Here are five of the most frequently asked questions on cause marketing compliance that we are asked.  

1. When and where must a company be registered to conduct a charitable sales promotion (also known as a CCV)? What about the nonprofit beneficiary? 
2. Does a company need to register as a commercial co-venturer in every state that has a CCV registration requirement if it’s only conducting a charitable sales promotion on its website? 
3. What advertising disclosures must be included in a charitable sales promotion, and how can companies run into issues with their disclosures? 
4. What key strategies can nonprofits use to navigate unrelated business income tax (“UBIT”) issues during their cause marketing campaigns and corporate partnerships? 
5. What options are available for companies to engage with nonprofits that offer public visibility but are not subject to state CCV registration and reporting requirements? 

Navigating the compliance landscape of cause marketing can be complex. Still, the core goal remains the same: to ensure transparency, protect consumers, and make sure companies fulfill their commitments to nonprofit partners.

Cause marketing is powerful because it allows consumers to make a positive impact through their purchasing decisions. By proactively addressing registration requirements, providing clear disclosures, and strategizing with your nonprofit partner on the optimal campaign structure, companies can ensure that their campaigns are both effective and compliant with legal requirements. For more detailed answers to these questions and additional resources about cause marketing, visit the website of our long-term partner, Engage for Good — the leading community where cause meets commerce.

The post Cause Marketing Compliance – Top Five Questions appeared first on Perlman & Perlman.

Many NIL collectives have been structured as nonprofit entities which have sought and obtained 501(c)(3) public charity status from the IRS.  These collectives usually partner with other charities to establish NIL opportunities for student-athletes.  Under these arrangements, the nonprofit collective typically pays the athlete in exchange for his or her promotion of the partner charity through personal appearances, speaking engagements and social media, or through participation in sports clinics for community youth and the like.

This past year, the IRS announced that many NIL collectives structured as nonprofit organizations fail to qualify as tax-exempt entities.  According to a generic legal advice memorandum (GLAM), many of these entities operate primarily for the private benefit of student-athletes, and thereby fail the “operational test” under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code (the “Code” or “IRC”), which requires that tax-exempt organizations operate primarily for exempt purposes.  As a result of the perspective shared in this GLAM, the IRS has begun denying NIL collective applications for tax-exemption, as reflected in two recently released IRS Private Letter rulings (the “Rulings”) (Private Letter Ruling 202414007 and Private Letter Ruling 202416015).  

According to the IRS, the nonprofit NIL collectives described in these Rulings and in the GLAM further the following stated purposes: (i) providing opportunities for student-athletes to be paid for the use of their NIL, and (ii) contributing “to the greater good of the community” by raising awareness and support of their partner charities’ missions.  This article includes further discussion of the regulatory obstacles these nonprofit NIL collectives are facing, and the implications for collectives operating with similar missions.

IRS Rules Governing Tax-Exempt NIL Collectives

In order to obtain and maintain tax-exemption under IRC Section 501(c)(3), an entity must be organized and operated exclusively for one or more of the exempt purposes set forth in IRC Section 501(c)(3), which may be charitable, educational or scientific in nature (Treasury Regulation Section 1.501(c)(3)-1(a)(1)).

As discussed above, to be regarded as “operated exclusively” for exempt purposes, an organization must be engaged “primarily” in activities which accomplish exempt purposes (Treas. Reg. Section 1.501(c)(3)-1(c)(1)).  The presence of “a single nonexempt purpose, if substantial in nature, will preclude exemption regardless of the number or importance of truly exempt purposes” (GLAM, citing Better Business Bureau of Washington, D.C., Inc. v. United States, 326 U.S. 279 (1945)).

In addition, to be regarded as organized and operated exclusively for exempt purposes, an organization must serve a public rather than a private interest (Treas. Reg. Section 1.501(c)(3)-1(d)(1)(ii)).  To meet this requirement, an organization must establish that it is not organized or operated for the benefit of private interests, including for example, designated individuals, the founders of the organization or their family, or persons controlled, directly or indirectly, by such private interests.

That said, private benefit will not prevent an organization from obtaining exemption if the private benefit is incidental in both a “qualitative” and “quantitative” sense.   

The IRS has stated that to be “qualitatively incidental,” the private benefit must be a “byproduct” of the exempt activity or a “necessary concomitant” to the “accomplishment of the exempt purpose” (GLAM).   A private benefit that is a “direct or intentional” benefit to designated or identifiable individuals would not be “qualitatively incidental” (GLAM).  

To be “quantitatively incidental,” the private benefit “must be insubstantial in amount when compared to the overall public benefit conferred by the activity” (GLAM).

IRS’ Analysis and Conclusion Regarding Nonprofit NIL Collectives

According to the IRS, the nonprofit NIL collectives described in the Rulings and the GLAM operate primarily for the private benefit of student-athletes, in violation of the “operational test” under IRC Section 501(c)(3).  The following are key factors that went into its determination.  The IRS concluded that:

1. Providing paid opportunities for student-athletes is a primary purpose of the nonprofit NIL collectives’ activities — which means these collectives serve a private, rather than a public interest.

2. The private benefit to student-athletes is not “qualitatively incidental” to the collectives’ exempt purposes.  This benefit is not a “necessary concomitant” to accomplishing their exempt purpose of supporting partner charities.  According to the IRS, there “are alternative means by which you could promote local charities without conferring a substantial private benefit on these student athletes, such as by encouraging volunteerism” (Private Letter Ruling 202414007).

3. The private benefit to student-athletes is not “quantitively incidental” when compared to the overall public benefit conferred by the collectives’ activities.  In the GLAM, the IRS noted that many collectives pay 80 to 100 percent of all donations to student athletes.  The IRS said, “for payouts anywhere within this range, the benefit to private interests is substantial by any measure and cannot be dismissed as merely incidental to [their] other purposes and activities” (GLAM).

4. Student-athletes being paid by nonprofit NIL collectives are not themselves a recognized charitable class.  The IRS noted in the GLAM that “absent a finding that NIL collectives select student athletes for participation based on need, such that their activities could be considered” as being “conducted for the relief of the poor or distressed, …payments to the student-athletes are properly regarded as serving private rather than public interests.”

The Future of Nonprofit NIL Collectives

As discussed herein, the IRS has begun denying tax-exempt status to some nonprofit NIL collectives for the reasons discussed above.  For similar reasons, the IRS has indicated that it may reconsider the exempt status of nonprofit NIL collectives that have already been granted exemption (GLAM).¹  These actions also have implications for donors, who cannot take a charitable deduction for contributions to nonprofit collectives whose exemption has been denied or revoked.

With the above in mind, it is critical for nonprofit NIL collectives to review the Rulings and the GLAM with counsel and ensure that their purposes and activities do not confer impermissible private benefits to student-athletes.  Nonprofit NIL collectives should also consult with counsel on the pros and cons of converting to a more flexible legal form, including, for example, a for-profit limited liability company structure, which is not subject to limitations on the type of activities it facilitates.

1 However, the IRS has also noted that in reconsidering the exempt status of such collectives, it may be appropriate to grant relief under IRC 7805(b) to limit the retroactive effect of any such revocations.

The post Nonprofit NIL Collectives Are Facing Obstacles in Obtaining Tax Exemption appeared first on Perlman & Perlman.

While “pay-for-play” is still prohibited by the NCAA,² these new rules have opened the door for college athletes to explore a new world of sponsorships, endorsements and compensation.  For example, college athletes can now earn money for commercials, appearances, speeches, social media posts, hosting sports camps, giving lessons, writing books and more — all without violating NCAA rules.

“NIL collectives” have emerged as the chief brokers of these opportunities.  This article discusses what NIL collectives are, their legal forms of organization, and the regulatory framework that governs them.

How are NIL Collectives Structured?
NIL collectives are entities that are structurally independent of a school, yet fund NIL opportunities for the school’s student-athletes. They are typically founded by well-known alumni and supporters of the school.  Collectives generate and pool revenue raised through contributions from a wide variety of sources, including boosters, businesses, fans and more.  They use these funds to create opportunities for student-athletes to leverage their NIL in exchange for compensation.

While a number of NIL collectives have been formed as for-profit entities,³ in a growing number of cases, they have been formed as nonprofits. Numerous nonprofit collectives have, in turn, sought and obtained 501(c)(3) public charity status from the IRS, which potentially allows donors to receive a tax-deduction for their contribution to the collective.⁴

Tax-exempt collectives typically use student-athletes as independent contractors to help further their charitable mission.  For example, some provide in-kind contributions of a student-athlete’s services to other charities, including speaking, appearances and other public relations services that help expand the charities’ reach and visibility in their communities.  The student-athlete is paid by the tax-exempt collective to provide the services, while the other charities receive these services on a pro bono basis.

Special Rules Governing Tax-Exempt NIL Collectives
Collectives that obtain tax-exemption should be mindful of special rules that apply to tax-exempt entities.  These rules are enforced not only by the IRS, but also by State Attorneys General, whose responsibility is to ensure that charitable funds are used for charitable purposes. These rules require that tax-exempt cooperatives operate differently from the typical NIL collective.

For example, NIL collectives commonly facilitate endorsement, merchandising and marketing deals that allow for-profit companies to promote their products and services using a student-athlete’s NIL, which helps these for-profit companies increase business and revenues.  Many NIL collectives have the flexibility to promote such commercial interests due to their structure as for-profit (and therefore, taxable) entities.

However, facilitating commercial deals does not constitute a permissible purpose for a charitable, tax-exempt organization.  Therefore, if a tax-exempt NIL collective engages in such activity, revenues from this activity could be taxed by the IRS as unrelated business income – i.e., income from a trade or business, regularly carried on, that is not substantially related to the collective’s charitable mission.

Also, if the IRS finds that these commercial activities constitute a primary or substantial non-exempt purpose of the organization, the IRS could revoke its tax-exempt status.⁵ State Attorneys General could bring enforcement actions for similar reasons.  Therefore, if a tax-exempt collective facilitates marketing or similar NIL arrangements, it should generally avoid arrangements promoting goods and services of for-profit companies.  However, it could use the NIL of student-athletes to help promote and amplify the charitable missions of nonprofits serving communities.⁶

NIL collectives are also becoming well-known for offering lucrative compensation to student-athletes in connection with promotional deals.  For many collectives, their status as for-profit entities give them the flexibility to do so.

But, in the context of a tax-exempt collective, these payments must be reviewed carefully to ensure they do not constitute “excessive compensation” for federal tax law purposes.  NIL collectives should therefore carefully structure athletes’ compensation in accordance with IRS rules to ensure it does not exceed fair market value.  Failure to do so could put the collective at risk of losing its tax-exemption, and lead to potential enforcement actions by State Attorneys General.

However, it should be noted that even if such compensation is determined to be reasonable, a tax-exempt NIL collective could nevertheless lose its exemption if the IRS determines that its primary or substantial purpose is to pay or recruit student-athletes.  For this reason, it’s important that tax-exempt collectives work closely with legal counsel to ensure they have well-constructed charitable programs.

Given the risks outlined above, an NIL collective seeking tax-exempt status should carefully consider whether any of its time and resources will be spent on pursuing commercial (non-exempt) activities.  Collectives considering such activities should consult with counsel to reconsider its structural options, and discuss whether it would be advisable to create a for-profit subsidiary to house any commercial activity.

NCAA Interim Rules
Aside from understanding the regulatory framework discussed above, NIL collectives (no matter their legal form) should have an understanding of the NCAA rules which, as of the time of this writing, consist of interim rules adopted in July 2021.  These interim rules will remain in effect until federal legislation creates a national standard (which is what the NCAA is calling for), or until new NCAA rules are adopted.  While the purpose of the interim rules is to suspend NCAA restrictions on athletes’ profiting off their NIL, the rules maintain certain guardrails to prevent “pay-for-play” and similar arrangements.  Subject to state law, the following is prohibited under the interim rules:

• NIL opportunities cannot be used as a recruiting tool for prospective student athletes.  Such an action is considered an “improper recruiting inducement.”  Therefore, NIL collectives should refrain from making offers of NIL opportunities contingent upon a student-athlete’s enrollment at a particular school.
• As discussed above, NIL arrangements that constitute “pay-for-play” are also prohibited.   This rule prohibits any kind of arrangement that constitutes compensation in exchange for a student-athlete’s participation or performance in college athletics.
• NIL agreements should be specific about the NIL work being performed by the athlete in exchange for compensation, and such compensation should be paid only for work performed.  Such compensation must be determined through an independent analysis, based upon the facts of each specific case and the value each athlete offers to an NIL arrangement.
• The NCAA interim rules prohibit compensation from any school in exchange for the use of a student athlete’s name, image or likeness.  In addition, schools may not direct how student-athletes use NIL compensation.  (For example, schools may not require a student-athlete to use NIL compensation for financial aid.) Athletic department staff are not allowed to represent student-athletes in marketing their athletic ability or reputation.  They also may not communicate with a recruit on behalf of an NIL collective.  In addition, such staff may not facilitate a meeting between an NIL collective and a student-athlete, including, for example, by sharing a recruiting list or watch list.

State Laws and School Policies
As noted above, the NCAA’s interim rules are subject to state law, which varies depending on the state.⁷  Therefore, NIL collectives should take steps to ensure compliance under any applicable state law, including any state law that applies to the collective, the school where the student-athlete is enrolled, as well as the state where the NIL activity will take place.

The collective should also look at any specific NIL policies established by the college.

Both state laws and school policies may include reporting requirements that NIL collectives should be aware of, and some state laws prohibit athletes from entering into a contract that conflicts with the student-athlete’s team contract.

Understanding the regulatory framework governing NIL collectives will help avoid missteps that can lead to punitive actions by the IRS, NCAA or State Attorneys General, or scrutiny from Congress, which has also taken an interest in these entities.  As the NIL’s regulatory environment continues to evolve, it is incumbent on both collectives and student-athletes to take affirmative steps, including consulting with legal counsel, to ensure compliance.

1 This dramatic shift by the NCAA also came on the heels of its loss before the U.S. Supreme Court in NCAA v. Alston 141 S. Ct. 2141 (2021). Though NIL compensation was not the subject of this case, Justice Kavanaugh wrote a concurring opinion which suggested that the NCAA’s NIL compensation rules could be in violation of antitrust laws, and stated that “the NCAA is not above the law.”  The NCAA’s change also follows action by numerous states that, since 2019, had led the way in creating NIL rights for student athletes.

2 As discussed later in this article, “pay-for-play” refers to any kind of arrangement that constitutes compensation in exchange for a student-athlete’s participation or performance in college athletics.

3 Other legal forms taken by NIL collectives have included formation as for-profit limited liability companies (“LLCs”), which provides more flexibility in a number of ways.  For example, unlike tax-exempt nonprofits, for-profit LLCs are not subject to a cap on what’s considered reasonable compensation.  They may therefore offer student-athletes NIL work at any compensation structure.  For-profit LLCs are also not subject to limitations on the type of activities they can facilitate.  Therefore, unlike tax-exempt entities, for-profit LLCs may facilitate NIL arrangements for student-athletes such as merchandising or endorsement deals which promote commercial activities.  NIL collectives should consult with counsel to discuss the various pros and cons of these options.

4 On September 29, 2022, Senators John Thune (R-S.D.) and Ben Cardin (D-Md.) introduced the Athlete Opportunity and Taxpayer Integrity Act which, if passed, would “prohibit individuals and organizations from using the charitable tax deduction for specific contributions that compensate college or incoming college athletes for the use of their (NIL).”   They argue that “(s)uch activity is inconsistent with the intended purpose of the charitable tax deduction, and it forces taxpayers to subsidize the potential recruitment of – or payment to – college athletes based on their NIL status.”  As of the time of this writing, this federal legislation is the latest of more than a handful of NIL proposals introduced, but not yet passed, in Congress.  Congress’ appetite for eventually passing NIL legislation is unclear, though these proposals do indicate that NIL collectives are facing increased scrutiny from Congress.

5 Regs. Sec. 1.501(c)(3)-1(e)(1) and Sec. 1.501(c) (3)-1(c)(1).

6 One example of this approach is discussed in the previous section – i.e.,  tax-exempt collectives that provide in-kind contributions of a student-athlete’s services to other charities to help them promote their charitable missions.

7 As discussed above, the NCAA is lobbying Congress for legislation that would create a national standard, and thereby pre-empt differing state laws.

The post Seeking Tax-Exemption for a Name, Image and Likeness Collective (NIL)? What to Know. appeared first on Perlman & Perlman.

Nonprofits and for-profits (in this article, “Brands” for easy reference) can collaborate in a number of ways to benefit both organizations. Nonprofits benefit by receiving financial support and access to a wider audience. Brands benefit from the goodwill generated by supporting a charitable cause, while simultaneously furthering their own purposes. These collaborations may take a number of forms. (For further reading, see  articles on our website , Selfish Giving, and Engage for Good’s online resource Cause Marketing and the Law).

We’ve recently seen a number of nonprofits expand their efforts to more consciously address online collaboration. In this article, I provide a refresher to clarify where the IRS draws the line on these types of partnerships. Understanding this line can help Brands to maximize their benefits and charities to avoid unwanted tax consequences.

What are Qualified Sponsorship Payments?

A typical strategy for Brands and nonprofits to collaborate is through sponsored events. While the pandemic has thrown traditional fundraising events for a loop, many nonprofits have pivoted to digital engagements or are now beginning to plan live events again as vaccination rates rise. Whether an event is digital or live, many nonprofits underwrite their events with support from Brand sponsors. In exchange for this support, Brands typically receive certain benefits. Those benefits may include a page in the event program, placement of their logo on the step-and-repeat, or a booth at the event. In the virtual context, Brands may get a shout-out or other acknowledgment during the event, in thank-you emails to attendees, or in press releases issued by the nonprofit.

If a nonprofit wants to avoid tax on the sponsorship payments that are received in exchange for certain benefits to the Brand, one strategy is to ensure that the payments qualify as “Qualified Sponsorship Payments”, the term used in Section 513(i) of the Internal Revenue Code. In order to be categorized as a Qualified Sponsorship Payment, the payment must be made without any arrangement or expectation of a “substantial return benefit.” Payments made in return for advertising or marketing services may constitute a substantial return benefit, and cause the payment to be subject to tax under the IRS’s Unrelated Business Income Tax (“UBIT”) rules.

So when does including a Brand’s logo in the nonprofit’s event, or allowing the Brand to have a booth or table at the event, constitute a “substantial return benefit”? Fortunately, the IRS has provided guidance on this question. According to the IRS, one way to avoid providing the Brand a “substantial return benefit” is for the Brand and nonprofit to avoid language that “promotes or markets any trade or business”. The IRS goes on to provide several examples of activities that are allowable under the qualified sponsorship rules, including:

• Distributing a Brand’s products to the general public at the event, either for free or purchase
• Including a Brand’s logo, slogan, address(es), telephone number, descriptions of a Brand’s product line or services, PROVIDED that all the foregoing do not include any comparative or qualitive descriptions of the Brand’s goods and services.
• Exclusive sponsorship arrangements (i.e., having a Brand be the only bakery sponsoring the event. NOTE – this is different than an exclusive provider arrangement, described below)

The IRS, in its guidance, also describes what types of messaging and activities are considered “substantial” return benefits for Brands and therefore NOT qualified sponsorship activities, including:

• Advertising for the Brand (messaging that promotes or markets a Brand, including messaging that contains comparative or qualitative descriptions of the Brand’s goods/services)
• Exclusive provider arrangements that limit the sale, distribution, availability, or use of competing products/services in connection with the nonprofit’s event/activities (i.e., having a Brand be the sole provider of cookies for an event. NOTE – this is different from the exclusive sponsorship arrangements, described above)

Social Media Considerations

Many Brands and nonprofits have begun to include social media posts as part of their messaging around events and partnerships. In addition to concerns about UBIT and qualified sponsorships, Brands and nonprofits have to be wary of rules implemented by the social media platforms (Instagram, Twitter, and TikTok, for instance) and guidelines issued by the Federal Trade Commission.

Nonprofits often thank their Brand sponsors for their support. It’s important that the language included in those posts is agreed upon by the Brand and nonprofit, and is vetted to make sure it doesn’t amount to an advertisement or endorsement of the Brand’s products or services. Similarly, when a Brand posts to highlights its support of the nonprofit, the parties should ensure that the post doesn’t create the implication that the nonprofit is endorsing the Brand’s products.

Brands and nonprofits also have to make sure their posts include appropriate disclosures to put their respective followers on notice that the content they are posting is part of a partnership. How those disclosures should be structured depends on the platform and the nature of the post, but has to be clear enough so that the posts comply with the platforms’ rules and the FTC’s guidelines.

If the Brand and nonprofit have brought a celebrity or influencer into the event to help raise its profile, the same general principles apply to the influencer’s posts. The Brand and nonprofit should make sure there are contractual provisions as well as practical guidelines provided that clarify what the influencer can and cannot post, how those posts should be timed and structured, and what material disclosures must be included.

Advice for Brands and Nonprofits

Brands and Nonprofits need to carefully review their contracts and social media posts to ensure they are not violating the rules regarding Qualified Sponsorships or social media platform disclosures. All posts made by the nonprofit thanking the Brand should avoid any qualitative language. Here are two sample statements to differentiate between comments that could be considered advertising vs. those that are just acknowledgments:

• Acknowledgment – NONPROFIT thanks BRAND for their steadfast support of our event. With BRAND’s support, we raised $100,000 in furtherance of our mission to end childhood hunger.
• Advertising – NONPROFIT thanks BRAND, purveyor of the best chocolate chip cookies in the NYC-area, for their support of our event. BRAND is one of the best companies and we thank them for their continued support. Find their cookies available for delivery at [WEBSITE].

In the second statement, the nonprofit used qualitative language around the Brand and its products. It also made a general comparative characterization of the Brand and linked to the Brand’s website, not for general informational purposes but to encourage viewers to order the Brand’s products. The second statement would be considered advertising, and could trigger UBIT for the nonprofit. The first statement merely identifies the Brand as a supporter of the nonprofit and its mission, and would be considered an acknowledgment.

In the contract governing the sponsorship or collaboration, the nonprofit should include restrictions on the Brand’s ability to use the nonprofit’s name and trademarks. For instance, the nonprofit should include a clause that prohibits the Brand from using pictures and videos from a nonprofit’s event in the Brand’s television, print, or social media advertising to promote its products or services. If a Brand seeks to incorporate the nonprofit’s photos and videos into content that highlights the Brand’s social mission and corporate responsibility, the nonprofit should carefully define the limits of that right to avoid an inadvertent endorsement.

The Brand and nonprofit should also consider how to enforce their contractual rights with regard to one another and any social media personalities that are part of the event. Payments can be delayed until after certain deliverables, to ensure all parties remain in sync in the run-up to the event. The parties should also consider the duration of their contractual rights –event contracts often terminate immediately upon the completion of the event, but if the parties are allowed to use each other’s names and logos even after the event is over, the contract should cover that ongoing use.

In order to manage the logistics of the event and the many deliverables that are included in sponsorship agreements, Brands and nonprofits can designate point people to review and approve deliverables. Specifying in the contract who the points-of-contact will be, as well as the required turnaround times, will help ensure the parties remain on good terms and maximize the event’s potential.

The post Qualified Sponsorship Payments, UBIT, and Social Media – A Reminder For Nonprofits appeared first on Perlman & Perlman.

Are you looking for answers to legal questions that arise in cause marketing and corporate partnerships?  If so, look no further!

Last year, Selfishgiving.com founder and blogger  Joe Waters and I distributed a five-question survey to businesses and nonprofits regularly engaged in cause marketing and corporate partnerships, asking them to share their top legal compliance questions and challenges.  After reviewing the survey responses, we decided to create a series of blog posts to address the most common corporate partnership legal compliance questions covering four issue categories: (1) Advertising Disclosures; (2) Registration and Reporting Requirements; (3) Contracts; and (4) Unrelated Business Income Tax (UBIT).   I hope you will find these FAQs useful in helping to navigate the legal and regulatory issues that arise as your company or charity engages in corporate partnerships.

Click on the FAQ headers below to read the answers to each question, which are posted on SelfishGiving.com, and sign up for Joe’s informative and entertaining weekly email newsletter, which has all the latest trends and strategic advice about cause marketing and corporate partnerships!

Part 1: Advertising Disclosures

1. Are cause marketing advertising disclosure “best practices”  required by law? Some of our corporate partners think they are just “suggestions.”
2. What if a company insists on structuring a campaign where the donation is based on a percentage of its profits, rather than a percentage of the purchase price?
3. Have any companies gotten into trouble with regulators for failing to include certain information in their cause marketing advertisements?
4. Advertising disclosure problems only present a real legal risk to the corporate partner, not the charity, right?
5. Can the company simply state on the hang-tag or store signage, “10% of the purchase price will be donated to ABC Charity, see www.company.com/ABCCharity for details,” and then include the website URL where the minimum guarantee and/or donation cap can be found?

Part 2: Registration and Reporting Requirements

Company FAQ

1. Our company is conducting its first ever cause marketing campaign. I heard that we may need to file state registrations. How do I know if I need to register, what does it entail, and how long will it take?  Note: The answer to this includes a chart on the state registration and reporting requirements applicable to companies acting as commercial co-venturers.
2. I operate a small e-commerce business in Massachusetts that sells clothing online, and would like to run a promotion in which the company will donate $5 to a local, nonprofit homeless shelter for every special edition T-shirt sold through our website. Does my company need to register nationally? What, if anything, does the nonprofit need to do?  Note: The answer explains how to determine the parties’ fundraising compliance obligations specifically in the context of an online cause marketing promotion.
3. Our company’s cause marketing campaign launched last week and we just found out we are supposed to register in certain states as a commercial co-venturer! Are we going to face fines or other penalties?

Charity FAQ

1. Our charity was asked to be the beneficiary of a company’s charitable sales promotion, but we’ve never engaged in a cause marketing campaign before. What do we need to be aware of before we proceed with this opportunity?
2. Our nonprofit is already registered nationally, and discloses all of its CCV partners as part of our annual charitable solicitation registration renewals, so we should be set with our CCV-related compliance, right?  Note: The answer includes a chart on the state reporting requirements applicable to charities that have entered into a CCV agreement.
3. Our charity was approached by a start-up company that wants to conduct a cause marketing campaign to benefit our organization. When we told them they may need to register with certain states and obtain bonds, they were concerned about the cost and burden of compliance. We don’t want to lose the opportunity to build a partnership with this company. What can we do?

Part 3: Contracts

1. We are entering into a cause marketing promotion in which our charity will receive a portion of the proceeds from the sale of each Sellco product. SellCo sent us a draft contract to sign. It seems to describe the promotion the way we discussed it. Should we go ahead and sign it?
2. What provisions should be included in our cause marketing agreement? Note: The answer includes a 15-point cause marketing contract checklist!
3. Is there a way to streamline the preparation of cause marketing agreements so they are compliant with all 50 states’ laws as well as for online sales?
4. Our corporate partner wants to enter into a multi-year relationship that includes a significant financial commitment, and will involve numerous customer activations.  Only the details for the first activation have been solidified. How do we draft an agreement to cover this type of arrangement?

Part 4: Unrelated Business Income Tax (UBIT)

1.  My organization, Charity Corp., has a corporate partner, Cool Products Co., that is conducting a charitable sales promotion in which it will advertise that it is donating a portion of the purchase price from sales of a particular product to Charity Corp.  Cool Products has asked to promote their sales campaign to our members and donors through email and social media. I heard that charities aren’t allowed to promote these types of campaigns because it might subject the charity to a tax called UBIT.  What is UBIT, and why and when is it a potential problem? How do we avoid creating taxable income?
2. How can our organization appropriately communicate about a corporate partnership to our donors/members/social followers without crossing  the line into marketing for the corporate partner?
3. The UBIT rules make our corporate partnerships team feel constrained in our partner cultivation strategy. What options does our organization have to provide value to our corporate partners?

The post Key Legal Issues in Corporate Partnerships appeared first on Perlman & Perlman.

Organizations that already paid the tax may file an amended return to obtain a refund of the tax paid.

The post Nonprofit “Parking Lot” Tax Is Repealed appeared first on Perlman & Perlman.

• Which cause marketing practices are regulators most concerned about?
• What are the biggest do’s and don’ts in drafting (and placing) campaign details and disclosures?
• When should I reach out to my legal counsel on a new or potential cause marketing campaign?

I answer these questions and more in The Ten Commandments of Cause Marketing Law Infographic, presented by Joe Waters‘ Selfish Giving blog, and Episode 152 of the CauseTalk Radio Podcast.

I had a lot of fun working with Joe on this infographic. As the leading blogger on all things cause marketing, Joe came up with a fun format for presenting the key cause marketing legal  issues in a visually engaging way. And since lawyers have a hard time explaining all the nuances of the law in as few words as can fit into an eye-catching infographic, Joe, along with Cause Marketing Forum’s Megan Strand, gave me the chance to go deeper into each of the Ten Commandments during a 1/2 hour podcast.

I hope you enjoy this audio and visual journey into the Ten Commandments of Cause Marketing Law!

The post The Ten Commandments of Cause Marketing Law appeared first on Perlman & Perlman.

The charity, which conducts research and analysis and provides the results of its research and analysis to the public, gave the company the right to use the information to market and sell its services, for research and reporting by its news operation, in development and distribution of its proprietary databases and for educational purposes. The charity requested a ruling from IRS to the effect that performance of the agreement: (1) would not jeopardize its tax-exempt status; and (2) would not be an unrelated trade or business for which the charity would have to pay taxes.

In analyzing the arrangement, the IRS first looked to see if there was excess “private benefit”. Private benefit, which is prohibited, occurs when a charity does something that confers a substantial benefit on private individuals such as a company’s shareholders. Private benefit may occur in transactions even where the terms are fair and reasonable to the charity. In this case, the IRS concluded that the benefits to the company and its shareholders were merely incidental, because the rights given to the company were crafted to further the charity’s goal of reaching the widest possible audience for its information, were non-exclusive and did not restrict the charity from distributing the information through other channels, even on a non-commercial basis.

Stressing the fact that the purpose of the arrangement was to further the charity’s goal of reaching the widest possible audience for its content, the IRS said that, “in an educational context, an organization may be determined to be operating for public purposes even if the general public does not have the same direct access to the educational program as does some smaller, restricted group. Although the Agreement will benefit only subscribers to [the company’s] services, the population served is broad enough to warrant a conclusion that the Agreement serves a broad public interest.” Accordingly, the IRS ruled that the arrangement would not jeopardize the charity’s tax-exempt status.

Based on reasoning that the primary purpose of the arrangement was to further the charity’s goal of reaching the widest possible audience, the IRS also ruled that the arrangement was “substantially related” to the accomplishment of the organization’s mission. As a consequence, the organization should not have to pay tax on the income it receives from the arrangement, although the IRS declined to rule on this for technical reasons. The IRS also declined to rule on whether or not the income would be treated as “royalty” income (also exempt from tax) because it did not have sufficient facts to make that determination.

By contrast, the IRS has recently denied applications from groups that involved related charities and companies where the same group of people controlled both entities. In those situations, the IRS has said it must assume that the charity will be used to provide undue benefits to the for-profit company and therefore does not primarily serve a public purpose. While that is a dubious assumption, the fact that the charity and the media company were independent of each other clearly helped in this case.

This PLR is good news for charities, especially in the education field, that produce information, data, or other kinds of content, and license that content to media companies for commercial use. It confirms that the IRS will allow arrangements with for-profit companies so long as the arrangement primarily serves the interests of the charity, the benefits to the for-profit company are reasonable in scope, and the charity does not grant greater rights to the for-profit than it needs to in order to accomplish its mission. That the IRS has finally chosen to make this point in written guidance is equally significant, as it has been unwilling to do so up until now. For practitioners, who have been starved for guidance in this area, this is a large step forward.

The post IRS Says Agreement With For-Profit Won’t Jeopardize Nonprofit Group’s Exempt Status appeared first on Perlman & Perlman.