[Snorlax94]

[quote author=winflop link=topic=18251.msg216515#msg216515 date=1512233676]
While I get that in some senses it looks like a bit of a boondoggle, at the same time the people who make these donations are also supporters of the program. Maybe 80% is too high, but I don't think it should be eliminated entirely.

I mean, sure, but they'd also be supporting the program if it was just a market transaction for the cost of the seats. A donation can't be mandatory, that just doesn't make any sense.

I'm also not convinced that there's any real justification for subsidizing the giving of money to a institution that's worth more than many countries. IIRC at least one of the tax bills includes a provision taxing endowments over a certain amount, that's probably the bigger deal than the seat deductibility thing.

And, really, if you're talking about ramifications for higher education, starting to tax implicit benefits for grad students is the much bigger deal. If that passes you're basically ending grad programs as they're currently organized for anyone but the independently wealthy.
[/quote]
Agree with Stupac. Taxing TAs and grad assistant as if they were on salary equal to tuition is the largest direct impact on Stanford and universities I am aware of.

But it’s not clear to me what will result after reconcilition.

[Snorlax94]

[quote author=winflop link=topic=18251.msg216515#msg216515 date=1512233676]
While I get that in some senses it looks like a bit of a boondoggle, at the same time the people who make these donations are also supporters of the program. Maybe 80% is too high, but I don't think it should be eliminated entirely.

I mean, sure, but they'd also be supporting the program if it was just a market transaction for the cost of the seats. A donation can't be mandatory, that just doesn't make any sense.

I'm also not convinced that there's any real justification for subsidizing the giving of money to a institution that's worth more than many countries. IIRC at least one of the tax bills includes a provision taxing endowments over a certain amount, that's probably the bigger deal than the seat deductibility thing.

And, really, if you're talking about ramifications for higher education, starting to tax implicit benefits for grad students is the much bigger deal. If that passes you're basically ending grad programs as they're currently organized for anyone but the independently wealthy.
[/quote]
Agree with Stupac. Taxing TAs and grad assistant as if they were on salary equal to tuition is the largest direct impact on Stanford and universities I am aware of.

But it’s not clear to me what will result after reconcilition.