[BicoastalAnn]

Originally Posted by JayCT

Again I am NOT endorsing the tax but with all the programs they offer already, they are only spending $5 billion. The rest is pure profit. Makes me wonder. Jay

I get where you're coming from and I do think non-profits should stand up to scrutiny on whether they're using their money charitably as advertised (some don't, which is legitimately illegal and tax fraud). But seems like Yale does. The governor would have more legs to stand on if the question was "do non-profits in the state use their money charitably" instead of "let's tax the ones that have the biggest endowments."

[MrGompers]

Originally Posted by JayCT

Funny I sat with an accountant friend yesterday and he explained to me the logic. Yale has more than $22 billion in their endowment. That endowment makes something like $8 billion a year in investments. The college takes in something like $4 billion from students and their operating costs are only like $5 billion. So if the university is taking in $12 billion annually but only spending $5 billion to run the school, why is the other $7 billion not taxed (these are the figures I recall but he showed me the universities tax return from last year which is available online). It is not serving any purpose other than to make the school more money. Shouldn't the school be giving its students more money? Isn't it now just become an investment company? I am not saying I agree it should be taxed, but it makes you think where the line is between a non-profit higher educational institution and a vehicle for making more money. Jay

Another point that people probably don't know is the person(s) or business(es) that donated money to the Yale endowment fund also received a tax benefit for it. i.e. they deducted that on their tax return(s) assuming they itemized deductions.

The budget surplus that you note above should not be taxed however and here's why. Currently the surplus is treated like as a "savings account" In corporate accounting this would be called "retained earnings" which ISN'T taxed. (although dividends and treasury stock are paid for/ paid out of from retained earnings)

Now since Yale is a non profit perhaps it may make sense to tax the surplus depending on what they do with it. For example, if they buy a golf course with the money the money that course earns should be taxed. I have a strong feeling that the IRS doesn't want to get into what is profitable vs non profitable businesses with institutions like Yale. It would also eat up a lot of IRS employee time and the IRS has been downsized a lot within the last 10 years.

Your accountant didn't give you the whole picture.

Another option would be to institute some type of sunset rule in which the money can work tax free for so many years. Then it eventually would become taxable. (much like a 401/IRA plan works for individuals) I think the record keeping would be too cumbersome for an idea like this though. Because a lot of money is moving thru the Yale endowment fund.

[Mr_250]

Bobs furniture received nearly $18m in grants, low interest loans and tax credits. T
They are owned by Bain capital owns them. Great, I like to see jobs being created hear.

Did anyone read why Connecticut scrambled to get them this money? Apparently they were just inches away from moving the Hq to Boston.

[BicoastalAnn]

I'm surprised Bob got that many concessions from the state... they only employ ~400 in their HQ right? I thought states only give that treatment to huge F500 types of companies.

[HumpDay]

Originally Posted by Mr_250

Bobs furniture received nearly $18m in grants, low interest loans and tax credits. T
They are owned by Bain capital owns them. Great, I like to see jobs being created hear.

Did anyone read why Connecticut scrambled to get them this money? Apparently they were just inches away from moving the Hq to Boston.

Man...were getting killed by Boston. GE and now almost Bobs Discount Furniture? Charlie Baker must be thinking, "which CT business should I take next?". Remember when states in New England used to work together? Now it's a free-for-all where it's all based on competition.

[clamshack203]

Originally Posted by HumpDay

Man...were getting killed by Boston. GE and now almost Bobs Discount Furniture? Charlie Baker must be thinking, "which CT business should I take next?". Remember when states in New England used to work together? Now it's a free-for-all where it's all based on competition.

Millennials are flocking to metro areas on scale to support major sports teams or to metro areas with good weather (warmth). Its tough going for communities w/o either. The majority of People/labor talent, just won't move to your town/metro area if its not offering one or the other. And no, its not necessarily about the sports team, as it is about being a job market at the scale that can support a pro sports team.

[HumpDay]

Originally Posted by clamshack203

Millennials are flocking to metro areas on scale to support major sports teams or to metro areas with good weather (warmth). Its tough going for communities w/o either. The majority of People/labor talent, just won't move to your town/metro area if its not offering one or the other. And no, its not necessarily about the sports team, as it is about being a job market at the scale that can support a pro sports team.

We have a professional sports team...not men's though...it's the Connecticut Sun which in my book, doesn't count.

We have Boston and NYC which isn't very far from any part of CT. If Hartford wasn't located between those 2 cities and if it was isolated from other cities like Denver, then we would most definitely have a team.

[beerisgood02]

The NYY and NYM are a short ride away from FFC. And if you want to see the NYK, its a 45 min train ride.

[rubygreta]

Originally Posted by JayCT

Funny I sat with an accountant friend yesterday and he explained to me the logic. Yale has more than $22 billion in their endowment. That endowment makes something like $8 billion a year in investments. The college takes in something like $4 billion from students and their operating costs are only like $5 billion. So if the university is taking in $12 billion annually but only spending $5 billion to run the school, why is the other $7 billion not taxed (these are the figures I recall but he showed me the universities tax return from last year which is available online). It is not serving any purpose other than to make the school more money. Shouldn't the school be giving its students more money? Isn't it now just become an investment company? I am not saying I agree it should be taxed, but it makes you think where the line is between a non-profit higher educational institution and a vehicle for making more money. Jay

8 billion/22 billion = 36%. The stock market has been flat for the last 12 months. Please tell your accountant friend that he is clueless.

[BicoastalAnn]

Originally Posted by rubygreta

8 billion/22 billion = 36%. The stock market has been flat for the last 12 months. Please tell your accountant friend that he is clueless.

$8b is an overstatement for sure but the endowment made 20% in 2014 and 11% in 2015... not exactly flat. Those guys can pay for the best money manager money can buy apparently.