<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Ask the taxgirl:  Charitable Deductions for LLCs</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.taxgirl.com/ask-the-taxgirl-charitable-deductions-for-llcs/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.taxgirl.com/ask-the-taxgirl-charitable-deductions-for-llcs/</link>
	<description>tax news, tax info and tax policy</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 13:18:44 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: bill</title>
		<link>http://www.taxgirl.com/ask-the-taxgirl-charitable-deductions-for-llcs/comment-page-1/#comment-4464</link>
		<dc:creator>bill</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Sep 2008 02:54:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.taxgirl.com/ask-the-taxgirl-charitable-deductions-for-llcs/#comment-4464</guid>
		<description>Maybe this will stir up some good discussion:
I have often wondered whether the contributions reflected on the books of most businesses are really contributions. It seems that promotion and recognition of the company name is usually the real reason for the gesture. Therefore, would they better qualify as advertising and promotion under Sec. 162 and 212 rather than simply as "gifts" under 170(c)? What do you think?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Maybe this will stir up some good discussion:<br />
I have often wondered whether the contributions reflected on the books of most businesses are really contributions. It seems that promotion and recognition of the company name is usually the real reason for the gesture. Therefore, would they better qualify as advertising and promotion under Sec. 162 and 212 rather than simply as &#8220;gifts&#8221; under 170(c)? What do you think?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
