Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by Retric 4843 days ago
Really, as far as my personnel spending priorities go Bill Gates has wasted close to 100% of his charitable donations. Which I would not care about, however he get's a huge (multi billion dollar) tax break on donations which is simply a staggering waste of money.

PS: Want to pay people to pray for world piece? That's a tax break after-all we don't actually need to repair roads and bridges or pay down debt.
2 comments
adestefan 4843 days ago
Deductions for charitable contributes are capped. There is also the difference between what Bill Gate's paper worth is and what his tax liabilities are for the year.
link
Retric 4843 days ago
Deductions for charitable contributes are capped.

Not for capital gains if you sell the underlying asset. If I buy a stock for 1 cent and donate it then I avoid all capital gains even if it's now worth 30 billion. Considering the original baseline Gates working with it's ~30 billion * .15 ~= 4.5 billion tax savings. You also get to deduct the original 1 cent from your income, but as I said your avoiding the 50% income cap on donations.

I agree that his paper worth and taxes are separate issues, I am simply stating that having a charity sell stock is much better than having a person sell stock for the amounts involved. And it would be reasonable to charge capital gains at the time of donation for the same reason it's reasonable to remove the donation tax break. To further prove the point if your dealing with a deprecated stock it's better to sell and then donate.

PS: Wikipedia has a good example (Ordinary Income Producing Property and Short Term Capital Gain Property) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charitable_contribution_deducti...

link
glomph 4843 days ago
100% ? What are you smoking? He spends millions on malaria nets that have a proven record of saving lives. If that is wasting money I don't really want to know what you think the right way to spend money is...
link
Retric 4843 days ago
Gates tends to attack symptoms not the root cause. Handing out net's is more or less the same as handing out food which has many well known downsides. He would have done more long term good donating 1 billion to deal with corruption and setup garment factory's in Africa than everything else he has done in Africa.

Again, I don't care what he does with his own money but as soon as the Government subsidies charities efficiency is something to consider. Panama had a huge problem with the disease and it was delt with they now have 36 cases per 100,000 people vs 75,386 in Guinea. http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_mal_cas_per_100-malari... And the simple truth is net's don't get you to 36 from 75,386.

link