Dog foster care deductible?

[Margaret CPA in OH]

A client fosters rescue dogs for GGRAND, Golden Retriever Rescue..., a 501©(3). The website states that the organization 'works hard to provide supportive services to our foster parents. Vet care needs and expenses are borne by GGRAND.' So client has $659 he want to claim as out of pocket expenses including food, grooming, chew toys, beddings, collars, antibacterial ointment, bandages, and vitamins. I have no problem with the mileage incurred to pick up dogs to take to other homes or to the specified vet for treatments but wonder about the food, etc. I asked if he received a letter from the organization in acknowledgement because it is over $500. He wasn't happy about the question and responded in all caps.

He said he recalls from the initial contract that it stated that he was responsible for normal care: food, water, grooming, etc. as a volunteer foster home. He does not state that the contract specified that those expenses would be a contribution.

It doesn't seem like that much in the grand scheme of things but I guess I'm getting a bit more cautious. Would these fall under volunteer out of pocket expenses for a qualified organization such as scout leader uniforms? It's just that it seems a lot of money. I know he does this out of genuine care for the dogs and I commend him, but....

[ILLMAS]

The 501©3 should have done all the research for you already, give them a call. Tell your client that the only way to support his contribution claim would be with a LETTER!

[rfassett]

It seems everybody wants a tax deduction for everything they do anymore. I guess the government has trained us that way. I do want to point out that I am a dog lover and I commend this person for his efforts. Generally, if you are looking for a charitable contribution deduction, I believe the funds or the donated item have to run through the organization. Otherwise, you leave it for what it is, an act of love. I can think of no other way to deduct this.

[JohnH]

This isn't authoritative, but I did run across this info from NAC.

Scroll down to the paragraph under "Reimbursement Policy"

http://www.nacrescue.org/programs/foster-parent-program/guidlines/

[Margaret CPA in OH]

Thanks for all this information, folks. I think I will call the agency today to see if their policy is the same as the link shown here. I couldn't find the same language but also note that it says "may" be tax deductible.

Recently I've been discussing with some clients who want to deduct every little thing to charity that maybe they want to decide whether their intent is charitble or a tax deduction. Sometimes they decide the record keeping isn't worth it.

[GeneInAlabama]

Can I deduct the expenses I have paid for my dog that I raised from a puppy? If I can, I sure have been missing a lot of deductions.

[Lion EA]

If you client owns pets of his own, he certainly cannot consider shared items such as toys, food dish, etc. Have him bring in his contract.

[Margaret CPA in OH]

Thanks, Lion, I didn't think about shared items. There may be some as he does own a rescue himself. I have called the organization and left a message. A volunteer will get back to me.

The problem is this guy is so defensive about this. I am only questioning the excess of $500 and letting him know that he needs the substantiation for 8283. It the out of pocket was $500, I wouldn't be concerned. Sigh....retirement looks better every day.

[JohnH]

Nothing quite like a fanatic to make your day...

[schirallicpa]

Before everything became computerized, my former employer had a client that claimed his dog for years. And one year I remember inputing a huge medical bill for the "dependent". I remember the day he learned that "Charles" was a pet not a child. I thought the roof was going to blow.

Hey - that's my dog Vinny in my picture. I need to get him a soc number.

[jainen]

>> it says "may" be tax deductible<<

EVERYTHING is deductible. If it isn't a direct business expense, it is marketing. If it is not related at all to a business, it's a charitable contribution. Didn't you know that? All my clients tell me so.

[joanmcq]

I would deduct the food, etc, as a charitable contribution. I see it as the same as Scout uniforms for the Scoutmaster.

[Margaret CPA in OH]

I did deduct up to $500 of out of pocket expenses without itemizing what they were. It was not possible to have the needed data for 8283 and the organization declined to provide a document substantiating those expenses because they don't audit the foster providers. Client wasn't exactly thrilled to be limited to $500 and forego the other $150 especially after reading about how he paid more tax than GE. But he also did not want to provide the details for 8283..

Thanks for all the input.

[jainen]

>>he does this out of genuine care for the dogs <<

... and the expectation of a hefty government subsidy through the tax system. Well, this is why America will never adopt a flat tax. Everybody has their own little benefit to defend with capital letters.

[Margaret CPA in OH]

And that's part of the message I relayed to him. I asked if he was doing this for the benefit of the dogs or for the tax deduction. Didn't like that question. But then mentioned the GE thing that he was paying more tax than they were. I happen to know this client supported Gov. Kasich so I responded that it was hard to understand politicians and other who keep saying how we must lower the tax rates on business, etc. Well, his rate was 15%, GE's was zero, apparently. Client didn't respond to that, either.

[kcjenkins]

But, to be fair, GE's was zero because they did things that the government wanted them to do, and he also could lower his taxes by doing things the government wants him to do. Charitable deductions is only one of those things, IRA are another, an HSA is another, investing in tax-exempt investments, education, etc.

It is always irritating to read about a big profitable company paying no tax, but the truth is that corps do not truly pay taxes, any more than your car pays the tax your state and/or county puts on your car. PEOPLE pay taxes, it's that simple. If you put a tax on a company, the company passes it on to the customers, or to the stockholders, or some combination of the two. Usually the customers.

So how efficient is it to put a tax on a company, let the company pass that tax to you, and let the government then give you back a fraction of those taxes in services, while keeping a significant part of them to pay themselves inflated salaries? Most of us would be better off with lower prices, I expect.