Charitable Giving Archives

A married couple donated used goods worth $6,760 to charity. They filed Form 8283 with their 2019 tax return. The IRS examined the return, the case ended up in Tax Court, and the entire deduction was disallowed.

What makes this case remarkable is that neither the IRS nor the Tax Court ever claimed the donation didn’t happen. Both sides agreed the contribution was real and made to a qualifying organization. The taxpayers lost anyway.

In this episode of Tax in Action, host Jeremy Wells breaks down the Besaw v. Commissioner case to reveal what went wrong. It comes down to something every tax practitioner has seen.

“When you help people with tax returns, and you ask them to upload their documents around tax time, and you get a slew of these blank Goodwill receipts,” Wells explains, “the taxpayer’s expecting some sort of tax benefit from all that. And you’re looking at that thinking, I can’t do anything with this.”

When Good Donations Go Bad

The timeline of the Besaw case reads like a warning every tax practitioner should remember.

In 2019, the Besaws filed their joint federal income tax return claiming $6,760 in non-cash charitable contributions. They attached Form 8283, the correct form for reporting non-cash donations of $500 or more. So far, so good.

But the form was basically empty. The Besaws left out the donation dates, the fair market values of the donated property, their cost basis in that property, and the method they used to arrive at the deductible amount.

“Really, all of the important information,” Wells notes.

The IRS examined the return in 2022 and requested proof for those charitable contributions. In response, the Besaws submitted what Wells calls a “reconstructed record,” essentially taking what was on their incomplete Form 8283 and using it to piece together documentation of their contributions.

The IRS said that wasn’t good enough. They denied the deduction and sent a notice of deficiency. The case wound up in Tax Court.

Contemporaneous Is The Magic Word

The fatal flaw in the Besaw case comes down to one word that appears throughout tax law: contemporaneous.

“The word contemporaneous comes up in other places in tax law as well,” Wells explains. “If you drive to meet a client or meet a vendor, you’re supposed to keep a contemporaneous written mileage log. That means you’re supposed to keep that throughout the year. You’re not supposed to look back at the prior year and try to reconstruct that from memory.”

The same principle applies to charitable contribution records. But Section 170 gives a specific definition. Documentation must be received by the earlier of the date you file your return or the due date (including extensions).

The Besaws created their records in 2022, long after filing their 2019 return and while the IRS was already examining it. That timing made all the difference.

What makes this case really striking is that nobody disputed that the donation actually happened. “At no point did the IRS or the Tax Court claim the donation may never have happened,” Wells emphasizes. “Everyone agreed that the donation happened. The issue was whether it was properly documented.”

This flows from a principle Wells returns to often. “Deductions are a matter of legislative grace.” That phrase appears throughout Tax Court decisions. It means the deduction doesn’t come free. You can’t just say you made a contribution and expect the benefit. The law sets rules for how taxpayers claim and prove deductions. Fail to meet those requirements, and the deduction disappears, even if the donation was real.

The Four Levels of Documentation Requirements

Understanding what documentation you need depends on how much you’re donating. The rules get stricter as the amounts go up.

Level 1: Non-Cash Contributions Under $250

For donations under $250, Treasury Regulation 1.170A-13(b)(1) requires a receipt showing:

The name of the charity
A description of the property
The date and location of the contribution

This is where those blank receipts from donation drop-offs become a problem. “A lot of times those slips of paper wind up in our client portal without much more than whatever is preprinted on them by the organization, which is usually just the name of the organization and its location,” Wells observes. “There’s no other information there.”

The receipt doesn’t need to include a value—that’s the taxpayer’s job. But it must describe what the taxpayer gave.

Level 2: Non-Cash Contributions Over $250

Cross the $250 threshold, and you need a contemporaneous written acknowledgment from the organization. This must include:

A description of the property
A statement of whether any goods or services were provided in exchange, and a value or good-faith estimate of those goods or services

“This is actually where the taxpayer failed in this Tax Court case,” Wells points out, “because the charity receipts contained no descriptions of the donated items.”

Remember, the acknowledgment must be received by the earlier of the filing date or the due date, including extensions. Miss that window, and you can’t fix it later.

Level 3: Total Non-Cash Contributions Over $500

When total non-cash contributions exceed $500, you must file Form 8283. Treasury Regulation 1.170A-13(b)(3) says you need to report:

The date you acquired the property
How you acquired it (i.e., purchase, gift, or inheritance)
Your cost or basis in the property
The fair market value at the time of donation
The method used to determine the fair market value

“The taxpayer in this Tax Court case left all these blank,” Wells notes. “And that was problematic for him.”

Level 4: Single Items or Groups Over $5,000

When any single item or group of similar items exceeds $5,000, IRC Section 170(f)(11)(C) requires a qualified appraisal. The taxpayer, the charity, and the appraiser all must sign Section B of Form 8283.

Wells has seen how this plays out. “I’ve had situations where taxpayers wanted to claim a deduction in excess of $5,000, and once we explain the appraisal requirement, either they didn’t want to go through with the appraisal, or they adjusted their valuation of that contribution to an amount below $5,000.”

What You Need vs. What You File

The charity doesn’t provide valuations on receipts. “It’s up to the taxpayer to report and to calculate a fair market value of those contributed items,” Wells explains. “It’s not up to the organization to put that together.”

But descriptions must be detailed enough to identify the items and estimate value. You can’t write “trunk full of stuff.” But you don’t need to list every single piece of clothing either.

Beyond what gets filed with the return, Treasury Regulation 1.170A-13 requires taxpayers to keep:

A detailed list of donated property
Receipts showing dates, locations, and descriptions
Fair market value worksheets showing how they calculated values
Any appraisals, if required

This is what the IRS requested in 2022, and what the Besaws couldn’t produce in its original form. Form 8283 is only part of the package.

Dealing with Those Blank Goodwill Receipts

“When you see those blank Goodwill receipts pop up in your client portal, how will you address those?” Wells asks. It’s a question every practitioner faces each tax season.

When receipts say something like “household goods, used clothing $1,000,” is that enough? Based on the Besaw case and the regulations, “Probably not,” Wells says. “We need a little bit more information than that.”

When non-cash charitable contributions appear, Wells recommends asking these questions:

What exactly did you donate? Get actual descriptions, not just “clothing”
When and where did they donate? Dates and locations matter
Is there a receipt or written acknowledgment? If not, do they have their own records?
Does the record describe the property adequately? “Stuff” won’t cut it
Did they receive anything in return? This affects the deductible amount
Do total non-cash contributions exceed $500? This triggers Form 8283
Does any single item exceed $5,000? This may require an appraisal
How did they determine the value? They need an actual method

Getting Real About Fair Market Value

Treasury Regulation 1.170A-1(c)(2) defines fair market value as “the price a willing, knowledgeable buyer would pay a willing, knowledgeable seller under no compulsion.”

For clothing and household goods, this usually means thrift shop value. Wells recommends a practical test. “If you didn’t know anything about this t-shirt other than you saw it hanging on a rack in a thrift shop and you liked it, what price would you reasonably pay for that?”

One common problem is sentimental value. “Just because an item holds some sentimental value for you or your family doesn’t necessarily mean it has a higher fair market value,” Wells cautions. “Sentimental value doesn’t really translate into actual market value.”

There’s also a quality requirement. Under Section 170(f)(16), clothing and household goods must be in “at least good used condition” to qualify. Worn-out or broken items are not deductible at all.

Four Myths That Create Problems

The Besaw case debunks several common assumptions:

Myth 1: A signed receipt is enough

In reality, the receipt must describe the property and include other details.

Myth 2: You can fix missing details later

This killed the Besaws’ deduction. Documentation must be contemporaneous.

Myth 3: Fair market value is optional for small donations

Form 8283 requires fair market value for every non-cash donation over $500.

Myth 4: If the donation happened, the IRS should allow it

The Besaw case proves otherwise. Both sides agreed that the donation occurred. But the Tax Court still disallowed the deduction.

The Bottom Line

The Besaw case demonstrates that, in tax law, documentation beats facts. A legitimate charitable donation means nothing without proper contemporaneous records.

Tax practitioners must remember:

Contemporaneous means by the filing date or due date (including extensions)
Different amounts trigger different requirements
Form 8283 isn’t the whole story. Taxpayers must keep detailed records
Those blank Goodwill receipts are audit risks waiting to happen

“This Tax Court case illustrates that substantiation is everything,” Wells concludes. “It really is in a lot of areas of tax law, and especially here in terms of charitable contributions.”

The charitable deduction can be powerful, but it comes with serious technical requirements. Listen to the full episode and make sure your clients understand these rules before they drop off that next load at Goodwill, and definitely before they try to claim the deduction.

Most accounting firm owners consider themselves generous people. They write checks to local charities, sponsor community events, and encourage employees to volunteer. But ask them to quantify their firm’s charitable impact over the past three years, and most would struggle to produce meaningful numbers.

The irony is, professionals who build careers on measurement and accountability often treat their own charitable giving as an unmeasured afterthought.

Marcus and Rachel Dillon faced this same challenge. As co-leaders of Dillon Business Advisors, they listed “giving back locally and internationally” as part of their vision, along with concrete, measurable goals. However, it became a reminder of good intentions that hadn’t yet become systematic action.

In this 2026 New Year episode of Who’s Really the Boss?, the Dillons skip the typical resolution-setting advice. Instead, they share how they live out their rally cry for the year: “lead change, create impact.” For them, IMPACT actually spells out their firm’s values. And they’ve finally found a way to measure it.

The Control That Creates Commitment

The Dillons knew what they wanted to accomplish. The challenge was finding a mechanism for accountability.

A separate bank account seemed obvious. It would be easy and fast. But Marcus saw the flaw immediately. “We wanted that control mechanism in place as opposed to just setting up an additional bank account that we could redistribute or transfer money back into,” he explains.

Their solution was The DBA Impact Fund, established through the National Christian Foundation in 2025. With a donor-advised fund, once money goes in, it can’t come back out. Those dollars are committed to charitable purposes forever.

This constraint is exactly the point. For firm owners who want to build charitable giving into their operations, a donor-advised fund provides accountability that willpower alone can’t.

The practical benefits extend beyond commitment. Funds can be invested and earn returns while accumulating for larger initiatives. The account works like a checking account when distributing money to approved charities. And because it generates standalone statements, the Dillons can share their giving transparently with their team.

Creating the fund was simple. “It literally took five minutes. I went to NCF’s website to create the fund, connected a bank account, and started transferring money,” Marcus notes. Five minutes to solve a problem that had lingered for years.

The Power of Simple Math

With the fund established, the leadership team, which includes Marcus and Rachel, and their directors, Amy McCarty, MBA, and Lezlie Reeves, CPA, decided how much to give.

They came up with a simple formula: 1% of every dollar invoiced, deposited the first week of each month based on the previous month’s revenue. The formula doesn’t consider collections, net income, or profit after expenses. Just invoice revenue.

“There’s direct accountability and no creative accounting or math involved,” Rachel emphasizes. “There’s no ‘it depends.’ Or I have to wait until I run the calculations.”

Anyone can look at the monthly invoice total, calculate 1%, and know exactly what to deposit. No waiting to close books or opportunity for excuses when margins feel tight.

They chose revenue over a fixed dollar amount for a specific reason. “We tied it to revenue because we believe in growth,” Marcus explains. As the firm grows, so does the giving. The charitable impact scales automatically with business success.

“We started with 1% because it’s easy,” Marcus admitted. They can always give more during strong periods, but the baseline stays constant and predictable.

When they created the fund in mid-2025, they made an initial deposit to “true up” all the invoices from earlier in the year. By 2026, they had a solid foundation ready to deploy.

Making Water Flow: The Team Experience

The Dillons wanted their team to experience generosity firsthand.

For their signature initiative, they selected Living Water International, an organization that drills water wells across Latin America and Africa. Both Marcus and Rachel have participated in Living Water trips. They know people on the board and have seen how it operates.

“We know it is a well-run organization,” Marcus explains. “If we were going to choose any one large charity to use this first season of the DBA Impact Fund, we wanted to go with a safe bet.”

The project spans two years. In 2026, The Impact Fund will purchase a well location in Latin America. In 2027, around 20 people, including team members, spouses, clients, and Collective member firms, will travel to install the well.

The Impact Fund covers all costs, removing financial barriers. “The purchase of the well is not voluntary,” Rachel explains. “That’s happening for the whole team. Going on the trip will be voluntary.”

Marcus calls Living Water trips “entry-level” mission experiences. They have structured itineraries with backup plans, safe accommodations, good food, and often a fun activity on the final day. Her first trip included ziplining on the way to the airport.

Birthday Wishes That Matter

While the well project creates a collective experience, the DBA Impact Birthday Gifts program gives individual team members a voice in the firm’s giving.

On each employee’s birthday, they direct the Impact Fund to donate $1,000 to any approved charity of their choice. The program costs employees nothing and adds to their existing birthday recognition.

“It’s significant enough that it does make an impact,” Marcus explains. “If we were only to do $100, they may not feel that it was as much of an impact.”

The program also helps with recruiting. When future team members ask how the firm celebrates birthdays, the answer now includes something more meaningful than cake in the breakroom.

Your Turn to Measure What Matters

The DBA Impact Fund is unusual in that it approaches charitable giving with the same discipline that firm owners bring to client work.

The framework has three parts:

A donor-advised fund that creates real accountability
A simple 1% revenue calculation that eliminates debate
Team involvement through collective projects and individual choice

“As accountants, dollars are an easy way to measure things,” Marcus observes. “And if you want to put dollars to what you care about, this is one small way to do it.”

The Dillons are transparent about their experiment. “We’re entering into the second calendar year of the funds being there, so it’s still an early experiment,” Marcus acknowledges. “If it fails, we won’t hold back from speaking to the failures.”

For other firm owners considering something similar, you don’t need a perfect plan. You need a mechanism that creates accountability and a calculation simple enough to execute consistently.

What would 1% of your firm’s revenue look like directed toward charitable purposes? How might involving your team—not just as contributors, but as participants—change your firm’s relationship with generosity?

For the full conversation, including more of Marcus’s mission trip stories and the team’s approach to capturing impact, listen to the complete episode.

Rachel and Marcus Dillon, CPA, own a Texas-based, remote client accounting and advisory services firm, Dillon Business Advisors, with a team of 15 professionals. Their latest organization, Collective by DBA, supports and guides accounting firm owners and leaders with firm resources, education, and operational strategy through community, groups, and one-on-one advisory.

Your Client’s Non-Cash Donation Documentation Is Probably Missing These Critical Details