Search News


Browse Archives

News

'Open the Blinds'

May 30, 2007

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

The leaders of the Senate Finance Committee have urged the U.S. treasury secretary to change the federal tax form that many tax-exempt entities file each year, with the goal of ramping up scrutiny of the complex financial operations of private nonprofit colleges and hospitals. The letter from Sens. Max Baucus (D-Mont.) and Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) offers some new insights -- worrisome to college tax experts -- into the senators' interest in the possibility of penalizing institutions that are perceived as spending too small a proportion of their endowment assets.

"While we always hear that sunshine is the best disinfectant, sunshine can't do its work unless we open the blinds," the senators wrote in their letter to Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson. "The sooner we open those blinds the better."

Baucus, who succeeded Grassley as chairman of the Senate's tax policy panel when the Democrats took control of Congress in January, seems largely to have embraced the ramped-up scrutiny that his predecessor began of various aspects of nonprofit management and finances, with a particular focus on universities and other big entities. The letter comes, too, as the Finance Committee is contemplating a series of budget proposals that could result in new or expanded taxes imposed on higher education institutions, including the possibility of ending the tax-free nature of tuition benefits for college employees or making nonprofit organizations’ hedge fund investments subject to unrelated business income tax.

The general thrust of the senators' letter to Paulson about Internal Revenue Service Form 990 is that as currently conceived, the federal tax form filed by all private nonprofit colleges and other non-state charities is inadequate to "emcompass vital information regarding major parts of the nonprofit sector -- especially hospitals and universities." The IRS should consider seeking "supplemental" information from "large, complex institutions" like that "if transparency and openness are to have real value."

Many of the topics about which the senators argue more information is needed about major tax-exempt entities like hospitals and universities will sound familiar to college and university finance officers and others who follow tax issues. Chief among them are executive compensation and governance, which have been major focuses of the Senate panel's work in the wake of recent controversies about the payment of chief executives at American University and the American Red Cross.

"Some charities are as creative as for-profit entities in providing compensation -- paying for housing, first class travel, spousal travel, deferred compensation, incentive compensation and bonuses, fringe benefits, loans, dining and often entire life styles," the lawmakers write. "We are concerned that right now it is often easier to understand how much a Fortune 500 CEO is being paid than how much a charity is compensating its executives.... The public needs to easily see the total amount of compensation and not have to piece it all together from different documents."

Right now that picture is complicated, the senators write, because nonprofit leaders often draw compensation not just from their main college, hospital or other organization but from "related organizations" (like fund raising foundations) or joint ventures, about which the senators also suggest more and clearer reporting is necessary on Form 990.

The newest area of scrutiny raised in the senators' letter, however, is about endowments. In recent weeks, aides to the Senate Finance Committee have discussed the prospect of requiring college and university endowments -- like those of private foundations -- to pay out a minimum percentage of their assets each year, possibly as a penalty for institutions that are seen as raising tuition excessively.

The language in the senators' letter Tuesday offers some additional insights into what might be motivating the panel to consider such proposals, with its references to endowments that "claim they have no legal requirement to pay out a dime" and that "have billions in the bank -- or as is more common now, in investments offshore in places such as the Cayman Islands -- and at the same time the entity provides only pennies on the dollar to the charitable goals of the organization."

The letter from Baucus and Grassley suggests that the public needs significant more and better information about institutions' endowments, how much is spent and on what, and where the assets are invested, among other things. "Consideration should be given to having a uniform definition of an endowment," they write.

The senators' letter also raises the prospect that tax-exempt groups should "provide charitable work commensurate with their resources" -- and that the tax form should "allow the IRS and the public to easily identify" whether a college or other charity is "shown to be carrying on through ... contributions and grants a charitable program commensurate with its financial resources. That is another way of suggesting the possibility of requiring minimum payouts for college endowments, says Bruce R. Hopkins, a tax lawyer who specializes in nonprofit organizations.

"This focus on endowments, from a higher ed point of view, should be quite troubling," Hopkins said. "Talking about a uniform definition of endowment logically leads to a uniform definition of what an endowment is supposed to do and be used for. But charities use endowment funds for different reasons -- they could be building funds, or for research, and sometimes they're ready to spend the money and sometimes they aren't. This recurring theme that these things are all alike could lead to a one-size-fits-all approach that could create major problems for colleges."

Baucus and Grassley ask Paulson to respond to their letter within 30 days.

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on 'Open the Blinds'

  • Posted by Robert Blumenthal on August 8, 2007 at 10:05am EDT
  • My response (appears on the website of the Pope Center (http://popecenter.org/):

    Two leading members of the Senate Finance Committee, Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.) and Sen. Charles Grassley (R-Iowa), are trying to increase transparency in the financial reporting by nonprofit organizations. Many of the reforms the senators propose – outlined in a May 29 letter to Treasury Secretary Hank Paulsen -- would have a profound effect upon the kind of financial information that colleges and universities are required to disclose to the public.

    Colleges and universities are required to file Form 990 annually with the IRS (available to the public through GuideStar). Baucus and Grassley propose a major overhaul of Form 990. They contend that the current form does not adequately encompass information regarding large, complex nonprofits such as universities. They call for more detailed reporting tailored to the specifics of these institutions and for making their financial reporting more transparent.

    A major area of concern for the senators is endowments. They want nonprofit institutions to answer the following questions:
    • What is the size of the endowment of the institution, and what definition of endowment is being used to arrive at the figure being reported?

    • What is the amount and percentage of the endowment being spent?

    • What are endowment funds being spent on?

    • What endowment funds are earmarked for specific purposes and what are those purposes?

    • How are endowment funds being invested?

    • What are the costs of the management of the endowment?

    The current Form 990 provides very little insight into these questions, and the situation is made all the more opaque by the fact that there isn’t even a uniform definition of “endowment.”

    In addition to expanding the scope of the information reported on Form 990, Baucus and Grassley want to ensure that the form is filed and made available to the public in a timely fashion. They point out that extensions for filing are routine and that considerable time passes before the document is actually available.

    The senators are to be commended for their efforts to bring about greater openness with regard to nonprofits, and the reforms they propose will increase transparency in the financial operations of colleges and universities. I believe, however, that their reforms do not go far enough. In their letter outlining the reforms to Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, the senators say that it is time to “open the blinds.” While a step in the right direction, their proposals would still leave the blinds partially closed, excluding much important light from the eyes of the public.

    We should require from colleges and universities -- institutions which enjoy tax-exempt status and which are supported by tax dollars in a myriad of ways -- the same level of transparency with regard to financial matters that we require from public companies, a point made by the two senators. Publicly traded companies are required to disclose their audited financial statements, together with the auditor’s notes to those statements. In order to be eligible for federal student aid funds, colleges and universities are required to produce and file a set of audited financial statements with the Department of Education annually. But, unlike the financial statements that publicly traded companies must file, there is no requirement that the financials of a college or university be made public.

    All the public gets to see is the Form 990, a very poor substitute. The balance sheet and income statement portions of that form are sketchy at best and are not presented in standard accounting format. Moreover, the 990 includes neither a cash flow statement nor the auditor’s notes. In order to guarantee the same level of transparency that currently exists with regard to public companies, Form 990 should be modified to require that a college or university include its audited financial statements, complete with the auditor’s notes accompanying them.

    Moreover, Form 990 should be made available to the public as soon as possible. Currently, it is not unusual for a college or university to post its Form 990 more than a year after the end of the relevant fiscal year. Public companies are required to furnish financial information in a timely manner. Colleges and universities should do so as well. These institutions should be required to annually furnish the necessary financial information within two months of the end of their fiscal year. Extended delay in providing information is not compatible with transparency.

    The senators’ call for a uniform definition of endowment is also crucial . For colleges and universities, the term “endowment” can mean whatever the school’s governing board wants it to mean. Institutions are free to decide which of their assets to count as endowment and are free to change this determination whenever they choose. In some cases, “endowment” refers only to invested funds which generate income but whose principal cannot be spent. In other cases, it also includes funds designated by the board as “funds functioning as endowment” or “quasi-endowment funds.” These are funds labeled by the governing board as endowment, but which may be spent at any time at the discretion of the board. Thus, not only is there no consistency from one institution to the next, but there is also no guarantee of consistency within a single institution from one year to the next.

    As long as the concept of endowment remains fuzzy, it will be impossible for the public to evaluate the effectiveness of any nonprofit entity. We need to have a clear definition.

    The tax-exempt status enjoyed by colleges and universities is a privilege that should carry certain responsibilities with it. Among those responsibilities should be the requirement to provide, in a timely fashion and on a regular basis, a transparent picture of the financial position and operations of the institution. With that information, parents, donors, and public officials will be better able to evaluate the school’s activities.

  • Posted by R.J. O'Hara on May 30, 2007 at 1:10pm EDT
  • This is a very positive development, and the Senate Finance Committee should be commended. Tax exemption is a privilege, not a right, and the taxpayers have every right to examine carefully the practices of those who are granted this privilege.

    Let us have from US News or some other investigative publisher a national ranking of financial efficiency in higher education, similar to what is provided for many other charitable organizations:

    http://www.forbes.com/2004/11/23/04charityland.html

  • Everything that goes with it
  • Posted by Joseph C. on May 30, 2007 at 2:50pm EDT
  • I've said it before and I'll say it again: If universities want to model themselves after corporations and profit-making institutions, let them walk through the same regulations and red tape.