FundSvcs Community

Hello, 

The definitions of quid pro quo are very clear via AASP resources.  Between John's annual presentation and the examples shared in other threads, the guidelines of what constitutes a quid pro quo are well defined.   

In order to continue to reinforce the importance of following guidelines, it would help me to be able to explain in a tangible way the RISK to wither the institution or the donor if a quid pro quo exists and is not properly documented.  I see the following statement in page 10 of Pub 1771:  

"A penalty is imposed on charities that do not meet the written disclosure requirement. The penalty is $10 per contribution, not to exceed $5,000 per fundraising event or mailing. An organization may avoid the penalty if it can show that failure to meet the requirements was due to reasonable cause." 

Does anyone have an example of the extent to which some institutions HAVE been penalized?  Are donors exposed to penalties, and to what extent?  Please share your stories, if you are willing, of the RISKS borne by all involved if a quid pro quo is not properly identified and documented.  I want to help make it plain how important it is to maintain a compliant state.  Thanks!

--Meg

Hello, 

The definitions of quid pro quo are very clear via AASP resources.  Between John's annual presentation and the examples shared in other threads, the guidelines of what constitutes a quid pro quo are well defined.   

In order to continue to reinforce the importance of following guidelines, it would help me to be able to explain in a tangible way the RISK to wither the institution or the donor if a quid pro quo exists and is not properly documented.  I see the following statement in page 10 of Pub 1771:  

"A penalty is imposed on charities that do not meet the written disclosure requirement. The penalty is $10 per contribution, not to exceed $5,000 per fundraising event or mailing. An organization may avoid the penalty if it can show that failure to meet the requirements was due to reasonable cause." 

Does anyone have an example of the extent to which some institutions HAVE been penalized?  Are donors exposed to penalties, and to what extent?  Please share your stories, if you are willing, of the RISKS borne by all involved if a quid pro quo is not properly identified and documented.  I want to help make it plain how important it is to maintain a compliant state.  Thanks!

--Meg

Thanks, John, and thank you for the additional reference to IRC 6720 - Fraudulent Acknowledgements.  

Please, by all means, do not construe anything I asked to imply anything but a desire to be in compliance with all laws.  

The clarification of consequences in an important part of understanding the importance of compliance. 

I appreciate your insights.  They help underscore the criticality of practices that the institution already has in place.

Hello, 

The definitions of quid pro quo are very clear via AASP resources.  Between John's annual presentation and the examples shared in other threads, the guidelines of what constitutes a quid pro quo are well defined.   

In order to continue to reinforce the importance of following guidelines, it would help me to be able to explain in a tangible way the RISK to wither the institution or the donor if a quid pro quo exists and is not properly documented.  I see the following statement in page 10 of Pub 1771:  

"A penalty is imposed on charities that do not meet the written disclosure requirement. The penalty is $10 per contribution, not to exceed $5,000 per fundraising event or mailing. An organization may avoid the penalty if it can show that failure to meet the requirements was due to reasonable cause." 

Does anyone have an example of the extent to which some institutions HAVE been penalized?  Are donors exposed to penalties, and to what extent?  Please share your stories, if you are willing, of the RISKS borne by all involved if a quid pro quo is not properly identified and documented.  I want to help make it plain how important it is to maintain a compliant state.  Thanks!

--Meg

Thanks, John, and thank you for the additional reference to IRC 6720 - Fraudulent Acknowledgements.  

Please, by all means, do not construe anything I asked to imply anything but a desire to be in compliance with all laws.  

The clarification of consequences in an important part of understanding the importance of compliance. 

I appreciate your insights.  They help underscore the criticality of practices that the institution already has in place.

Hello, 

The definitions of quid pro quo are very clear via AASP resources.  Between John's annual presentation and the examples shared in other threads, the guidelines of what constitutes a quid pro quo are well defined.   

In order to continue to reinforce the importance of following guidelines, it would help me to be able to explain in a tangible way the RISK to wither the institution or the donor if a quid pro quo exists and is not properly documented.  I see the following statement in page 10 of Pub 1771:  

"A penalty is imposed on charities that do not meet the written disclosure requirement. The penalty is $10 per contribution, not to exceed $5,000 per fundraising event or mailing. An organization may avoid the penalty if it can show that failure to meet the requirements was due to reasonable cause." 

Does anyone have an example of the extent to which some institutions HAVE been penalized?  Are donors exposed to penalties, and to what extent?  Please share your stories, if you are willing, of the RISKS borne by all involved if a quid pro quo is not properly identified and documented.  I want to help make it plain how important it is to maintain a compliant state.  Thanks!

--Meg