LLCs: A New Horizon for Charitable Giving?

Dec 14, 2015

Reading Time : 4 min

Although an LLC is a flexible and practical approach to forming and managing a for-profit business, it may not be a viable approach to achieving philanthropic and charitable endeavors. On the one hand, an LLC combines the more favorable aspects of partnerships, including flow-through taxation (unless it elects to be taxed as a corporation), avoids the double taxation and administrative formalities of a corporation, and grants the owner more control over its management. On the other hand, contributing property to an LLC alone does not constitute a completed gift under federal law, and, depending upon the way the LLC is structured, the donor may not receive the favorable income and gift tax charitable deductions that would otherwise be immediately available by using more traditional charitable structures.

Use of an LLC for charitable purposes raises two issues regarding control. The first relates to the federal tax law definitions of a gift. The second relates to the level of control that an owner has to manage and invest the assets of the LLC.

Tax Issues

The choice to form an LLC for a charitable enterprise is not a common practice—for good reason. First, many individuals are directly concerned with obtaining an immediate charitable income tax and gift tax deduction in the year of contribution for the fair market value of the property contributed. The income and gift tax deductions are unavailable, unless a completed gift is made to a qualified charity. As discussed below, Zuckerberg’s use of an LLC as a charitable vehicle makes these deductions unavailable.

Generally, federal law imposes (as do some states) an excise tax on the value of the gift of cash or other property at a rate of 40 percent. The value of the gift for gift tax purposes is the value of the gifted property as of the date of the gift. The federal gift tax is generally not imposed on qualifying transfers to a qualified charity because of the federal gift tax charitable deduction. In addition to the gift tax charitable deduction, an individual can also take advantage of the income tax charitable deduction for gifts made to such qualified charities. No deduction may be taken if the transfer of property fails to satisfy the federal requirements.

A gift for federal gift tax purposes is defined as “a transfer of property for less than an adequate and full consideration in money or money’s worth.”  It appears that Zuckerberg contributed his Facebook shares to the LLC and, in return, received ownership interests in the LLC. As a result, he continues to have full and complete use of the assets held in the LLC. This failure to relinquish control of the property does not constitute a gift and will not be subject to gift tax. This “incomplete gift” is a valid argument against Zuckerberg’s use of an LLC for his charitable giving. 

Management and Investment of LLC Assets

Despite the foregoing arguments, structuring a charitable entity as an LLC gives Zuckerberg a unique level of control that he would not otherwise have if he were to use the more typical vehicles for charitable contributions.

For example, in many cases, individuals who wish to make large charitable contributions are typically advised to create a private foundation or make a contribution to a donor-advised fund (DAF) in the family’s name to make their charitable contributions. Private foundations are administratively burdensome with many complex federal and state rules and regulations. A donor-advised fund is a simpler way of creating a foundation-like entity. Many financial institutions and banks have programs whereby a donor can establish such a fund and stipulate those individuals who will make donee recommendations as “advisors” while the institution running the fund (the “DAF Organization”) takes care of all of the administrative and tax-compliance headaches. The donor family can just sit back and enjoy the fun part: making the distributions.

Like a foundation, a DAF may continue with family members as advisors until no family member who wants to remain involved is living. The disadvantage of a DAF is that, as a legal matter, the DAF Organization controls the management and reinvestment of the property. As a practical matter, the donor may make investment recommendations that will be reviewed and subject to approval by the DAF Organization. However, the flexibility of this approval process will depend upon the DAF Organization’s internal policies. In addition, with respect to the grant-making in a DAF, the donor may make “nonbinding recommendations” for grants to be made to particular charities or a “category” of charities. Again, as a legal matter, the DAF Organization has the right to override the donor’s recommendations as to the recipient and timing of any grant. As a practical matter, it is widely understood that a donor’s recommendations are rarely denied.

Zuckerberg’s choice of an LLC structure for his charity alleviates the administrative burdens of a private foundation while simultaneously allowing for the ease and facility of management, similar to a DAF. The greatest advantage in this new structure is the ability to directly manage and control the investment of the assets held in the LLC, which is somewhat restricted in both a private foundation and a DAF.

Final Thoughts

Use of an LLC in place of traditional charitable vehicles has created new possibilities for high-net-worth individuals to make charitable gifts. Zuckerberg defends this structure by stating, “The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative is structured as an LLC rather than a traditional foundation. This enables us to pursue our mission by funding nonprofit organizations, making private investments and participating in policy debates—in each case with the goal of generating a positive impact in areas of great need. Any net profits from investments will also be used to advance this mission.” 

Zuckerberg’s initiative is not the first time individuals have used an LLC for charitable giving. In recent years, the formation of an LLC for charitable entities has generated curiosity due to the launch of such organizations as the Emerson Collective by Steve Jobs’ widow, Laurene Powell Jobs, and the Omidyar Network by Pierre Omidyar, founder of eBay. The creation of the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative merely continues and reignites the conversation on the viability of this structure. The question is whether this structure will gain traction and the sustainability of accomplishing the intended charitable purposes within the structure.

Share This Insight

Categories

Previous Entries

Deal Diary

June 27, 2024

On June 24, 2024, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) published five new Form 8-K Compliance and Disclosure Interpretations (C&DIs) expanding the agency’s interpretations of cybersecurity incident disclosures pursuant to Item 1.05 of Form 8-K. In July 2023, the SEC adopted final rules with respect to cybersecurity incidents that generally require public companies to disclose (i) material cybersecurity incidents within four business days after determining the incident was material and (ii) material information regarding their cybersecurity risk management, strategy and governance on an annual basis. We wrote about the final cybersecurity disclosure rules here.

...

Read More

Deal Diary

February 12, 2024

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) recently adopted final rules (available here; also see the fact sheet and press release) representing significant changes to  special purpose acquisition companies (SPACs), shell companies and the disclosure of projections. These rules aim to enhance disclosures, protect investors and align the regulatory framework for SPACs with traditional IPOs. The following summarizes the key aspects of these rules.

...

Read More

Deal Diary

October 4, 2023

On September 20, 2023, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) issued a final rule amending the so-called “Names Rule” (found here) that is “designed to modernize and enhance” protections under Rule 35d-1 of the Investment Company Act of 1940. The final rule is part of the SEC’s holistic efforts to regulate environmental, social and governance (ESG) matters, and is the SEC’s latest attempt to curb greenwashing in U.S. capital markets. The amendments require registered investment funds that include ESG factors in their names to place 80% of their assets in investments corresponding to those factors, thereby extending to ESG funds the SEC’s long-standing approach of regulating the names of registered funds to ensure they are marketed to investors truthfully. Fund complexes with more than $1 billion in assets will have two years from the final rule’s effective date (60 days after publication in the Federal Register) to comply, while fund complexes with less than $1 billion in assets will be given a compliance period of 30 months.

Chair Gary Gensler said “[t]he Names Rule reflects a basic idea: A fund’s investment portfolio should match a fund’s advertised investment focus. In essence, if a fund’s name suggests an investment focus, the fund in turn needs to invest shareholders’ dollars in a manner consistent with that investment focus. Otherwise, a fund’s portfolio might be inconsistent with what fund investors desired when selecting a fund based upon its name.” The sole dissenting vote against the rule modification, Commissioner Mark Uyeda, said “[w]ith these amendments, the Commission overemphasizes the importance of a fund’s name, as if to suggest that investors and their financial professionals need not look at the prospectus disclosures.” Commissioner Uyeda also expressed concern that fund investors will bear the increased compliance costs associated with the rule change.

...

Read More

Deal Diary

May 31, 2023

As discussed in our prior publication (found here), the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) adopted amendments on December 14, 2022, regarding Rule 10b5-1 insider trading plans and related disclosures. On May 25, 2023, the SEC issued three new compliance and disclosure interpretations (C&DIs) relating to the Rule 10b5-1 amendments.

...

Read More

Deal Diary

May 24, 2023

On May 15, 2023, the Eastern District of California ruled that California Assembly Bill No. 979 (“AB 979”) violates the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution’s Fourteenth Amendment and 42 U.S.C. § 1981. As enacted, California’s Board Diversity Statute, required public companies with headquarters in the state to include a minimum number of directors from “underrepresented communities” or be subject to fines for violating the statute. AB 979 defines a “director from an underrepresented community” as “an individual who self-identifies as Black, African American, Hispanic, Latino, Asian, Pacific Islander, Native American, Native Hawaiian, or Alaska Native, or who self-identifies as gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender.”

...

Read More

Deal Diary

May 9, 2023

Update: On October 31, 2023, the Fifth Circuit granted the US Chamber of Commerce's petition for review of the SEC's share repurchase disclosure rules, holding that the SEC acted arbitrarily and capriciously in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act. The court directed the SEC to correct the defects within 30 days of the opinion. On December 1, 2023, the SEC informed the Fifth Circuit that it was unable to correct the rule's defects within 30 days of the opinion. On December 19, 2023, the Fifth Circuit vacated the SEC’s share repurchase disclosure rules.

...

Read More

Deal Diary

April 12, 2023

We have released our 2023 ESG Survey which includes a collection of reports reflecting on significant ESG themes and trends from 2022, as well as what we believe to be key developments for 2023.

...

Read More

Deal Diary

February 6, 2023

As companies begin preparing for the 2023 proxy season, we note that Institutional Shareholder Services Inc. (ISS) and Glass Lewis, the leading providers of corporate governance solutions and proxy advisory services, issued updated benchmark policies (proxy voting guidelines), which can be found here and here, respectively. The updated proxy voting guidelines generally focus on board accountability and oversight considerations and address topics such as climate accountability, board diversity, shareholder rights, corporate governance standards, executive compensation and social issues. What follows is a summary of the proxy voting guidelines published by ISS and Glass Lewis for the 2023 proxy season.

...

Read More

© 2024 Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP. All rights reserved. Attorney advertising. This document is distributed for informational use only; it does not constitute legal advice and should not be used as such. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Akin is the practicing name of Akin Gump LLP, a New York limited liability partnership authorized and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority under number 267321. A list of the partners is available for inspection at Eighth Floor, Ten Bishops Square, London E1 6EG. For more information about Akin Gump LLP, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP and other associated entities under which the Akin Gump network operates worldwide, please see our Legal Notices page.