Contents

§ 10.5 EARMARKING OF GIFTS FOR INDIVIDUALS• A gift to a university restricted to a fund underlying a chair in a particulardepartment• A gift to a museum restricted to the museum’s endowment fund• A gift to a hospital restricted to the hospital’s building fundThese types of conditions or restrictions will not cause a charitable contributiondeduction to be disallowed. 144§ 10.5 EARMARKING OF GIFTS FOR INDIVIDUALSA charitable contribution deduction is not allowed if the charitable organizationinvolved is used merely as a conduit, so that a payment to the charity is earmarkedor similarly designated for the benefit of one or more specified individuals,even if these recipients are members of the charitable class the charity isintended to benefit. This aspect of the law comprises other, related elements, suchas the concept of a gift, 145 gifts for the use of a charity, 146 and conditional gifts. 147For example, an individual claimed charitable contribution deductions forpayments made to a tax-exempt college. He had previously indicated to a prospectivestudent at the college that he would like to aid the student financially;he wrote that he would try to arrange for a scholarship for this student. In a letterto the director of admissions of the college, accompanying the gifts, this individualwrote: “I am aware that a donation to a [s]cholarship [f]und is onlydeductible if it is unspecified, however, if in your opinion and that of the authorities,it could be applied to the advantage of [the student], I think it would beconstructive.” A court found that these gifts were earmarked for the student, asevidenced by the fact that the college never awarded him a scholarship and simplyapplied the payments to his account at the college. 148Likewise, an individual made payments for the maintenance and educationof a child who was a ward of a tax-exempt children’s home. Rejecting the claimof a charitable deduction for the payments, a court, while conceding that thepayments relieved the home of the financial obligation of furnishing the childwith its services, wrote that the deduction could not be sustained because thepayments were for a designated individual and “for no other individuals or forno other purpose” of the home. 149 The court wrote that “[c]harity begins wherecertainty in beneficiaries ends, for it is the uncertainty of the objects and not themode of relieving them which forms the essential elements of charity.” 150The IRS has ruled in this context. In one instance, an individual contributedmoney to an exempt university, with the requirement that the funds be used to144 Another illustration of this type of gift is a contribution of an art collection to a museum pursuant to an agreementmandating exhibition of the collection in adherence with a variety of conditions. See, e.g., Priv. Ltr. Rul.200202032.145 See § 3.1(a).146 See § 10.3.147 See § 10.4. To some extent, this also involves the matter of the need for a charitable class. See § 3.3(b)(iv).148 Tripp v. Commissioner, 337 F.2d 432 (7th Cir. 1964), aff’g 22 T.C.M. (CCH) 1225 (1963).149 Thomason v. Commissioner, 2 T.C. 441, 444 (1943).150 Id. at 443. 375