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
charities -- taxation, charity laws & legislation, charities -- united states, internal revenue -- united states
Date of Authorship for this Version
2015
Volume Number
13
First Page
83
Last Page
149
Repository Citation
Hackney, Philip T., "Charitable Organization Oversight: Rules v. Standards" (2015). Journal Articles. 388.
https://digitalcommons.law.lsu.edu/faculty_scholarship/388
Comments
Part of 2015 AALS symposium: "IRS Oversight of Charitable and Other Exempt Organizations - Broken? Fixable?"