Corporate donations

The term corporate donation refers to any financial contribution made by a corporation to another organization that furthers the contributor's own objectives. Two major kinds of such donations deserve specific consideration, charitable as well as political donations.

Charitable donations

Corporations give to charitable causes, either because of the personal convictions of influential leaders within the corporation, or more commonly to help establish the public perception that the corporation is a good corporate citizen.

Types

Corporate charitable giving can be divided into direct cash and non-cash contributions. Direct cash giving comes from corporate headquarters, regional offices, or company sponsored foundations. Examples of direct cash contributions include:

Non-cash contributions are contributions of equipment, supplies or time, and do not include cash contributions. Examples of non-cash contributions include:

Non-cash contributions can also be interpreted through an organization's policy to allow employees paid time off when performing volunteer work.

Annual charitable giving figures

Total corporate cash donations in 2010 are estimated to be $15.29 billion in the United States.[1] Of that, ~80%-85% came from corporate grants and sponsorship of fundraising events while ~15%-20% or $2–$3 billion came from corporate matching gifts and volunteer grants.[3]

Political donations

There is a wide range of models of political finance in democracies; political donations by individuals and organizations are one of many sources of funding. To view a list of corporate donors and their recipients, go to opensecrets.org[4] Corporate as well as religious donations, have directly affected the rights of individuals concerning Proposition 8. [5]

United States

In the US, corporations are prohibited from making expenditures to influence federal elections.[6] Similar restrictions exist in many state elections and have been upheld by the US Supreme Court.[7]

Corporations may make donations to Political Action Committees (PACs); PACs generally have strict limits on their ability to advocate on behalf of specific parties or candidates, or even to coordinate their activities with political campaigns. PACs are subject to disclosure requirements at the federal and state levels. The ability of corporations to engage in such independent expenditures has been subject to intense debate after the US Supreme Court struck down, on free-speech grounds, limits in Citizens United v. FEC, a case involving the creation of a film critical of Hillary Clinton by a nonprofit corporation.

Donations are closely tracked by a number of organizations, including the Center for Responsive Politics (opensecrets.org). Such organizations often group donations under specific corporations, but such donations refer to contributions from individuals and PACs associated with the corporation, not "corporate donations".

Corporate donations to PACs and Super PACs are a First Amendment issue and subject to intense political debate in the US. Proponents of tighter regulations of political donations by corporations argue[8] that corporate donations corrupt democracy. However, research in political science and economics has found little evidence for influence of political donations on election outcomes.[9] Other research suggests that post-election lobbying and access to politicians, rather than campaign contributions, shapes and reinforces policy decision by politicians[10]

Germany

In Germany, both individuals and corporations may make unlimited contributions to political parties. These contributions are partially tax exempt and partially matched by government funds; contributions of more than 10000 Euros are reportable.

During the 2013 election cycle in Germany, corporations and other organizations made direct contributions to German political parties in the amount of at least 24.2 million Euros.[11] Due to public subsidies of political parties and membership dues, such donations in Germany generally represent about 15% of the total revenue of major political parties; see Party finance in Germany.

Other Countries

Australia, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Germany, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, and Turkey have no limits on either contributions for parliamentary elections or on spending on such elections; in Belgium, Canada, Chile, France, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Japan, South Korea, Poland, and Slovenia, there are limits on both contributions and spending; Austria, Hungary, Italy, New Zealand, Slovakia, the United Kingdom have no limits on contributions but do have limits on spending; Finland and the United States have limits on contributions but not on spending.[12]

See also

References

  1. 1 2 http://www.givingusareports.org/products/GivingUSA_2011_ExecSummary_Print.pdf
  2. 1 2 http://www.doublethedonation.com/FAQ/OurDatabase.php
  3. ↑ http://www.corporatephilanthropy.org/pdfs/giving_in_numbers/GivinginNumbers2011.pdf
  4. ↑ http://opensecrets.org/
  5. ↑ http://www.californiansagainsthate.com/category/mormons/
  6. ↑ Federal Election Commission, Contribution Limits
  7. ↑ Reuters: Supreme Court declines to hear Iowa campaign finance challenge
  8. ↑ Warwick Smith, Political donations corrupt democracy
  9. ↑ Econlib Campaign Finance
  10. ↑ John R. Wright: Contributions, Lobbying, and Committee Voting in the U.S. House of Representatives, American Political Science Review 84(2), 1990.
  11. ↑ Die Welt: Parteispenden
  12. ↑ Paul Waldman How Our Campaign Finance System Compares to Other Countries

Literature

The literature given here refers to political donations by corporate donors only:

This article is issued from Wikipedia - version of the 11/24/2016. The text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share Alike but additional terms may apply for the media files.