Private philanthropy is important in America. In 1985, philanthropy totaled almost 80 billion dollars. Philanthropy is partially a function of price. Absent a tax benefit, the price of charitable giving is unity. When tax benefits are available, the price of cash giving is one minus the marginal tax rate of the donor. Philanthropy is not evenly distributed among all classes of organizations. Changes in tax cost bring about changes in the distribution of gifts among organizations. Predictions have been made of a six to twelve billion dollar decline in individual giving as a result of the Tax Reform Act of 1986. The question is, "Whose ox gets gored?" In 1962, the Internal Revenue Service collected data directly linking itemized charitable contributions to class of donee organization. Prior works by Taussig, Schwartz, Feldstein, and Clotfelter have been principally based on this data. Their works document differing elasticities of price on charitable giving. The current research gathered 1985 data on the relationships between income, price, and charitable donee for 298 Dallas County, Texas, taxpayers. Data was obtained from selected certified public accountants in Dallas County who prepared income tax returns for individuals as part of their practice. Two hundred fifty usable responses reflected charitable gifts. The data collected permitted the tax benefit resulting from charitable gifts to be calculated. Income levels and marginal tax rates on those gifts were then correlated with donee organizations using multiple regression analysis. The main effects of price and income on giving were masked by multicollinearity. The interaction effects of price and other independent variables showed little price effect on giving. Only when coupled with the income variable at income levels of $50,000 was the price effect significant.

The debate over federal income tax treatment of home mortgage interest (HMI) has largely overlooked an important, and possibly unintended political and economic consequence of our federal income tax system. The distribution of the for home mortgage interest deduction tax benefit across states is a possible missing consideration. Specifically, this study offers a federalist1 perspective on the federal income tax benefit from the deduction for HMI - one of the largest personal federal tax expenditures on the books. This dissertation analyzes current national political rhetoric from a federalist perspective. Discussion also includes background, current status, and proposed changes to the tax code for of the HMI deduction. First, a Tobit regression is used to analyze the distribution of the HMI tax benefit across states and to test for disproportionate distribution across states in benefit derived from the federal income tax deduction for home mortgage interest beyond that which is explained by income. This initial part of the study is also the precursor to a hierarchical analysis seeking to identify significant factors affecting the distribution of the benefit of the HMI deduction across states. The Ernst and Young/University of Michigan Individual Model File of 1992 tax returns is the primary data source for this initial part of the investigation. The second part of the analysis examines the effect of sets of factors in a causal hierarchy on the HMI deduction benefit. By first controlling for the effects of personal and identifiable state characteristics on HMI deduction benefit, the possible existence of a residual socio-political force is tested. The primary data sources for this part of the study are the 1990 Census of Population and Housing 5% Public Use Microsample as well as tax data extracted from the Statistics of Income, Individual Public Use Tax File, Level III Sample, as well as others. Ridge regression is used for hypothesis testing. Results indicate the existence of a significant difference in the benefit from home mortgage interest deduction across states holding income constant. This study also finds that a set of personal as well as a set of state market, legal and tax characteristics significantly influence the taxpayer's HMI deduction benefit, and that a residual difference in benefit across states after controlling for personal and identified state attributes. Future study should examine the source of residual across state differences (attributed to socio-political differences between states). Federal housing goals may be frustrated as the effective subsidy actually helps support higher home prices in areas where high housing costs may already be a barrier to potential new homeownership. The concepts and techniques applied in this study could easily be applied to other provisions of federal tax, or to any other tax system in a federation for that matter.

Thesis. 1979. Ph.D. cn--Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Dept. of Urban Studies and Planning. / MICROFICHE COPY AVAILABLE IN ARCHIVES AND ROTCH. / Vita. / Bibliography: leaves 268-278. / Ph.D.cn

Univ., Diss.--Heidelberg, 2004.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Canterbury, 2009. / Typescript (photocopy). Includes bibliographical references (p. 581-602). Also available via the World Wide Web.

M.Comm. (South African & International Taxation) / The capital allowance mentioned in section 11(e) of Income Tax Act 58 of 1962 (“the Act”) refers to machinery, plant, implements, utensils and articles, the value of which may have diminished by reason of wear and tear or depreciation. The machinery, plant, and articles in question, often accede to other assets of a permanent nature such as immovable buildings. This is a problem in South Africa because the wear and tear allowance is lost when machinery, plant or articles lose their identities upon being absorbed into assets of a permanent nature such as a building. Buildings and other structures of a permanent nature do not qualify for the wear and tear allowance in terms of section 11(e) of the Act. This article investigates the uncertainties with regard to interpreting what constitutes “buildings, or other structures or works of a permanent nature” for the purposes of the prohibition of wear and tear allowances contained in section 11(e)(ii) of the Act.

In the 2011/2012 Budget Speech delivered by the Minister of Finance, Pravin Gordhan, it was announced that a 15% withholding tax on gambling winnings above R 25 000 was to be introduced with effect from 1 April 2012. This treatise was undertaken to critically analyse the different elements of the proposed new withholding tax. It was established that the fiscus already benefits significantly from the gambling industry and levies and taxes from the gambling industry dwarf the revenue SARS collect from other forms of taxes such as Donations tax and Estate Duty tax. The necessity, therefore, of taxing gambling winnings in the hands of the individual is debatable. A comparison with the three foreign countries used by the Minister as an example of countries who have successfully implemented a withholding tax on gambling winnings exposed operational or other characteristics which bear no significant relationship to the situation in which the industry operates in South Africa. Probably the most significant difference is the fact that in the three foreign countries, losses are deductible and only the net gains are taxed. Although it iv could add to an already seemingly administrative-intensive legislation, it is submitted that taxing gambling winnings and ignoring losses suffered by gamblers will be disproportionately unfair towards the taxpayer. The many questions raised in this treatise illustrate the level of uncertainty still surrounding the new proposed gambling tax. It is hoped that communication will be provided by SARS as soon as possible to address the issues at hand. This would go a long way in ensuring that the implementation of the proposed withholding tax on gambling winnings is as smooth and efficient as possible.

M.Com. / Please refer to full text to view abstract

The Income Tax Act 58 of 1962 (“Act”) entitles taxpayers to deduct certain losses and expenses incurred by them from their taxable income if such losses and expenses comply with the requirements of section 11(a) of the Act. One of the requirements of section 11(a) is that, in order to be eligible for a deduction, the losses and expenses must have been “actually incurred” by the taxpayer. The area of tax deductions in our tax law represents the frontline in the continuous and inevitable war between the taxpayer (almost always desperately trying to maximise her deductions) and the revenue authorities (as often times desperately trying to minimise the deductions to which the taxpayer is entitled). The stage on which the various battles which make up this mighty war between citizen and state are fought is the court and the arsenal with which each party comes armed is the Act and, more specifically, the absolute belief of each party in the correctness of their interpretation of the Act, which, each party hopes, will be ably demonstrated by their able (and often extremely expensive) counsel. Such is the determination of the taxpayer and the tax authorities alike that the body of case law relating to this specific area of our law is, especially when one considers that it essentially involves on only one section of the Act, relatively voluminous. The author’s intention is to consider only one of the requirements with which the taxpayer must comply in order to be eligible for a deduction, namely, the requirement that the relevant loss or expenditure must have been “actually incurred” by the taxpayer. Despite the fact that the meaning of the phrase “actually incurred” has been considered extensively by our courts, significant uncertainty still exists as to its exact meaning. The author will deal with three specific contexts in which the meaning of this phrase remains a subject of uncertainty, namely, share-based payments, contingent liabilities and losses and expenses incurred in relation to illegal receipts. The author will begin first by dealing with the interpretation of tax statutes, the author will then, in general terms, consider the general deduction formula after which the author will delve into the meaning of the phrase “actually incurred” in the contexts of each of the transactions mentioned above. / Dissertation (LLM)--University of Pretoria, 2012. / gm2014 / Mercantile Law / unrestricted

The purpose of this dissertation is to examine an unexplored aspect of tax expenditures: the tax-price implications of tax exemptions, deductions and credits. Although this implication of tax expenditures has not been adequately examined, two separate lines of analysis have been suggested by the existing literature. Some authors have emphasized the welfare costs of tax expenditures. To the extent that tax expenditures narrow the tax base the introduction or extension of a tax expenditure undoubtedly makes the cost of raising revenue more than it would be otherwise. This kind of cost, denoted as a welfare cost, can be incorporated into a model of individual tax-price determination. On the other hand, other authors have emphasized another tax-price implication of tax expenditures: that the introduction or extension of a tax expenditure changes the cost-shares faced by each taxpayer, exclusive of any welfare cost. Since an individual's cost-share is nothing more than his personal tax base divided by the aggregate tax base, this result emerges because a tax expenditure usually changes the individual's tax base in a manner disproportionate to the change in the aggregate tax base. This dissertation will explore and combine each line of analysis, both theoretically and empirically. In the first portion of the dissertation a model of tax-price determination is developed that explicitly incorporates the welfare cost of taxation. Various tax expenditures are then introduced into the model and their effects on individual tax-price schedules discerned. In this way the influence a tax expenditure has on an individual's choice over public sector size can be surmised. The next portion develops within the confines of a simple median voter model some potential allocative implications of various tax expenditures. This portion traces out the expected change in the median voter's desired quantity of the collective good, given various tax expenditures, via an analysis of the cost-share impact of the various tax expenditures. Although in this section welfare costs are not explicitly considered or all possible political cases outlined, the analysis does look at a set of cases that are of general interest. The final portion of the dissertation considers the influence tax expenditures taken in toto have on both the cost-sharing arrangement among individual taxpayers and the welfare cost to individual taxpayers. The results are used to gauge both the distributive and allocative implications of tax expenditures. / Ph. D.