On Tue, 29 Apr 2003 15:51:31 +0000, davehin wrote:

In misc.rural Rich Wellner wrote:

Not to say folks shouldn't follow the above advice (as a rule americans
could stand to be a lot more charitable), but something that seems to
be lost in the mix is that it was an employee who donated to PETA and
Levi Strauss matched the employees donation through a fairly standard
matching contribution plan. It doesn't appear that Levi's actually
decided to donate money to PETA of their own volition.

Perhaps, but they certainly get to decide which organizations to put on
the "We'll match your donation" list. By doing so, they are expressing
their agreement with those organizations; by giving them money, they're
backing up their sentiments.

Many companies agree to match donations to any organization registered as
a 501(c)(3) entity in order to avoid playing favorites and avoid getting a
bad name.

Guess it didn't work in this case...

There is the question of whether PETA should be allowed to continue with
that tax structure, but today that's how it is.

rw2


--
-----------------------------------------------------
Poliglut.org
Politics from the excellence in blogging think tank
We welcome everyone, no matter how wrong you might be
-----------------------------------------------------