this post was submitted on 17 Nov 2024
997 points (94.1% liked)

Comic Strips

12739 readers
3278 users here now

Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.

The rules are simple:

Web of links

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 9 points 6 days ago (1 children)

and that's how you lose your job.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Not sure why you got down voted. Pretty sure that classifies as insubordination.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Because I feel like some on here have the freedom to speak their mind and not worry about having food on the table tomorrow.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

I was thinking the same thing

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 days ago

and let me be clear, I am for having a voice to speak out, but there's a point where it's like "ehhhhh I might be going a bit too far with this"

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 days ago (1 children)

do they even get tax breaks from that?

[–] [email protected] 10 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

No

When this happens you get a the receipt showing your donation to these charities. They can't take a program, where they collect donations on behalf of others, and then claim that intake was part of their income. This is something they use to put feel good PR in their ads, and cynically act like they do anything worth while for these people. They don't get a tax break for it though.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago

I would like a dollar.

[–] [email protected] 202 points 1 week ago (9 children)

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.
[–] [email protected] 10 points 6 days ago

That leaves out when the company prompting you charges an administration fee to collect part of that sum donated for their own profits.

It leaves out when they, like CVS did with the diabetes association charity collecting at checkouts, take the money as an IOU to the charity while making money out to offset loans in the near term.

It leaves out structuring of collected funds to allow a 503C arm of the corporation to have tax advantaged status while also specifically being chartered to help the for profit company that you are shopping at.

There are a variety of scummy practices employed by organizations collecting those funds and it absolutely can benefit them to do so.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 days ago

I hate how charities are run by rich assholes who pay themselves or their family and friends 6 to 7 figures while doing very little to actually help people

[–] [email protected] 53 points 1 week ago (6 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 130 points 1 week ago (2 children)

The "kick back" is good PR.

[–] [email protected] 45 points 1 week ago (1 children)

And decision-makers at that company feeling good about themselves at no cost whatsoever for the company or themselves.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 week ago (1 children)

exactly

its not really charity if you don't give something up

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 week ago (1 children)

They really should match all donations.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 week ago

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

[–] [email protected] 49 points 1 week ago

The kickback is also in saying that they donated the money to charity .... which was collected from other people

It's like I asked you to donate money to a charity and I said I had to be the one to collect it .... then I take your money and donate it in my name ... basically, I took your generosity and claimed it as my own.

In many cases company's also understand that they can't openly do this because it would be too obvious ... instead they just ride the generosity gravy train ... they encourage people to donate to charities through their store/company/business ... then the company may or may not give their own contributions but they get to attach their name to the donated amounts.

It's like a billionaire selling you a can a beans and then asking you to donate a penny to a charity .... I always say no because the idiot billionaire could spare 1% of their wealth and give millions of dollars to charities everywhere, why the hell are you asking me?

I never give to charities through a store/company or business ... I give directly to charities on my own.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 1 week 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!

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It’s true but it’s not the full story .

Who gets to go the charity dinner and presents the check to the orphanage?

Who gets in Time magazine for “taking a stand” for corporate responsibility?

A corporation is not capable of benevolence. Give directly to the charity yourself, you’ll get a sticker and sometime a free pen.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 26 points 1 week ago (1 children)

They do get a whole lot of advertising, social capital, and influnce over which causes get proped up, on the back of donating customers, while you're out a few bucks that you could have pooled for a single charity and gotten a tax receipt of your own for.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 days ago

They do get a whole lot of advertising, social capital, and influnce over which causes get proped up, on the back of donating customers

Sure, but that's not a tax write-off as originally said. Stick to the things that are actually things.

while you're out a few bucks that you could have pooled for a single charity and gotten a tax receipt of your own for

If your donations for the year exceed the standard deduction (hint: the standard deduction is about $15k. Most people take that instead of itemizing). Doesn't have to be one single donation, and if your receipt shows the donation (it should) and it's for a legitimate charity I don't see why you couldn't use that to deduct that donation if you itemize.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 week ago (5 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 week ago (1 children)

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.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 week ago (1 children)

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

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 week ago

Yeah, because corporate charity is super regulated and never ever misused.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 66 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (11 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 43 points 1 week ago (3 children)

I know people who still repeat the line that earning more money will push them into a higher tax bracket and they’d end up with less money than if they stayed at their current income.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

So, there are some misconceptions about this on both sides. While some may misunderstand how tax brackets work, there absolutely are certain income thresholds where barely going over a certain amount will net you less money overall.


Edit: To clarify, you should accept the raise. In most cases all you need to do to avoid "losing money" at any of these points is to lower your AGI by contributing to an IRA, 401K, etc.


For example (using 2025 numbers here for a single filer):



  • Medicare Premium Increase (for those on medicare)
    @ $106k your medicare tax increases by $888, so you don't want a raise that puts you between $106k and $~107k
    @ $133k medicare tax increases by $1.3k, so you don't want a raise between $133k and $134k
    @ $167k medicare tax increases by $1.3k again
    @ $200k medicare tax increases by $1.3k again
    @ $500k medicare tax increases by $444... https://www.nerdwallet.com/article/insurance/medicare/what-is-the-medicare-irmaa



There are probably a few other taxes/credits I didn't include, but this is just a quick example with what I could look up at the moment.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Isn't this possible? Tax brackets for 2024 I thought for single filer is 24% below 191k and 32% over 191k, isn't it?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 days ago (1 children)

The higher rate gets charged only on the portion above the threshold. So with those rates someone earning 192k pays ($191k * .24) + ($1k * .32) = $46,100 not ($192k * .32) = $61,400.

Where you can be worse off earning more is if it puts you over a threshold for some social services (food stamps for example) with a hard cutoff rather than progressively lower benefits.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago

Thank you for explaining!

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 days ago

In places with marginal tax brackets, no. The numbers are different where I live, but the principle (hah) is the same:

If you earn 291k a year, the first 191k is taxed at 24%. The money left over (100k) gets taxed at 32%. So if you get a raise or bonus, the “tax problem” is only that your extra money is immediately taxed at 32%.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Oh man don't even get me started on that one too. I knew some people that genuinely thought a bonus would make them earn less overall.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 26 points 1 week 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.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 week ago

how are Americans so goddamn ignorant

It's what we do best

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 week ago (3 children)

how are Americans so goddamn ignorant

I mean did you see who we just elected?

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[–] [email protected] 48 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

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

[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 week ago

Gym's. The original shitty subscription company.

[–] [email protected] 31 points 1 week ago

https://taxpolicycenter.org/taxvox/who-gets-tax-benefit-those-checkout-donations-0

Tldr: no, it doesn't work that way. They can't get any tax breaks from your money.

[–] [email protected] 28 points 1 week 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...

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 week ago (4 children)

I've been told since you donate it's a tax write off for yourself and therefore the company can't double write it off on theirs. Not sure I believe that these companies follow the rules but that's what I've been told.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›