Search

The tax deduction for charitable contributions has existed in the Internal Revenue Code in some form since the early 1900s. While the charitable deduction has been preserved in the U.S. tax code for more than 100 years, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) of December 2017 threatens charities by removing the tax incentive to donate to charity from all but the wealthiest taxpayers. Both charities and nonprofits play a vital role in the U.S. economy by providing some goods and services more efficiently than the public or private sectors. In this Note I explore the role of nonprofits in the U.S. economy and how the federal government has used tax incentives to encourage taxpayers to donate to charities. I describe how new changes in TCJA, including doubling the standard deduction, increasing the estate tax exemption, capping the state and local tax deduction, and lowering the income tax rates, remove the tax incentives for most individual taxpayers to donate to charity. I then propose solutions to the problems that TCJA created for charities. I submit that a carefully constructed universal charitable deduction could be a fiscally efficient subsidy. TCJA created an uncertain future for the nonprofit sector. Implementing the proposals in this Note could help preserve the future of the nonprofit sector in the United States by making the tax incentive to give to charity available to all taxpayers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

People are more likely to interact with other people of their ethnicity-a phenomenon known as ethnic homophily. In the United States, people of color are known to hold proportionately more high-contact jobs and are thus more at risk of virus infection. At the same time, these ethnic groups are on average younger than the rest of the population. This gives rise to interesting disease dynamics and non-trivial trade-offs that should be taken into consideration when developing prioritization strategies for future mass vaccine roll-outs. Here, we study the spread of COVID-19 through the US population, stratified by age, ethnicity, and occupation, using a detailed, previously-developed compartmental disease model. Based on historic data from the US mass COVID-19 vaccine roll-out that began in December 2020, we show, (i) how ethnic homophily affects the choice of optimal vaccine allocation strategy, (ii) that, notwithstanding potential ethical concerns, differentiating by ethnicity in these strategies can improve outcomes (e.g., fewer deaths), and (iii) that the most likely social context in the United States is very different from the standard assumptions made by models which do not account for ethnicity and this difference affects which allocation strategy is optimal. This manuscript was submitted as part of a theme issue on "Modelling COVID-19 and Preparedness for Future Pandemics"., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Analysis of the attitudes of a 1977 cross-sectional sample of 1,530 American adults concerning euthanasia and suicide indicates that sex, age, and education are significant variables. Males, those who are younger and those who are better educated, are more likely to approve of euthanasia and suicide when a person has an incurable disease. Religious affiliation was not an important variable, although those who were frequent church-service attenders or who were high on religiosity were highly likely to reject euthanasia and suicide.