Charitable Organization Oversight: Rules v. Standards

68 Pages Posted: 9 Jan 2016 Last revised: 15 Feb 2016

See all articles by Philip Hackney

Philip Hackney

University of Pittsburgh - School of Law

Date Written: January 7, 2016

Abstract

Congress has traditionally utilized standards as a means of communicating charitable tax law in the Code. In the past fifteen years, however, Congress has increasingly turned to rules to stop fraud and abuse in the charitable sector. I review the rules versus standards debate to evaluate this trend. Are Congressional rules the best method for regulating the charitable sector? While the complex changing nature of charitable purpose would suggest standards are better, the inadequacy of IRS enforcement and the large number of unsophisticated charitable organizations both augur strongly in favor of rules. Congress, however, is not the ideal institution to implement rules for charitable purpose. The IRS is the better institution generally to institute rules there because of its informational advantage over Congress. Additionally, the IRS can implement rules in a more flexible rule format than can Congress. Still, Congress as a rulemaker makes sense in a few scenarios: (1) where it implements transparent procedural requirements; (2) where it regulates discrete behavior of charitable organization acts; and, (3) where it intends to remove a set of organizations from charitable status through simple rules.

Keywords: charitable organizations, charitable oversight, tax law, IRS

Suggested Citation

Hackney, Philip, Charitable Organization Oversight: Rules v. Standards (January 7, 2016). 13 Pitt. Tax Rev. 83, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2712301

Philip Hackney (Contact Author)

University of Pittsburgh - School of Law ( email )

3900 Forbes Ave.
Pittsburgh, PA 15260
United States
412.643.0434 (Phone)
412.648.2649 (Fax)

HOME PAGE: http://www.law.pitt.edu/people/philip-hackney

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Downloads
95
Abstract Views
640
rank
322,893
PlumX Metrics