Lead Stories

We regularly feature answers to questions from readers in our “To the Point” column. The full list can be viewed here. Here are a few questions recently received from readers.

Who determines the value of in-kind contributions? 

Our 501(c)(3) opera company has received donations of items for a fund-raising auction and food and wine for the event.  We have also received meals and costumes for out-of-town performers.  Do we set the values or do the donors? –From the Website.

A charitable foundation that had been dissolved for more than a decade has no standing to challenge the use of a grant made during the 1980s, an appellate court in Florida has held.  The Court has also ruled that the grant did not create either a constructive trust or a resulting trust that was violated when the recipient of the grant modified its use.  (The Foundation for the Developmentally Disabled v. Step by Step Early Childhood Education and Therapy Center, Ct. of App., FL, Second Dist., No. 2D09-686, 3/26/10.)

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has held that a trial court has no authority to reduce the penalties imposed by the Internal Revenue Service upon nonprofit organizations for filing their Form 990 tax information returns late.  It has reversed a federal District Court decision granting a 75% reduction in the penalties assessed against the Service Employees International Union and a subsidiary.  (Service Employees International Union v. U.S., No. 08-16105, 3/17/10.)

A director of a nonprofit summer camp has been denied a claim for nearly $1 million in advances made to keep the camp operating before it went into bankruptcy.  A Bankruptcy Court in Pennsylvania has held that almost all of the transfers were donations and not loans, and that they were made without authority from the board.  (In Re: Machne Menachem, Bkrptcy. Ct., M.D. PA, No. 5-01-bk-04926, 3/4/10.)

A homeowners insurance policy does not provide coverage to the owners of a farm used for a nonprofit animal sanctuary and for-profit entertainment business when a sanctuary volunteer is mauled to death by a rescued tiger during a photo shoot for her high school yearbook photo, according to the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals.  The Court has affirmed a Kansas District Court decision denying coverage to the owners of the farm. 

An appellate Court in California has affirmed a trial court decision ordering a Sikh Temple to disclose directors’ names, addresses and other contact information to a member of the board who sought the information so that he could contact his colleagues about Temple business.  The Court rejected the Temple’s argument that it could not be forced to divulge such “private” information without the consent of the individuals involved.  (Pamma v. Sikh Temple, Gurdwara, Yuba City, Inc., Ct. of App. CA, Third App. Dist., No. C062361, 4/7/10.)