• Bassman1805@lemmy.world
    13010·
    16 days ago

    Ah, this again.

    The mega corporation did not receive any tax benefit from collecting donations. They are able to write off the amount of donations from their income, so that they aren’t paying tax on the money they collected specifically to be donated.

    1. Company collects $1 donation from customer
    2. Company has $1 extra income
    3. Company donates $1 to charity
    4. Company writes that dollar off of their income.
    5. Company reports the exact same profit/loss as if they had not collected donations.
    • danc4498@lemmy.worldEnglish
      388·
      16 days ago

      I assumed this was true also, but I also believe the company is receiving some sort of kick back from this otherwise they wouldn’t be doing it.

        • Serinus@lemmy.world
          101·
          16 days ago

          And, if it’s a big enough portion of the charity’s funding, influence over the charity. But not tax breaks.

      • very_well_lost@lemmy.worldEnglish
        13·
        16 days ago

        It’s a marketing thing. Stuff like this creates the illusion that they’re good corporate citizens.

        Of course, they could donate a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of a percent of their own profits and make a much bigger impact, but that would set a bad precedent! Giving away your money is only for the working class!

      • stupidcasey@lemmy.world
        2·
        16 days ago

        Also the political/social influence is real. Why bribe the government when you can outsource it to you and say it’s for a good cause. But the reality of the situation is they are giving a politician what they want and if the politician do something they don’t like they can move that “donation” to someone else.

    • iAmTheTot@sh.itjust.works
      11·
      16 days ago

      They don’t even report it as income, because it’s not income. It’s your donation, not the company’s donation.

    • TheBraveSirRobbin@lemmy.world
      81·
      16 days ago

      Couldn’t the CEO of the nonprofit be the spouse of the CEO and make a huge percentage of what they donate?

      Not saying donating through a mega corporation is always bad, but I’d prefer to look into who I’m donating to rather than a split second thought at the end of a transaction.

      • grepe@lemmy.world
        6·
        16 days ago

        this! the megacorporation receives 500k donations, which they transfer to CEO’s son’s “charity” that spends 99% of it on the said son’s salary. he buys another ferrari and the charity sends some flowers to a children cancer hospital.

        • Mojave@lemmy.world
          10·
          16 days ago

          Non profits can still have employees that get paid, they are just required to report who gets paid and how much (at least in my state).

          • Jyek@sh.itjust.works
            1·
            16 days ago

            Yeah obviously they have employees who get paid, but if a large portion of new donations just paid a CEO pay, that’s not exactly discreet fraud when the IRS comes around looking.

        • TheBraveSirRobbin@lemmy.world
          1·
          10 days ago

          Frequently yes it is. Look into celebrity charities. Frequently they have a family member running it and most of the employees are family or friends. Most of the money goes to family with at most 50% going to the actual cause.

  • iAmTheTot@sh.itjust.works
    443·
    16 days ago

    So sick and tired of this myth, how are Americans so goddamn ignorant of their own tax system that this continues to persist.

    Corporations are evil for a million and one reasons. This isn’t one of them.

    • very_well_lost@lemmy.worldEnglish
      163·
      16 days ago

      This myth is probably prevalent because corporations have spent the last 40 years squeezing every cheat and every advantage they can out of the system — to the point where anything that even smells like a “good gesture” is rightfully met with suspicion and contempt from the people they’ve been so blissfully exploring.

      • Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world
        41·
        16 days ago

        Oh shoot…I missed it. I DVR’d the election results, and never got around to watching it. Don’t tell me! No spoilers! I want to see if it we finally elect our first black president. It’s Obama vs McCain.

        …also, I’ve been in a coma for a while. 2024, huh? Do we have flying cars yet?

    • Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world
      31·
      16 days ago

      Because we’re Americans. Ignorant is kind of our power play! We’ll angrily defend a position we know nothing about, and then call YOU wrong for being well versed on the matter.

    • Lightsong@lemmy.world
      21·
      16 days ago

      I don’t know much about this. How is this not “one of them”? It seems to be like one of them.

      • iAmTheTot@sh.itjust.works
        3·
        15 days ago

        The company doesn’t get any benefit at all on its taxes by collecting donations from customers. Those donations belong to the customers, who themselves can claim them on taxes. The company is doing a good thing by encouraging and soliciting charity.

    • grepe@lemmy.world
      44·
      16 days ago

      maaaan! you must come from a country where the laws actually protect customers from the corporations rather than the other way around… otherwise you could never come up with such a naive statement.

  • auzy@lemmy.world
    28·
    16 days ago

    My gym took $2 from everyone’s account in a once off for charity unless you opted out.

    And then bragged about all the money they raised in their marketing.

    Yeah, by illegally stealing it from members

  • rational_lib@lemmy.world
    221·
    16 days ago

    Never trust a corporation, period. Their incentives are to maximize profits from whatever revenue streams they have, no matter what they tell you. There are ways they can do this that are at least in the gray area of legality,such as:

    A class-action lawsuit was filed against CVS Health Corporation (CVS) in May 2022 accusing the company of “deceptive fund-raising in a campaign it held for the American Diabetes Association,” according to The Boston Globe. Also according to The Boston Globe article, “Prior to each customer’s transaction, a checkout screen prompts the customer with several options for pre-selected dollar amounts, as well as an opt-out option, allowing donations to the diabetes association. Yet, the plaintiff alleges, CVS did not forward donations to the diabetes association, but instead applied the donations toward a legally binding $10 million obligation CVS made to the diabetes association.”

    Side note: I’m not an expert on these donations or anything, but rather the practice of corporations exploiting everything they can is so predictable that I knew all I had to do was search…

  • Shardikprime@lemmy.world
    4·
    16 days ago

    You don’t donate because you don’t want to give a mega corporation the benefit of tax breaks

    I don’t donate because I want to keep those starving starved

    We are not the same