- 31 -
5. Whether Petitioners May Deduct Their Payment for Mishna
Classes
Petitioners contend that they may deduct as a charitable
contribution the $175 that they paid for Mishna classes that Emek
provided separately from its regular classes and charged
separately from its regular tuition and fees. We disagree.
Petitioners’ payment for Mishna classes at Emek is not made
deductible merely because Emek offers those classes separately
from their regular educational programs, and Emek charges, and
petitioners pay, separately from Emek’s other charges.
Petitioners did not intend those payments to be a contribution or
gift to Emek within the meaning of section 170(c).17
6. Conclusion
We conclude that petitioners are not entitled to a
charitable contribution deduction under section 170 for any part
16(...continued)
said it is strongly inclined to the view that sec. 170 was not
amended in 1993 to permit deductions for which the consideration
is intangible religious benefits, and that Hernandez v.
Commissioner, 490 U.S. 680, 702 (1989), is still controlling.
That court also said that it need not rule definitively on this
point because petitioners’ claims did not meet the requirements
for partial deductibility of dual payments established by United
States v. Am. Bar Endowment, 477 U.S. 105 (1986). Similarly, we
have decided this case by applying United States v. Am. Bar
Endowment, supra.
17 Emek is an educational organization, not a religious
organization. We need not consider under what circumstances
payments to a religious organization for religious instruction
are deductible.
Page: Previous 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011