https://www.marketwatch.com/story/heres-...2017-12-18

I find it...repulsive...that these Athletic clubs get the same "non-profit" designation as other charities. They are massive, they don't do anything productive, and they are clearly the definition of a loophole by which wealthy boosters can still funnel money to athletic budgets but now count it as "charitable" donations.

I also find it objectionable that most athletic departments can "require" a "donation" in order to just be eligible for prime seats. I remember when I had season tickets to UC...on the "visitor" side...and sat gazing at mostly empty "home side" seats (this was back in the early 00's). I was amazed that you couldn't "buy" a package that got you onto the "home" side of the stadium and, when the ticket renewal came, found that you had to join the "UCats" foundation to rack up enough points to get the privilege of joining the empty home stands. Being on a budget and liking my seats OK at the time (on the 25, 19 rows up from the field) I decided not to upgrade, but the idea of hiding, what is in essence a price increase, inside of a booster organization was vexing. And my UC experience is not atypical... I now live in Morgantown and WVU does the same thing. I think all the schools do the same thing.

So... Good. There is a fundamental difference between the "United Way" and the "Mountaineer Athletic Club" or "UCats". I don't think you should get a tax-deduction for making a huge "donation" to an athletic department in order to get your prime seats. I also don't think Universities should be allowed to advertise prices that are abnormally low for season tickets knowing that...wink, wink, nod, nod...you aren't really getting the product you think you are for the price you actually have to pay.

A lot of loopholes got hit. So you will be hearing a lot screaming from corporate and academic welfare recipients.

It is a good thing for the government to get out of the tax break business, as that is picking winners and losers, the opposite of egalitarian ideals. We do like our welfare benefits, so much so we often call them fancy names like entitlements.

But although on the whole it's a good thing, I don't think it will have a huge economic impact, as regulations and especially Chevron deference (congress take back your regulatory oversight and regulatory rules writing responsibility) are much greater impediments to improving the economy. They stack the deck in favor of oligarchs who are connected and can operate the system in their favor. It also changes nothing about the structural changes in the economy that we so far have failed to come to grips with, and which are independent of all government policy.

It will be interesting to see if like the Reagan tax code, it survives mostly intact the next Democratic administration, which is very likely coming to power with large majorities in 2020.

Why many of us are paying for 2018 this month. Gives these clubs a year to figure out what the loopholes are to get around it.

Glad to see some of these loopholes closing.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

(12-22-2017 07:32 PM)Jjoey52 Wrote:  Glad to see some of these loopholes closing.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

One loop hole I see, donations will be tied to Parking Locations instead of tickets for LTR seats.

Meh, I take the standard deduction anyway so I’ll keep on giving my 1000/year

(12-22-2017 04:01 PM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  I find it...repulsive...that these Athletic clubs get the same "non-profit" designation as other charities. They are massive, they don't do anything productive, and they are clearly the definition of a loophole by which wealthy boosters can still funnel money to athletic budgets but now count it as "charitable" donations.

I also find it objectionable that most athletic departments can "require" a "donation" in order to just be eligible for prime seats. I remember when I had season tickets to UC...on the "visitor" side...and sat gazing at mostly empty "home side" seats (this was back in the early 00's). I was amazed that you couldn't "buy" a package that got you onto the "home" side of the stadium and, when the ticket renewal came, found that you had to join the "UCats" foundation to rack up enough points to get the privilege of joining the empty home stands. Being on a budget and liking my seats OK at the time (on the 25, 19 rows up from the field) I decided not to upgrade, but the idea of hiding, what is in essence a price increase, inside of a booster organization was vexing. And my UC experience is not atypical... I now live in Morgantown and WVU does the same thing. I think all the schools do the same thing.

So... Good. There is a fundamental difference between the "United Way" and the "Mountaineer Athletic Club" or "UCats". I don't think you should get a tax-deduction for making a huge "donation" to an athletic department in order to get your prime seats. I also don't think Universities should be allowed to advertise prices that are abnormally low for season tickets knowing that...wink, wink, nod, nod...you aren't really getting the product you think you are for the price you actually have to pay.

In theory, an athletic department is "non profit" About 95 percent of College Athletic Departments operate in the red.

I give to help out App's athletic program, not for some tiny tax deduction. Besides the article didn't take into consideration the savings on the other end.