Notice 2017-73

Schwab Charitable, a tax-exempt public charity that administers donor-advised funds (DAFs), opposes the proposed regulatory burdens and treatment of DAFs as similar to private foundations. They argue that DAFs are already compliant, and that the proposed rules—specifically regarding bifurcated gifts, pledges, and public support—would create unnecessary administrative burdens and reduce the efficiency of charitable giving.

Schwab Charitable, a tax-exempt public charity, opposes the proposed regulations in Notice 2017-73 that would impose additional regulatory burdens on donor-advised funds (DAFs) similar to those on private foundations. They argue that DAFs are already compliant, and that the proposed rules—specifically regarding "bifurcated gifts," pledges, and public support—would create unnecessary administrative burdens, undermine donor privacy, and reduce the efficiency of charitable giving.

The Kosciusko County Community Foundation, a community foundation, submitted a mixed response to Notice 2017-73. They oppose the Treasury's positions on ticket/grant splitting (Section 3), the aggregation of DAF grants for public support tests (Section 5), and new regulations regarding private foundation grants to DAFs (Section 6), while supporting the position that DAF grants can be used to pay pledges (Section 4).

Rodriguez, Horii, Choi & Cafferata LLP, a law firm representing community foundations and public charities, supports the proposed guidance regarding donor advised funds (DAFs) and enforceable pledges. However, they argue that the IRS should eliminate the requirement that DAF sponsors must not refer to a donor's pledge agreement, as it creates practical burdens and does not change the incidental nature of the benefit.

Fidelity Charitable, an independent public charity, opposes the proposed regulations in Notice 2017-73, arguing that they incorrectly import private foundation rules onto donor-advised funds (DAFs). The organization contends that the proposed rules are unwarranted, overly burdensome, and lack a basis in statutory authority or evidence of abuse.

The Four County Community Foundation, a community foundation, provides a mixed response to Notice 2017-73. They oppose the Treasury's position on ticket/grant splitting and the attribution of DAF grants for public support tests, but they support the position allowing DAF grants to satisfy pledges.

The Greater Kansas City Community Foundation opposes the proposed rules for bifurcated grants and public support treatment for DAF grants, arguing they create unnecessary administrative burdens and lack clarity. They advocate for a "bright-line" Section 170 analysis that allows DAFs to cover tax-deductible portions of fundraising events and suggest that DAF grants from public charities should be treated as coming from the public charity itself.

Kim Jordan, representing the Fairmount Park Conservancy, expresses concern that the proposed changes to Donor-Advised Funds (DAFs) will increase administrative burdens and restrict charitable giving. The commenter argues that new restrictions could slow down the flow of donations to nonprofits and advocates for language that encourages giving through various mechanisms.

The Allegan Community Foundation, a community foundation, submitted a mixed response to Notice 2017-73 regarding Donor Advised Funds (DAFs). They oppose the Treasury's position on ticket/grant splitting and the aggregation of DAF grants for public support tests, but they support the position allowing DAF grants to pay pledges.

The Bay Area Community Foundation submitted a mixed response to Notice 2017-73, opposing the Treasury's positions on ticket/grant splitting, public support limitations, and private foundation distributions. However, the organization supports the Treasury's position regarding the use of donor advised fund (DAF) grants to satisfy pledges.