Quote:
Originally posted by viet_mom
The fee (anywhere between $9,500 to 30K) doesn't get itemized, but most of it is supposed to go to the orphanage where your child is adopted from. Not to reimburse the orphanage for its adoption services (the agency does the paperwork, not the orphanage, which merely houses the child and tells the agency that one is available). And caring for a child in these countries wouldn't ever cost the orphanage 9-30K, so the fee isn't meant to reimburse the orphanage for the care provided your child for the one month he/she was there (in my case, that was the length of time there). From an economic standpoint, you are removing an extra mouth to feed and the orphanage is less strained. The fee is supposed to be to improve conditions at the orphanage for the children left behind who may not be adoptable (many have family who visit them there and have not been relinquished), medical supplies, food, etc.
|
If the fee has two components, they ought to break it in two and funnel them through. This would be similar to what is done on Old Home U Cruize to Belize -- you pay a fee to the charter company and there is a required contribution to the Alma Mater. I can't say doing this is a slam dunk legally, but it is done and there are lots of deductions taken on this basis.
Quote:
True. But a lot of aid is not funnelled through U.S. tax deductible charities. Those charities do not earmark the funds to specific places you want them to go and there are many cases where the givers want the funds to go to specific people or communities.
|
I have seen charities that can earmark for specific foreign charities -- conditioned on the foreign charity meeting the charities' requirements (e.g., show in a budget where the money is going and represent that it will be spent for the good stuff). If no one is doing this, someone should set up a charity to do it. The idea that someone might cut a $30,000 nondeductible check when they could cut a $40,000 deductible check and still have money in their pocket seems tragic, especially for the orphanages. Of course, it does leave more money in the pot for Bush to refund to the millionaires.
