Connect with us

Accounting

Donor advised funds’ tax benefits shown by client scenarios

Published

on

Financial advisors and charitable-minded clients can tap into tax savings through donor-advised funds when balancing portfolios, making regular gifts and after windfalls, according to an expert.

Those three scenarios show in part why donor-advised funds have amassed around $230 billion in assets — with another trillion dollars in growth expected for the next decade, according to a presentation at this week’s Future Proof conference by Adam Nash, an angel investor and former Wealthfront CEO who’s now CEO of Daffy, a donor-advised funds service. 

The other reasons for that rising popularity include the flexibility with an upfront deduction for the donation that doesn’t require a grant to be allocated immediately and the ability to send charities other types of assets besides cash such as appreciated stock or other securities, Nash noted.

In his presentation, Nash compared donor-advised funds to other types of tax-advantaged accounts that have evolved into pivotal roles as part of clients’ long-term financial plans over recent decades, like individual retirement accounts, 401(k) plans and 529 college savings plans.

“A donor-advised fund is basically the perfect account for putting money aside for charity,” Nash said. “You can put money or assets into the account, and you get an immediate tax deduction this year against income when you put the assets in the account. The accounts have investment options — some more than others — but your money is invested tax-free for as long as you want it to compound. And then any time you want to give money to an operating charity — it could just be a few clicks and that money gets sent off and taken care of. 

“And it’s not surprising that, even at the very high end, a lot of people are thinking about,” Nash added, “‘Do I really need to set up a foundation? Do I really need to set up a trust? I can just use a donor-advised fund to handle the philanthropy needs, the back end and the back office for my clients.”

READ MORE: IRS donor-advised fund proposal could have ‘chilling effect’

The three examples Nash laid out in his talk displayed the possible role of donor-advised funds in a client’s portfolio.

The sale of a stock that has risen in value or the spinoff of a part of a small business or another “positive event” can bring capital gains and income — along with accompanying taxes in a particular year, he noted. The donor-advised fund can help advisors and their clients offset those gains.

“If you have a windfall, you can immediately say, ‘Hey, put that money, put some of those assets into a donor-advised fund and take your time evaluating organizations and thinking about who you want to give that money to,” Nash said. “Maybe you can put aside money that’s good enough to support your giving, not just for one year, five years, 10 years — build a real legacy for you and your family or for your business. And so this is the most common reason that advisors fall in love with donor-advised funds.”

Regular gifts of assets to donor-advised funds at any time can bring a bigger tax advantage than donating cash, and the structure enables advisors and their clients to send stocks, ETFs or even digital holdings like cryptocurrency to organizations that may not have the capacity to receive non-cash contributions directly.

“Let’s say they give $30,000 to charity every year,” Nash said. “If you can just tell them, instead of taking that cash and giving it to the charity, to actually put the stock in a donor-advised fund, get those tax benefits, then they can give that cash to those charities, the same as they always did, but save money on taxes. And here’s the kicker, for people who care about this stuff, there is no wash-sale rule with donations, right? You can donate the shares out of their account to the donor-advised fund that had the lowest cost basis and then, literally, a millisecond later, you can take the cash that they would have given to charity and use it instead to replenish their investment account with higher cost-basis shares. So you permanently eliminate that tax liability.”

READ MORE: You’re doing it wrong: Annual portfolio rebalancing isn’t enough

Portfolio rebalancing may also present some “unforgiving” numbers when it comes to the “tax draft” of selling off one category of assets that took on unexpectedly high values in order to buy more investments in a lower-valued type of security, Nash pointed out.

“What if, instead of selling those appreciated shares, you actually donate some of those shares to a donor-advised fund, and then you use the cash that you would have used to rebalance the portfolio to buy up the underrepresented asset in the portfolio,” he said. “So you’re just moving the same amount of money around, but by having a donor-advised fund to capture that tax benefit of those appreciated securities, you just eliminate that liability.”

Advisors and their clients can choose among many donor-advised fund providers that are operating in the space, but Nash’s firm is making its pitch based on newer technology tools, the capacity for clients to add other family members and advisors to their accounts and flat-fee price points between $3 and $20 a month. 

Its name, Daffy, stands for “donor-advised funds for you,” Nash noted. Last year, the firm launched a tool for matching campaigns, such as one that Nash shared with Future Proof attendees in which a widower started a fund in honor of his late wife.      

“It’s very personal, and the organizer, the person running the campaign, can pick up to six charities to support and let their donors pick amongst them, and then the matching just automatically happens within minutes every time someone makes a donation in a campaign,” Nash said. “They’re not just giving to the organization. They’re supporting the organization, and they bring new people into the community — which is what the charities really want, is more and more exposure to people who care about their cause.”

Continue Reading

Accounting

House tax bill calls for $30K SALT, omits millionaire tax

Published

on

The House tax committee is seeking to increase the state and local deduction and make official several of President Donald Trump’s campaign tax pledges in a multitrillion-dollar package that will serve as Republicans’ signature legislative effort.

The House Ways and Means Committee release of the tax measures, ahead of planned debate on the panel Tuesday, is a sign the Republican-controlled chamber is moving toward a floor vote this month on the legislation. The bill aims to cut taxes by more than $4 trillion and reduce spending by at least $1.5 trillion over a decade.

The proposal doesn’t include a tax hike on the wealthiest Americans, after weeks of debate among Republicans about whether to raise levies on millionaires. The bill would permanently extend the 37% top rate for individuals that was set in Trump’s 2017 tax law. That’s despite Trump telling Speaker Mike Johnson as recently as last week that he wanted a 39.6% rate for individuals making more than $2.5 million.

The package — which Trump has dubbed his “one big, beautiful bill” is the centerpiece of his legislative agenda. It renews many of his first-term tax cuts, set to expire at the end of the year. But narrow Republican margins in the House mean that the president needs near-unanimous support from his party to pass the bill.

The bill would raise the nation’s borrowing limit by $4 trillion. This is smaller than the Senate’s preferred $5 trillion level. Lawmakers are hoping to push any additional votes on raising the debt ceiling until after the 2026 midterms.

The draft language eliminates income taxes on tips and overtime pay through 2028. House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Jason Smith had vowed to follow through on Trump’s campaign pledges to end those levies.

Trump had also campaigned on ending taxes on Social Security benefits, but that cannot be done in the special budget process that Congress is using to advance the tax package. Instead, the bill provides a $4,000 bonus for seniors on top of the regular standard deduction.

One of the thorniest issues — including a contentious standoff over increasing the state and local tax deduction — is still not resolved. The draft calls for increasing the state and local tax deduction to $30,000 for both individuals and couples, up from $10,000, with income limits for single taxpayers earning $200,000 or joint filers making twice that. But some lawmakers representing high-tax areas want an even bigger tax break — as much as $124,000 for joint filers.

On the hook for tax increases: wealthy private universities, which could see an increase in the levy on endowments from 1.4% to as high as 21% on investment income. 

Johnson told reporters Monday that the House is on track to pass the legislation by Memorial Day. It would then go to the Senate, where it could be subject to major revisions.

The new details come after the tax-writing committee released some initial provisions late Friday. Those included raising the maximum child tax credit to $2,500 from $2,000 and increasing the standard deduction, both retroactive to 2025 to put more money in voters’ pockets before the 2026 election. 

The bill also raises the estate tax exemption to $15 million and increases the 20% deduction for closely-held businesses to 23%.

Continue Reading

Accounting

Jon Voight joins studios, unions to press Trump for film aid

Published

on

President Donald Trump’s Hollywood ambassadors joined studios, labor unions and producers in asking the White House to expand and extend tax incentives as part of an upcoming budget reconciliation bill.

A letter dated Monday asked the president to include three film and TV incentives in the budget bill being drafted by Congress. The coalition includes the Motion Picture Association, which represents Hollywood studios, as well as unions of writers, actors and other trades.

Actor Jon Voight, who was named one of three special ambassadors to Hollywood in January, is leading the effort to obtain assistance from Washington to boost US film and TV jobs. The groups signing the letter represent nearly 400,000 industry professionals. Sylvester Stallone, another Trump ambassador, also signed the letter.

The U.S. film and TV industry has struggled in recent years as entertainment companies reduced their spending and moved production overseas, where cheaper labor and more generous government subsidies make their business more profitable. 

The letter doesn’t mention tariffs on foreign film production, which Trump said he would pursue in a social media post on May 4. His 100% tariff proposal, made after a visit with Voight, sent the shares of studios such as Netflix Inc. and Walt Disney Co. tumbling as investors considered the possibility of rising costs and a trade war in the entertainment business. 

The specific proposals in the new letter involve reviving Section 199 of the tax code, which provided deductions for manufacturing to film and TV production, extending Section 181, which allows for accelerated deductions, and restoring Section 461, which lets businesses use past losses to reduce future taxes.

Continue Reading

Accounting

State AI regulation ban tucked into Republican tax, fiscal bill

Published

on

A powerful House committee has tucked language preventing states from regulating artificial intelligence into President Donald Trump’s massive tax and spending bill, a move that would benefit many of the U.S.’s largest tech and AI companies. 

OpenAI, Meta Platforms Inc., and Alphabet Inc.’s Google are among the firms that have argued that state AI regulations would hamstring the burgeoning technology. Meta in April comments to the White House also said state-level rules would raise compliance costs for AI companies. 

The House Energy and Commerce Committee’s draft bill, which the panel will debate on Tuesday, would place a 10-year moratorium on “any law or regulation regulating artificial intelligence models, artificial intelligence systems, or automated decision systems,” according to language released late Sunday. 

It’s unlikely the language will meet the strict bar for ultimate inclusion in the tax bill, which is being pushed through Congress with only Republican support using a special parliamentary procedure. Senate rules require that provisions passed using the procedure be primarily fiscal in nature.

But its inclusion signals where key Republicans stand on the matter just one month after tech executives urged Congress to pass federal AI legislation to prevent states from creating their own rules. 

AI safety advocates and critics of big tech on Monday warned that the language, if passed, would hamstring state governments seeking to ensure the technology is deployed safely and ethically.  

Brad Carson, president of the AI safety think tank Americans for Responsible Innovation, called the language a “giveaway to Big Tech that will come back to bite us.”

“Tying the hands of lawmakers when it comes to taking on big tech could have catastrophic consequences for the public, for small businesses, and for young people online,” Carson said. 

Patchwork solution

This year alone, at least 45 states and Puerto Rico introduced at least 550 AI bills, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. And that number is only set to grow in the months ahead. 

California lawmakers’ push last year to pass AI safety laws was opposed by tech companies and venture capital firms, such as OpenAI and Andreessen Horowitz, and ultimately vetoed by California Governor Gavin Newsom, a Democrat. State lawmakers are trying again this year to pass a pared-back bill aimed at holding AI developers accountable for any severe harm caused by their products. 

During an April Energy and Commerce hearing, Scale AI Inc. CEO Alexandr Wang called for “one federal standard” on AI. 

“We cannot afford a patchwork of 50 different state standards that we have to execute against,” Wang said. 

Representative Jay Obernolte, a California Republican on the panel, agreed with Wang, saying Congress has a “limited amount of legislative runway to be able to get that problem solved before the states get too far ahead.” 

But Jan Schakowsky, a senior Democrat on the committee, said the provision would give tech companies “free reign to take advantage of children and families.” 

“This ban will allow AI companies to ignore consumer privacy protections, let deepfakes spread, and allow companies to profile and deceive customers using AI,” she added.

Continue Reading

Trending