Exogeneity vs. Endogeneity in Section 170’s Quid Pro Quo Test

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

This article advances an exogenous-endogenous distinction for purposes of determining and calculating quid pro quos under section 170. This test holds that exogenous benefits — benefits that arise independently of, or arise outside of, the taxing authority — are properly considered quid pro quos (and should reduce the amount deductible); whereas, endogenous benefits — benefits that arise from or within the specific federal or state taxing authority — are not quid pro quos and should not be considered in determining the amount deductible under section 170. 

The exogenous-endogenous distinction advanced by this article comports with the policy and intent of section 170, provides a way to demarcate quid pro quos in a consistent manner (irrespective of donee), and clarifies why section 170 need not consider the federal tax benefit associated with it, but must consider any associate state tax benefit. 
Original languageAmerican English
JournalState Tax Notes
Volume90
StatePublished - 2018

Keywords

  • tax
  • charity
  • charitable deduction
  • SALT
  • SALT deduction
  • state and local
  • TCJA
  • SALT workaround

Disciplines

  • Law

Cite this