Blog Layout

Noncash Contributions to Charity – Tax Court Strictly Enforces Substantiation Requirements

Oct 09, 2014

by Gregory S. Dowell


A recent tax court case leaves no doubt that noncash gifts to charity need to be substantiated, and individual taxpayers must take notice. In Smith vs. Commissioner, the Tax Court ruled that none of the taxpayer’s contributions were deductible, even though the Court conceded that it had little doubt that the items were actually donated to charity, due to the fact that Smith failed to comply with the substantiation requirements for noncash charitable gifts.


Smith’s noncash charitable donations for the tax year 2009, all given to AMVETS, consisted of the following:

  1. Furniture from his mother’s house, following her death: The furniture included seven sofas, four televisions, five bedroom sets, six mattresses, a kitchen set, a dining room set, a china cabinet, and three rugs. Smith valued these items at $11,730 for charitable contribution purposes.
  2. Clothing belonging to Smith and his children, consisting of 180 shirts, 63 pairs of slacks, 153 pairs of jeans, 173 pairs of shoes, 51 dresses, 35 sweaters, nine overcoats, and seven suits: The clothing was valued at $14,487 as a charitable contribution.
  3. Electronic equipment, which included two computer systems, a printer, and a copier: Ownership of these items was not clear. These items were valued at $1,550.


Smith, who had visited AMVETS several times during 2009, obtained a number of blank receipts signed by AMVETS representatives, then proceeded to consolidate all of the above contributions on two blank receipts. The two receipts were completed to reflect Smith as the donor and used August 30, 2009 as the date of the contributions. Smith prepared a spreadsheet to identify the property that was donated, but neither receipt included any description of the donated goods. The date the spreadsheet was prepared was not established and there was no evidence that it was actually submitted to AMVETS.


Smith testified that, in order to determine the value of the donated property, he used a Salvation Army website that listed estimated ranges of value for used property. A printout from the website was produced as evidence. It was noted during the case that the values Smith placed on the donated property exceeded the high range as indicated on the Salvation Army guide, and no explanation was provided as to why Smith believed the property to be more valuable. Smith did not have any of the items appraised, and no photographs or other evidence was introduced to substantiate the existence or condition of the donated items.


The Internal Revenue Code provides that charitable contributions are deductible if a taxpayer satisfies substantiation requirements. The substantiation requirements depend on the size of the contribution and on whether cash or property was donated, and separate requirements exist for all contributions of $250 or more, contributions of property with a claimed value exceeding $500, and contributions of property with a claimed value exceeding $5,000.


An individual may deduct a gift of $250 or more only if the contribution is substantiated with a contemporaneous written acknowledgment by the charitable organization. The acknowledgment must include a description of any property other than cash that was contributed.


If contributions exceed $500, similar items of property are aggregated for purposes of the substantiation rules. “Similar items of property” is defined to mean “property of the same generic category or type,” such as clothing, jewelry, furniture, electronic equipment, household appliances, or kitchenware.


Noncash contributions in excess of $500 must be supported by written records with respect to each item of donated property that include (1) the approximate date the property was acquired and the manner of its acquisition; (2) a description of the property in detail reasonable under the circumstances; (3) the cost or other basis of the property; (4) the fair market value of the property at the time it was contributed; and (5) the method used in determining its fair market value.


For contributions of property valued in excess of $5,000, the taxpayer must generally satisfy the substantiation requirements discussed above and must also: (1) obtain a “qualified appraisal” of the items; and (2) attach to his tax return a fully completed appraisal summary.


The term “household items” includes furniture, furnishings, electronics, appliances, linens, and other similar items, and no deduction is allowed for contributions of clothing or household items unless such items are in good used condition or better.


In the Smith case, the Tax Court found that there were three categories of property (the household items from his mother’s house, the clothing, and the electronic equipment). For all three categories, the Court said that Smith had to meet the substantiation requirements, but he failed to do so:


Requirements for charitable contributions of $250 or more: Smith obtained blank signed forms from AMVETS and later filled them out by inserting donation values. Because the forms were signed by AMVETS before the property was donated, the Court questioned whether they constituted an “acknowledgment” by AMVETS that it received anything.


The Court said that the AMVETS tax receipts did not contain the necessary description of the property donated. As an alternative, Smith created a spreadsheet showing the property he allegedly contributed, and there was no evidence that this spreadsheet was ever provided to or seen by AMVETS. In addition, there was no evidence as to when Smith’s spreadsheet was created. The only evidence as to the contemporaneous nature of the acknowledgment was the date of August 30, 2009, which Smith wrote on the blank receipts.


As a result, the Court said that Smith failed to satisfy the substantiation requirements for contributions of $250 or more.


Requirements for contributions exceeding $500: Smith made noncash contributions of clothing, furniture, and electronic equipment, and for each category of items he claimed a value exceeding $500. However, he did not maintain written records establishing when or how the items were acquired, what the cost bases were, and he did not maintain written records establishing the fair market value of the items at the time of the donation. It was noted that the values used were considerably higher than the “high” values from the Salvation Army guide that he produced, without any explanation as to the difference; no photos or other records were provided to establish the condition of the donated items or a justification for the higher values. Strikingly, the Tax Court noted that Smith’s donation largely consisted of clothing and household items and, as such, he presented no evidence that these items were in good used condition or better, which is a qualification for a charitable deduction.


Requirements for contributions exceeding $5,000: A qualified appraisal was not obtained and the requirement to attach an appraisal to the tax return was thus not met. The Court concluded that he failed to satisfy the substantiation requirements for his claimed contributions of clothing ($14,487) and household furniture ($11,730).


This is a meaningful case to study for any taxpayer who has more than a minimal amount of noncash contributions in a tax year. It is clearly important to maintain contemporaneous written records of charitable giving, with the appropriate acknowledgments from the charitable organization. In years where the noncash giving is exceptionally large due to an inheritance or some other occurrence, a taxpayer should strongly consider having an appraisal of the property performed. Pragmatically, the taxpayer will need to weigh the cost of the appraisal against the value of the possible charitable deduction.


This case provides the IRS with important precedent to disallow large noncash charitable deductions. More than ever, taxpayers will need to do some advance planning, and we encourage clients who are contemplating large noncash gifts to contact us to discuss their particular situation.

14 Dec, 2023
With year-end approaching, it is time to start thinking about moves that may help lower your tax bill for this year and next. This year’s planning is more challenging than usual due to changes made by the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 and the SECURE 2.0 Act.
14 Dec, 2023
With year-end approaching, it is time to start thinking about moves that may help lower your business's taxes for this year and next.
By Greg Dowell 14 Nov, 2023
How to make doing good a little less frightening financially.
By Greg Dowell 13 Nov, 2023
Catching many businesses by surprise, this Act kicks in with filing requirements as early as January 1, 2024.
By Greg Dowell 05 Sep, 2023
Having a business fail for lack of employees was unheard of 10 years ago. The problem existed for many businesses long before the pandemic, but it certainly went to a whole new level from 2020 to the present.
By Greg Dowell 24 Aug, 2023
Improve profitability, reduce the opportunity for fraud, focus on your core business, eliminate excuses for tardy financial data - what's not to love about outsourcing your accounting?
By Greg Dowell 16 Aug, 2023
ESOPs have been around for years; they could be a solution for ownership transition.
By Greg Dowell 16 May, 2023
by Gregory S. Dowell Updated May 16, 2023 Spring is the traditional kick-off to wedding season, and thoughts quickly turn to the wedding venue, gifts, the happy couple, and, of course, the guest list. Lurking somewhere in the shadows, behind even that strange uncle you barely know, is another guest that needs to be considered: The tax impact on the newlyweds. To start, newlyweds will have two options for filing their income taxes in the year of marriage: Filing status can either be married filing jointly, or married filing separately. In the vast majority of cases, a couple will benefit with a lower overall tax burden to the couple by choosing to file married filing jointly. One of the classic cases where a couple may consider filing separately is when one spouse has significant amounts of medical expenses for the year. Medical expenses are only deductible if they exceed 7.5% of adjusted gross income; using only one spouse's income may allow a deduction to be taken if filing separately, compared to losing the medical deduction entirely if both incomes are combined by filing jointly. We previously had written about the tax trap that often occurs when two people get married, resulting often in an unanticipated balance due when the first joint tax return for the couple was filed. While President Trump’s Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA), changed the dynamics somewhat, it is still worthwhile to put pen to paper before saying “I do”. Prospective spouses have the opportunity to save money by taking income tax considerations into account before tying the knot. That’s particularly true for those who plan to marry late this year or early next year. As this article explains, from the federal income tax standpoint, some individuals marrying next year may come out ahead by either deferring or accelerating income, depending on their circumstances. Others may find it to their advantage to defer a year-end marriage until next year. For some quick background, a “marriage penalty” exists whenever the tax on a couple’s joint return is more than the combined taxes each spouse would pay if they weren’t married and each filed a single or head of household income tax return. Before President Trump’s TCJA, only the 10% and 15% married filing jointly brackets were set at twice that of the singles bracket, and so the marriage penalty effect on joint filers applied in the brackets above the 15% bracket. Beginning with the 2018 tax year, however, the TCJA set the statutory tax brackets for marrieds filing jointly-through the 32% bracket-at twice the amount of the corresponding tax brackets for singles. As a result, the TCJA eliminated any tax-bracket-generated marriage penalty effect for joint filers where each spouse has roughly the same amount of taxable income-through the 32% bracket. For example, if two individuals who each have $215,950 of taxable income file as single taxpayers for 2022, each would have a tax bill of $49,335.50, for a combined total of $98,671. If they were married, their tax bill as marrieds filing jointly would be $98,671, exactly the same amount as the combined total tax they’d pay as single taxpayers. Because the 35% bracket for marrieds filing jointly isn’t twice the amount of the singles 35% bracket, the marriage penalty effect will still apply to joint filers whose income falls in the 35% bracket. Using 2022 tax tables, two single taxpayers may each have $500,000 in taxable income, for a combined total of $1,000,000, without having any of it taxed higher than 35%. However, for marrieds filing jointly, the 35% tax bracket ends at $647,850 in taxable income, and each additional dollar of taxable income taxed at 37%. Thus, where two high-earning unmarried taxpayers with substantially equal amounts of taxable income are planning for their marriage to take place either late this year or early next, it may pay from the tax viewpoint to defer the marriage until next year. As an example, if two individuals each have $539,900 of taxable income file as single taxpayers for 2023, each would have a tax bill of $162,718, for a combined total of $325,436. If they were married before the end of the year, their tax bill as marrieds filing jointly would be $334,076, or $8,640 more than the combined total tax they’d pay as single taxpayers. If only one of the prospective spouses has substantial income, marriage and the filing of a joint return may save taxes, thus resulting in a marriage bonus. The bonus is the result of two factors: 1) the tax brackets for marrieds filing jointly cover wider spans of income than the tax brackets for taxpayers as singles; and 2) the taxable income of the lower-earning individual may not push the couple’s combined income into a higher tax bracket. In such a case, it will probably be better from the tax standpoint to accelerate the marriage into this year if feasible. There are a number of other factors that should also be taken into account when determining the effect of a marriage on income taxes of the couple. As mentioned early in this post, the first decision is to verify that filing a joint return is preferred to filing separate returns. In addition, many provisions of the tax code phase out completely (or decrease partially) as adjusted gross income increases. In a perfect world, there would only be good surprises for a newlywed couple following their wedding. To avoid any unpleasant income tax surprises, we always recommend that a newlywed couple take the time to make a projection of what their income will look like when combined as a couple, and determine what the tax bill will look like, at the Federal and State levels. After all, planning ahead, communicating with each other, discussing finances, and avoiding unpleasant surprises are some of the keys to a long marriage.
By Greg Dowell 11 Mar, 2023
Don't forget a birthday, anniversary, or any of these tax filing dates . . .
By Greg Dowell 07 Feb, 2023
The IRS asks taxpayers to wait to file 1040s if they received rebate payments from their state in 2022.
More Posts
Share by: