Donor Advised Funds and why Private Foundations need them

A donor-advised fund (DAF) is a separately identified fund or account that is maintained, operated, and legally controlled by a section 501(c)(3) organization like The Stewardship Foundation. In this month’s article, we list why owners of private foundations may want to covert to DAFs with The Stewardship Foundation.

Man working in home officeReason #1. Save time and money

Private foundation owners pay for lawyers, accountants, and office supplies, but with a DAF, owners advise how the funds are used, yet avoid the administrative cost. In some cases, as much as 50%. Cutting costs makes the money go further.

Reason #2. Less hassle

DAFs relieve philanthropists of the hassles of running a foundation. No more tedious paperwork or fact checking potential recipients. For larger foundations, no hiring, firing, or worrying about staff.

Reason #3. More privacy

DAF funds are relatively anonymous because there are no requirements to disclose as much information about their charitable giving. Privacy ensures that philanthropists can support causes that operate within their personal value system, ethical standards, or call to Christian conscience. Private foundation tax forms are public information, exposing operational details and even personal information.

Reason #4. Smaller donor investment fees

Small foundations often pay relatively high fees to the firms that handle their investments. On the other hand, donor funds work with a much bigger pool of money from all the accounts we administer, so fees are lower.

Reason #5. More generous tax deductions

Donors get an immediate tax deduction when they contribute to a fund from their private foundation, but with a DAF, deductions are more generous – instead of a limit of 30% to a private foundation, donors can deduct cash contributions up to half their adjusted gross income each year. There are other tax advantages for appreciated-security donations, and investment gains are generally tax-free (no excise tax).

Reason #6. Protected legacy

DAF funds protect the original intent of the founder. After a founder’s death, family members may disagree on the direction that the private/family foundation should take. They may begin to direct funds to causes contrary to the founder’s moral or ethical values. To protect the legacy intent of the founder, the foundation’s assets can be split among several accounts at donor-advised funds, and those accounts can then be used for different purposes.

If you are interested to learn more about converting from a private/family foundation to donor advised funds, we recommend a recent Wall Street Journal article by Jillian Mincer where she raises the question whether it is time for private foundation owners to convert to donor advised funds.

Mickelson Wins – Loses Over Half to Taxes

st. andrewsIn July, Phil Mickelson won the British Open, and before that the Scottish Open. I hope you enjoyed his performances as much as I did. If you’re not a golf fan, there’s a story here that you still might find interesting.

After winning these prestigious trophies, Mickelson lightened his trip home from the lovely British Isles by forking over 44% of his winnings to the United Kingdom. Back in the U.S., the IRS took their share of self-employment tax and Medicare surtax, and his home state of California took another 13% or so leaving our golf hero with about 39% of his winnings. And that’s before he paid his travel expenses, agent fees and his caddie, leaving him with a meager 30% of earnings.

Forbes ranks Mickelson as the 7th highest paid athlete in the world. Last January, Phil was so mad about taxes he admitted he was going to make some “drastic changes” because he was in the “zone” that was being targeted both federally and by the state.

No one whom I know personally has a net worth of $180 million, but I do know most of us would do well to take a look at our own rising tax burden and think about making some changes. A couple of places to start are to

  1. review our investment strategy for these changing times, and
  2. consider how we can lower our estate tax risk (and do some good for a deserving charity in the process).

The Stewardship Foundation is always willing to help you assess your situation, examine your goals, and help you meet your financial needs. Unfortunately, we can’t help you read greens or improve your golf swing, but we can help you drive your passions and approach achieving your dreams, resulting in the financial birdie or even the eagle you desire. Give us a call. If you prefer to have a chat after the 18th hole, we’re open to that too.

The Iceberg Theory – What Donors Can’t See Can’t Help Charities

During college I took a literature course from a professor who greatly respected Nobel Prize winning author, Ernest Hemingway.  One characteristic of this great American’s writing style is the Iceberg Theory, also known as the “theory of omission.”  

If a writer stops observing he is finished. But he does not have to observe consciously nor think how it will be useful. Perhaps that would be true at the beginning. But later everything he sees goes into the great reserve of things he knows or has seen. If it is any use to know it, I always try to write on the principle of the iceberg. There is seven-eighths of it underwater for every part that shows. Anything you know you can eliminate and it only strengthens your iceberg. It is the part that doesn’t show. If a writer omits something because he does not know it then there is a hole in the story.
— Ernest Hemingway

What if non-profit organizations kept this iceberg principle in mind when talking to major donors? What if their executive directors and development officers started “observing” their donors—consciously listening for the “part that doesn’t show” – the 7/8 they can’t see or perceive because donors typically reveal only the tips of their icebergs? icebergDonors do not consciously omit information, but they only reveal what is necessary to answer your questions. And isn’t the typical question, “Are you willing to increase your donation amount this year?”

The question is interesting because it ignores the 80% of donor wealth tied to non-cash assets like land and buildings, a business, or holiday home. A typical family earning $100,000 a year gives a little over $2,500 to charity. What wonderful things could happen if donors only knew how to leave a legacy by leveraging their wealth tied up in vacation homes or vacant land!

At the Stewardship Foundation we provide tools and support that advisors and non-profits can use to help their donors realize the charitable intent potential hidden “below the iceberg.”  For example, on our website we post Questions for Donors to help development offices and other financial professionals listen for certain donor concerns that may indicate a willingness to move from “donation” to “legacy.”

The tragic story of the Titanic illustrates the danger for those who ignore the Iceberg Theory’s suggestion that when a writer (think nonprofit or charity or donor) omits something then there is a “hole in the story.” By ignoring the wealth that lies beneath the iceberg, charities and nonprofits may lose the opportunity for sustainability, and donors lose the opportunity to accomplish great things during their lifetime.

If you are a nonprofit or charity and want to learn how you can apply Hemingway’s wisdom to your development efforts, then we’d love to share our knowledge about transformational giving. If you are a donor who has never considered using your “hidden wealth” to make a difference in your community during your lifetime, then we’d love to share our knowledge about planned giving. As a huge Hemingway fan, it would be my pleasure to honor this great American author by helping in some way to plug a few holes and leave our community and causes in a better place because we did.