Contents

FUNDAMENTAL CONCEPTSemployees (and their dependents) of the corporation and its subsidiaries, whowere in demonstrated need. The IRS was of the view that the class of eligiblerecipients was sufficiently broad to constitute a charitable class. 230 (About 5 percentof the employees held salaried management-level positions.) The assistancewas provided in cases of “unexpected temporary extreme financialhardship.”Selection of aid recipients was based on objective criteria and demonstrationof need, and was made by an independent selection committee or under adequatesubstitute procedures. The charitable organization was expected to be principallyfunded by the corporation’s employees; contributions could be made by means ofan automatic payroll deduction system. The corporation did not reimburse or otherwisecompensate its employees for contributions made to the charity, nor did itrequire the making of gifts or participation in the payroll deduction plan as a conditionof employment. The corporation did not charge the charity for any of itsservices pursuant to the payroll plan. In this situation, the IRS was of the viewthat charitable purposes were primarily being furthered, that the benefit to theemployer was no more than insubstantial, and that contributions to the charitableorganization were, as noted, deductible gifts. 231In another instance, this type of a program was established by a public charity,as a fund within it, for the benefit of its employees who required emergencyservices because they had become financially needy or suffered economic hardshipdue to accident, loss, or disaster. 232 Again, the IRS ruled that gifts to thefund qualified for the charitable contribution deduction. 233(l) Mandatory PaymentsThe concept of the mandatory contribution has an oxymoronic ring to it, and forgood reason, in that deductible charitable contributions are generally required tobe voluntary. 234 Yet there are transfers to charitable organizations that are mandatedby law, court order, contract, or even the charitable entity itself. 235 Intermixedwith this topic is another general rule, which is that deductiblecontributions are often expected to be supported with donative intent. 236An illustration of a mandatory payment to a charitable entity was the value ofa parcel of land dedicated by an individual to a county for use as a public street;the transfer was disallowed as a charitable contribution because the individualwas obligated by contract to sell the land to a church. 237 Similarly, an individual230 See § 3.3(b), text accompanied by notes 329–339.231 Amounts transferred by or for employers to or for the benefit of employees are presumed not to be gifts, butrather items of gross income. IRC § 102(c). The IRS ruled that this rule is “inoperative” in this case because thepayments are made by the charitable organization.232 Priv. Ltr. Rul. 200243050.233 As to these programs generally, two questions linger: What difference does it make (1) if the charity involvedis or is not controlled by the employer (whether tax-exempt or for-profit) and (2) is or is not a public charity?234 See § 3.1(a).235 As to the latter, some charitable organizations have policies, perhaps reflected in bylaws, requiring individualsto contribute, often annually, as a condition of serving on the governing board. In some instances, a specificamount is mandated.236 See § 3.1(a).237 Taynton v. United States, 60-1 U.S.T.C. 9,458 (D. Va. 1960). 92