percentage legislation in central and eastern europe: - a mechanism for philanthropy? nilda bullain...
TRANSCRIPT
Percentage Legislation Percentage Legislation in Central and Eastern Europe:in Central and Eastern Europe:- - a mechanism for philanthropy?a mechanism for philanthropy?
Nilda BullainEuropean Center for Not-for-Profit
Law
Conference on Corporate Social Responsibility: A New Model of
Partnerships
2 July 2008, Tbilisi
© ECNL
Central idea of % mechanism
Taxpayer decides whether to designate portion of tax paid to
entitled organization.
* tax allocation* (indirect) government support
© ECNL
% laws around the region Historical context
Germany, Spain, Italy The Percentage Group
the inventor: Hungary (1996) Slovakia (2001) Lithuania (2002) Poland (2003) Romania (2003)
Initiatives: Czech Republic, Ukraine, Armenia Abandoned idea: Georgia, Macedonia
© ECNL
Issues to be considered Who can designate? How much? To how many? To whom, what are the criteria? How? When? What for? Reporting, accountability? Invalid designations? Dispute settlement…
© ECNL
Who ?(taxpayers)
How much?To how many
recipients?
HU individuals 1 +1% 1+1
SK individuals& companies
2% *2%
1- many
Lit individuals 2% many
PL individuals 2% many
RO individuals 2% 1
© ECNL
Recipients To whom?
All qualifying NGOs (HU, SK – registered on list) PBOs (Lit, PL) Church/state objective, public institutions
Other criteria: Prior existence, pre-registration, PB purposes,
public debt, territory What are resources used for?
Mainly unrestricted funds
© ECNL
And how? Through Tax Returns Directly on account of beneficiary
(Poland) – proved ineffective so amended Reporting/Accountability Issues to be considered:
Administrative burden (time +money) Anonymity Directly or through employers
© ECNL
Legal nature and effects of the percentage mechanism
Tax allocation mechanism
Citizens control tax spending directly
Indirect government support
Beneficiaries (NGOs) have access to increased resources
Transitional philanthropy
Encourages philanthropic activity
MULTIFUNCTIONAL!
© ECNL
Policy rationales for the 1% law
Taxation self-determination a tool to strengthen democratic
system and values (taxpayer control of public spending)
Civil society developmentIncreasing resources of the sectorRaising awareness in the general
publicStrengthening communication skills
and outreach
© ECNL
Rationales for the 1% law
Developing a philanthropic culture “first step” of making people think
why they would want to support an NGO
Government outsourcing decentralized and de-politicized
government support to activities that benefit the public
© ECNL
Potential impact of the 1% law
Policy rationale Potential for success
Taxation self-determination
Good (with some limitations)
Civil society development
High (but much depends on implementation)
Development of philanthropy
Questionable (likely but so far no visible impact)
Government outsourcing
Low (not appropriate mechanism)
© ECNL
The advantages…
NGOs Linking to community; NGO communication skills; Awareness about civil society issues; Pool of resources for unrestricted funds; A revenue for local/small NGOs; Higher potential for bigger NGOs; Market based - healthy competition;
© ECNL
The advantages, cont’d. Taxpayers
Decision on how % of public money is spent; Awareness about how public money is spent; Awareness about civil society issues and why
to support.
State Decentralized/de-politicized government
support; Probably not costly; To “sweeten bitter pill of taxation” ; NGOs give part back through taxes.
© ECNL
Objectives revisited: Resources?
Hungary Around 35-40% of taxpayers; 0.8% of sector revenue; Around 43% of NGOs receive (and bigger NGOs). In 2005: 6.9 billion Fts.
Slovakia 1st year 34% of taxpayers; 2nd: 42% (i), 75%(c). In 2006: 14.432.772 USD (individuals), 29.261.585
USD (corporations) 21% of all NGOs, or 99.8% of all eligible
Poland: 3.6% from tax payers; In 2005: 22,038,733 USD. around 8% of all NGOs are eligible, no data how many
received
© ECNL
Objectives revisited: Philanthropic Culture?
Unidentified effect on traditional philanthropy;
Lithuania and Slovakia: abolished tax incentives;
Anonymity of declarations a problem.
© ECNL
The challenges Is it a just mechanism?
Who can give, who can receive (competition w others)?
Limited resource: % of the cake always the same.
How much you invest, how much you get? Administration, complexity vs. resources.
Is it creating “classes” of NGOs? Is it enhancing, delaying or substituting
development of philanthropic culture? Anonymity, donor reflex.
What is the effect on other tax incentives?
© ECNL
So is it a form of philanthropy?
A classic definition of philanthropy: Voluntary private giving for public purposes.
Percentage idea:
Taxpayer decides … to designate % of tax paid to organization.
“TRANSITIONAL OR GENETICALLY MODIFIED PHILANTHROPY”
© ECNL
An incentive for philanthropy? Incentives for philanthropy:
Usually tax deductions and tax credits.Tax incentive involves an economic
benefit to the taxpayer.Novel forms: government aided
philanthropy, such as the Gift Aid system in the UK.
No economic consequence to the donor (+/-).
Government encourages private giving by increasing the value of the gift from public budget.
© ECNL
An incentive for philanthropy?
Percentage designation not an incentive for philanthropy in the “law dictionary” sense.
However, may be considered an “incentive” in the broad understanding of the word:The opportunity itself encourages
people to act (direct resources to NGOs).
© ECNL
And a mechanism for philanthropy? Has the potential in transitional
societies…
But if to be adopted, should be based on: analysis of third sector analysis of existing legal incentives analysis of current philanthropic culture careful review and selection of
implementation options cross-sectoral cooperation in drafting
And it should be implemented in combination
with traditional incentives!
© ECNL
For more information:
www.onepercent.hu
www.jedenprocent.pl
www.rozhodni.sk
www.labdara-parama.lt
www.unulasuta.ro
© ECNL
Thank you!
For more information, visit www.ecnl.org.hu