Why do so many NFL (pro football) players have charities?
"In addition to tax-related benefits, one answer may be that it helps them avoid being inundated with requests to support other foundations. Most charities have access to public records that indicate potential donors based on income and demographic. They can use that info to solicit for donations. ""Hey NFL Player, you have lots of money, and we have cute starving emus that really need your help!"" Here's a blurb from Foundation Source about some of the benefits to starting your own foundation.  Get an Immediate Tax Deduction, but Give Later: You get the tax deduction when the foundation is funded, then make your charitable   gifts over time. Leave a Lasting Legacy: Foundations set up in perpetuity can burnish your name far beyond your lifetime. Because gifts are made   from an endowment that generates investment revenue, the total gifts   made by the foundation can far surpass the actual funding. Be Taken More Seriously as a Philanthropist: A foundation imparts a gravitas that causes people to take your philanthropy more seriously,   due to the structured, organized approach you employ for your giving. Sidestep Unsolicited Requests: When you focus your foundation on specific giving areas, your mission statement can be used to politely   turn down off-target funding requests. Deepen and Focus Your Philanthropy: Whereas individual donors often spread their giving among as many causes as possible, the formalized   structure of a foundation often encourages donors to narrow their   focus to specific causes. Build a Better Family: As family members take on philanthropic research, present their findings to the board, participate in the   decision-making process, and track results, they hone skills that will   serve them for years to come. Tax-Deductible Grants to Individuals in Need: A private foundation allows you to provide emergency assistance directly to individuals   using dollars for which you’ve already received a tax deduction. Run Charitable Programs Without Setting Up a Separate Nonprofit: Direct charitable activities are IRS-approved programs that permit   foundations to directly fund and carry out their own projects. Pay Charitable Expenses: All legitimate and reasonable expenses incurred in carrying out the foundation’s charitable mission can be   paid by the foundation and will count toward the annual minimum   distribution requirement. Provide Loans Instead of Grants: When used to support a charitable purpose, private foundations can employ loans, loan guarantees, and   even equity investments, which are paid back (potentially with   interest), so you can recycle your philanthropic capital for other   charitable causes. https://www.foundationsource.com/resources/library/top-10-advantages-of-a-private-foundation/ There's a similar list here on the website for an attorney that specializes in philanthropy and non-profits. I won't copy/paste that list as it's similar, but I wanted to provide an additional source confirming the above benefits. This link contains some disadvantages as well.  http://www.hurwitassociates.com/l_start_pros.php" "BobbyScon's answer really covers this, but perhaps isn't sufficiently explicit.  Reason 1 of the quotation is the largest, by far: Get an Immediate Tax Deduction, but Give Later: You get the tax deduction when the foundation is funded, then make your charitable gifts over time. Having a ""personal"" foundation means that you make donations whenever it is appropriate from a personal finance point of view, but then actually perform the charitable giving in a time that is convenient. So you fund the foundation on Dec. 31, say; that gets the money out of your hands, and out of your taxable income, for the prior tax year.  Then you're not required to do anything else with that money until a time and place where it's convenient to you. In many cases, they set it up not as a foundation but as a Donor Advised Fund.  These are of late becoming extremely popular among the wealthy, largely the ease of setting them up and the above. The other major advantage of a Donor Advised Fund is simplicity in tax season: you have exactly one charitable donation recipient, with one receipt (or one set of them if you donate over time)."
Considering I know people who don't give a rats ass about football but watch the Super Bowl for the halftime show, the commercials and the score, the NFL should be shelling out a big piece of those tickets to the performers and give away free ad time. "I'd suggest you to separate ""doing good"" from ""earning profit"". Look at the guys like Warren Buffett and Bill Gates (or Carnegie and Ford for that matters). They understand that you can't reconcile the two goals, so they donate for free what they earned for profit. If you want to make a social impact with your money, you can check the charity programs that have a confirmed record of a positive impact on people's lives. Non-profits that studied such programs publish their results extensively: AidGrade compiles this research and suggests direct donations to the programs that demonstrated best outcomes per dollar invested:" Because salaries aren't high enough.  If the salaries were higher more people would pursue that field.  I'm not going to begrudge anyone making billions, but Microsoft is raking in cash, and it's obvious that they'd rather horde it than spend it on talent.  Well, ask a professional sports team about that equation.  Just because salaries are in the 100s of thousands doesn't mean that they're too high.  Especially when you look at these companies financial filings. If I donate $10,000 to charity then I can deduct that $10,000 from my income and not pay income taxes on it.  So if I make $50,000 a year then I will only pay income taxes on $40,000 instead of $50,000 since I donated $10,000 to charity.  This is what is meant when charity contributions are said to be tax deductible. Don't feel like you have to donate to charity.  You owe no one anything.  You do more for others by working (assuming you work in the private sector). If you know of someone personally that is in need of aid then you could give them some help directly.  I find this more effective then blindly dumping money in a bureaucratic, inefficient charity.  I also find there are very few people in need of charity. Personally, I think charity donations are a way for people to feel good about themselves.  They rarely care if their donations are effective. Yes. Donating to name-brand charities or politicians will result in you geting solicitied for more donations -- charities sell your info and donation habits. If you don't have much money, and more important, don't itemize, donations are strictly between you and your karma. If you itemize (from a combination of mortgage interest, property tax, and state tax), by donating used goods, you can get some return on your taxes, and feel good about yourself.  When I donate at charity time (December for me) I don't look at every $1000 check as a $250 benefit back to me, although that's the effect. I care deeply about the charity's cause and have personally visited each of them. You want to drop $50 to some huge agency that's funding cancer research? No objection. But when I visit a Veteran's Center or School for the Blind, I can see the good work my money is doing. Generally this is simply a matter of the business paying taxes on the sale (income), balanced by a credit (charitable deduction), which eventually adds up to their not paying taxes on money they collected in order to pass it along to the charity. Note that because the business is taking the deduction on that donation, you can't take a deduction on the charitable portion of your purchase. "One reason is because car insurance is mandated. Mandated insurance means the government is forcing people to purchase it, which also means that everyone must have the opportunity to purchase it at a reasonable cost, even if the insurer would normally not choose to insure them. In mandated industries, risk pools are formed which means that as a whole, lower risk members partially subsidize higher risk members. In mandated industries that have a large risk variance, the insurance system would break down if everyone was charged their ""fair share"" because high risk members would be unable to afford a policy. (This is even more prominent with health insurance than car insurance because the difference in risk is vastly greater.) On a positive note, perhaps you may get a warm and fuzzy feeling knowing that you are helping out others ""in need""." The chronically ill should be seeking out charities not insurance companes. Since companies are into making profit and paying thier employees. While someone who is already fucked is a hugely bad bet for a new client. I'ts nothing personal just the way things are. Your rights end where someone else's rights begin. Meaning you can't force other people to pay your way through life. As much as being able to breath is an achievement for some it does't entitle people to a free ride at someone else's expense. An interesting look that ties in quite a few of my interests on the commonality of being data-driven gambling. You know it's funny because watching MoneyBall, my first reaction is that Peter Brand's (after Jonah Hill) data analysis was something many are already doing in fantasy.  But fantasy sports is a hobby for most of us :P  Though in bigger money leagues, this could be debatable haha.  *As a side note, I'm particularly surprised that the NBA betting profits outpaced NFL profits in 2011 (48.8M vs. 44.2M), but I'm curious to see if that trend holds through the 2012 season. The good news is that your parent organization is tax exempt and your local organization might be. The national organization even has guidelines and even more details.  Regarding donations they have this to say: Please note: The law requires charities to furnish disclosure   statements to donors for such quid pro quo donations in excess of   $75.00.  A quid pro quo contribution is a payment made partly as a   contribution and partly for goods or services provided to the donor by   the charity. An example of a quid pro quo contribution is when the   donor gives a charity $100.00 in consideration for a concert ticket   valued at $40.00. In this example, $60.00 would be deductible because   the donor’s payment (quid pro quo contribution) exceeds $75.00. The   disclosure statement must be furnished even though the deductible   amount does not exceed $75.00. Regarding taxes: Leagues included under our group exemption number are responsible for   their own tax filings with the I.R.S. Leagues must file Form 990 EZ   with Schedule A if gross receipts are in excess of $50,000 but less   than $200,000. Similar rules also apply to other youth organizations such as scouts, swim teams, or other youth sports. 1. People love free and don't hate ads all that much.  2. There are plenty of sites that have a donate or subscribe button in lieu of advertising.  But it only really works where the fan base is passionate. So... we should continue to give money to an industry that essentially shakes down sick people because we have always given money to this industry. I kinda think we should go back and look at the ridiculous earnings of some of the top executives and enact a special tax to take it back and use it to actually fund healthcare. If the charity accepts stock, you can avoid the tax on the long term cap gain when you donate it. e.g. I donate $10,000 in value of Apple. I write off $10,000 on my taxes, and benefit with a $2500 refund. If I sold it, I'd have nearly a $1500 tax bill (bought long enough ago, the basis is sub $100).  Any trading along the way, and it's on you. Gains long or short are taxed on you. It's only the final donation that matters here.  Edit - to address Anthony's comment on other answer - I sell my Apple, with a near $10,000 gain (it's really just $9900) and I am taxed $1500. Now I have $8500 cash I donate and get $2125 back in a tax refund. By donating the stock I am ahead nearly $375, and the charity, $1500. "Fighting poverty is akin to ""fighting drug use"".  No matter how much money is raised via taxation there will always be a bottom percentile of individuals who are not ""wealthy"" in relation to others above them in society and especially Bill Gates.   If he really wants to make a difference then he should support rational and reasonable economic propositions which raises the standard of living and lowers the cost of living, but I suspect that would not bring him any sort of feel good press as his ""Tax the rich, give to the poor"" proposals."