, since that higher payout raises the five-year average, the tax rate goes back to 2% unless grant amounts continue to rise each year. The return to 2%, according to some in the foundation world, actually then becomes a disincentive to increasing grants in the first place.

According to C. David Campbell, president of the McGregor Fund, a Detroit-based foundation:

"This year, most of the foundations in Detroit will be paying out much more than they have in the past because of the needs... But that will leave all of us in the position of paying more taxes going forward, which ironically will further diminish what we have to support nonprofits."

Enter Senator Charles E. Schumer, New York Democrat, and his buddies, Senators Debbie Stabenow and Carl Levin, Democrats of Michigan. Senator Schumer has proposed eliminating the current two-tiered system with a single excise tax rate of 1.32% in all years.

According to Robert S. Collier, chief executive of the Council of Michigan Foundations

"We are confident this will stimulate more giving by foundations... simply by making the administration of tens of thousands of smaller and midsize foundations much easier because they won’t have to spend a lot of time with their accountants trying to figure out if they have to pay 1 percent or 2 percent."

I'm all for anything that will encourage foundations to do what they're supposed to - support nonprofit organizations - but, really, was figuring out a two-tiered tax system really that much trouble for the foundation world?

And, more to the point, are foundations really saying that the only reason they can't step up and grant out more in this fiscal emergency is because they'll only save on one year's taxes? I know that many foundations are stepping up, and that this does not represent the attitude of the entire sector.

Now, I'm not saying that I'm against Schumer's bill. It's probably a great idea. I'm just saying that certain foundations need to increase their giving in an emergency, excise tax or not.

Tax Returns for the Tax Exempt

Did you remember to file your personal income taxes on time? I'm sure you did. And I'm sure you put a lot of care and effort into it.

What about your nonprofit organization's filings? As a public charity, your 990 filing each year is public information. You should be sure to remember that when preparing it. Most of us would be content to let the accountants handle the 990 and send it in without reviewing the text, but that would be a mistake.

Did you know that your 990 can be read by anybody with a free log in to GuideStar.org? In my work, I use GuideStar regularly to research the foundations that I send proposals to for my clients.

As a donor, I also look at the 990s on GuideStar to see things like executive compensation, mission statements, and income and expenses by program. More and more, savvy donors are using this resource before writing their checks.

So, what does this mean for you? Make sure that your finances tell the full story of your organization. Is there anything that would bring up questions from donors? Ensure that your reporting is clear and above-board. Also, that where you get to put in text about your programs, be sure to use that to tell your success stories.

Your 990 is not just a filing between you and the IRS; it is a public relations document which will be read by the public.