Jump to content

NCAA TAX EXEMPT?


Recommended Posts

On 5/6/2017 at 5:57 PM, zippy5 said:

That's false. They are government. Doesn't matter either way. If they were for profit they could create a foundation and solicit all the donations their hearts desire.

 

I don't know how else to correct you on all of this.  But good luck to you if you'd like to try to advise a for-profit company to use their foundation as an alternative way to pay the bloated salaries of the company's highest paid employee.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/6/2017 at 4:53 PM, zippy5 said:

Again, Bama isn't a "non-profit." I don't know what makes you think anything would change in their case if they were taxed. Additionally, Bama making money is really the exception to the rule.

 

Knowing your stance on education, I don't think you'd like to see how schools would be run if they were for profit. Bye bye tenure.

 

Universities in many ways are already for profit corporations, without the name, let's be real here.  Yeah, For profit education is about the worst idea in the universe for education, if you give a damn about it.  You expect people who have PhD's in research to stick around an organization that wants to nickel and dime their salary, with no protections and puts their job on the whim of an unproven, non-scientific, non-accredited evaluation system?  Good luck keeping them.  If they want that kind of job they could easily make considerably more in the private sector with their expertise.  

 

I mean just ask any current educator who's worth a damn; the state's current teacher evaluation system is an absolute joke.  It's actually impossible to tell good teachers from the bad...and in reality I'd argue it makes the best teachers look worse than they are.  In fact, it measures everything in short of that which actually makes a good teacher.  So have fun destroying education.  The moment public education moves to "for profit" I'm gone.  I can certainly make more than I do now, and have had offers to do so...I just happen to like what I do and am damn good at it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Completely agree, we should do away with this dog and pony show of an evaluation system.  People can tell who the bad teachers are after five minutes in the classroom.  Let the Principal decide who to fire and move on, just like in the corporate world. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And while we're at it, can we do away with teachers unions?  Like you said, you're degreed professionals, sometimes with PhD's.  Time to stop acting like you need collective protection like you're working in a coal mine in the 1950's. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, pdt1420 said:

Completely agree, we should do away with this dog and pony show of an evaluation system.  People can tell who the bad teachers are after five minutes in the classroom.  Let the Principal decide who to fire and move on, just like in the corporate world. 

 

Now, the problem with that model (and why tenure exists at all) is because Principals change readily in schools.  Our oldest teacher in my department is retiring this year and he's seen 12 through his Career of 35 years.  He's had administrators that have hated him, and would have fired him on the spot if they could have because he had the gaul to tell them that their plans weren't going to work because of X, Y and Z.  Those administrators were always gone a year or two later while he's been there the whole time.  Really, if things were the way they used to be, he should be principal.  Unfortunately, you need to get a state certificate to do so, which is why he never cared to do it.

 

It also prevents principals who want to hire younger (and cheaper) people do fill jobs.  This is crucially important; because the people I learn most from are my peers.  Having people who have taught for 35 years is an invaluable resource.  Had some narrow minded administrator at some time gotten rid of them because they arbitrarily didn't like them, or arbitrarily liked the way they did things, than the younger teachers like myself would have lost out on that experience.

 

As for getting rid of teacher unions; completely disagree.  They act as a counterbalance in many districts for administrations screwing over kids because of whatever resume building policy they want to enact.  Classroom sizes, classroom resources, building resources that directly impact kids, unions fight for all the time, as well as making sure the district is compliant with state and federal law, especially when it comes to Disabilities and making sure that the law is being met on resources given.

 

Now there are some problems with unions as well.  I'm active in mine and we have actively considered becoming independent of the national/state Union at large.  I won't go into the nitty-gritty of why, but it isn't because unions are inherently bad.

Edited by Balsy
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/8/2017 at 8:43 AM, zippy5 said:

Right, salaries are their only expense :rolleyes: 

 

We were talking about massive salaries (like Saban's).  But my previous comment applies here anyway.

 

Although a for-profit company can use their charitable foundation to support their own selected causes, if you believe that this is a way to both bring in donated money and operate as a for-profit, and just simply use that money to pay company expenses, you've really been misinformed.  You can roll your eyes all you want, but I again wish you luck trying to pull that off.     

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Debating with you sometimes really is an exercise in futility sometimes :lol:

 

Go back and read my posts, I never once said what they could or should spend the money on, only that they could still solicit donations. That's all I'll say on this, it's a dumb argument either way because nothing is changing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It sure looked like you were telling us that they could use donations to pay expenses.  I was just correcting that.  But, you're right on everything else in your post above, and I agree that it's not going to change.  But what I'd like to change is that I wouldn't have been forced to know this subject as well as I have throughout the course of my career.  It's really exciting stuff.  :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 7 months later...

WVU expects to pay $1.3 million in excise tax.

 

"That bill [...] includes provisions impacting college sports, including a 21 percent excise tax on those with the highest salaries in non-profit organizations like colleges and universities. The excise tax kicks in on an organization’s five highest paid employees who make more than $1 million a year."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Sergeant Zip said:

WVU expects to pay $1.3 million in excise tax.

 

"That bill [...] includes provisions impacting college sports, including a 21 percent excise tax on those with the highest salaries in non-profit organizations like colleges and universities. The excise tax kicks in on an organization’s five highest paid employees who make more than $1 million a year."

 

That's very interesting!  Thanks for posting!  

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/2/2018 at 2:11 PM, Sergeant Zip said:

WVU expects to pay $1.3 million in excise tax.

 

"That bill [...] includes provisions impacting college sports, including a 21 percent excise tax on those with the highest salaries in non-profit organizations like colleges and universities. The excise tax kicks in on an organization’s five highest paid employees who make more than $1 million a year."

 

What does this mean for Duquesne and Dambrot? He's right at the $1M threshold, correct?

 

I think that's a great provision, by the way. Everyone complains about the money-hungry corruption in the NCAA, and this targets that. It also helps keep colleges more balanced with athletics/academics. 

Edited by lilroodude
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, lilroodude said:

think that's a great provision, by the way. Everyone complains about the money-hungry corruption in the NCAA, and this targets that. It also helps keep colleges more balanced with athletics/academics. 

 

There I agree with you.

 

Except I think an unintended result may not be the reduction of coach salaries; instead it might be the raising of tuition "student fees" to supplement the loss of $$$ due to the tax.  Because where there's a hole, it's gotta be filled.  The Top-tier programs will continue business-as-usual; while the middle-to-bottom will either have to sacrifice those borderline contracts or raise tuition  student fees, to compensate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Sergeant Zip said:

80 / 20 rule is gone too.

 

Minnesota issued a letter

 

"This change to tax law would mean Scholarship Seating contributions will no longer be 80 percent tax-deductible."

So did UA.

 

"

YEAR-END GIFTS AND TAX LAW CHANGES

Dear Friend of Akron Athletics,
 
Thank you for your generous support and investment in the success of our UA student-athletes through your annual donation to the Z-Fund.  Your continued support makes a tremendous impact on our 450 student-athletes to excel in the classroom, in competition, and in the community.
 
As you are aware, Congress has recently passed changes to the tax code which will be signed by the President by the end of this week.  The proposed changes will have an impact on your philanthropic gifts to Akron Athletics.  For example, current IRS policy allows for donations related to priority ticket access for collegiate events to be tax-deductible for 80% of the total gift amount.  The new legislation eliminates the provision allowing individuals to deduct charitable contributions connected to athletics tickets.  With this new lRS policy, future donations to the Z-Fund for ticket purchases may no longer be considered tax-deductible.  We ask that you consult your tax advisor for your exact charitable contributions deductibility.
 
At this time, Akron Athletics does not have any plans to adjust the donation structure of the Z-Fund seating programs for Men's and Women's Basketball, Football, and Men's Soccer, but we are actively looking at the new policy and considering how to structure our benefits in the future.
 
It may be to your advantage to make any planned donations you are currently considering prior to the end of this 2017 tax year to guarantee tax-deductibility under current tax law.  For example, you may consider making a one-time gift that can be prorated by UA over a period of years toward future Z-Fund seating donation requirements.
 
Our Athletics Development staff will be happy to personally assist you with any questions you may have related to your generous support or with a gift to Akron Athletics.  You may contact the Z-Fund staff by calling one of the following development officers Monday through Friday from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m:
                       

Anthony Henderson (330) 972-7117 or  ahender@uakron.edu

Tim Faix (330) 972-8502 or  tfaix@uakron.edu

George Van Horne (330) 972-8255 or  ghvanhorne@uakron.edu

 
Any contributions made by December 31, 2017, would be deductible according to current tax laws.  Please contact your tax advisor about your specific situation and the impact of the new IRS Tax Law.
 
Thank you for your support of Akron Athletics and investing in our student-athletes' success.  We wish you and your family all the best during this holiday season."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...