Bobby Dodd grass

[apatriot1776]

We raised over $175M for the 2020 initiative. It is entirely feasible that the GTAA could obtain permission for some of that money to be redirected toward debt retirement. If the decision makers conclude that debt retirement is more efficient than leveraging that money in very payable debt service, then it may make sense.

Especially in today’s environment, regardless of debt status I can imagine that additional investment with interest rates at 7% is much less appetizing than when it got announced in 2020 at 3%.

 

[iceeater1969]

I totally agree. We are in big time debt. Why would we make another expensive change so soon. It's not like we are rolling in money. Another personal complaint is why are we replacing the Edge center with so much debt still on the books. Whoever is or has been running the AA has no business sense and lacks fiscal responsibility. We need to get the debt under control.

They can get engineers to send $ to build stuff.

Engrs can not grasp paying top $ for coaches to help us overcome self imposed academic rigor and narrow course offering.

 

[iceeater1969]

Especially in today’s environment, regardless of debt status I can imagine that additional investment with interest rates at 7% is much less appetizing than when it got announced in 2020 at 3%.

Haven't made pricipal payment in over decade.

 

[Bogey]

Especially in today’s environment, regardless of debt status I can imagine that additional investment with interest rates at 7% is much less appetizing than when it got announced in 2020 at 3%.

Exactly. I had a home equity loan and when interest rates were 3-5 %, I had no incentive to pay on the principal from my IRA. When it jumped to near 10%, I payed it off.

 

[ThatGuy]

Seconding @TechPhi97's post was this post in that thread:

I don't see the absolute amount of debt as being as important as the annual debt service payments when discussing it in the context of the AA's total annual income, or income from media. Also, I am interested to see where it lands when the 2023 numbers are available. 2022 payments ($13M) dropped from 2021 ($14M) which is a good trend. And while the 2020 Covid year numbers were an anomaly, 2019 was even higher at $15M. Someone is managing our debt payments to be less impactful.

I've seen all of the posts on this in various places (forgive me for continuing it in another thread - maybe I should start a new thread?). And appreciate your and @TechPhi97 digging into the numbers.

My question is this: does "debt service" here just include our payments against the debt? Or does it include payments actually towards the debt?

One of the things I remember that made me nervous in the past was that, IIRC, the GTAA had restructured the debt, and was paying interest-only payments towards it. I know that the phrase "debt service" includes principal by definition - but I'm wondering if we're still only paying interest, and if that's the case, where the debt service numbers are coming from?

I would hate for us to be in better place than other institutions in the short term by paying less each year, but not actually making a dent in the debt as a result.

Hopefully some of you who have read some of the data can correct my thinking.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

We raised over $175M for the 2020 initiative. It is entirely feasible that the GTAA could obtain permission for some of that money to be redirected toward debt retirement. If the decision makers conclude that debt retirement is more efficient than leveraging that money in very payable debt service, then it may make sense.

That's not how designated giving works. You have to use the money for what it was designated for. From my understanding, a LOT of that money was given as matching gifts for designated purposes.

 

[stinger78]

That's not how designated giving works. You have to use the money for what it was designated for. From my understanding, a LOT of that money was given as matching gifts for designated purposes.

Designated giving is not tax deductible. Deductibility moves opposite control. If you give to a non-profit capital improvements fund and leave it in their hands it may be deductible. Using fund money for any reason not specified by that fund is illegal. Permission can be granted to repurpose gifts to funds. Not sure how matching finds would work.

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

Designated giving is not tax deductible. Deductibility moves opposite control. If you give to a non-profit capital improvements fund and leave it in their hands it may be deductible. Using fund money for any reason not specified by that fund is illegal. Permission can be granted to repurpose gifts to funds. Not sure how matching finds would work.

Not sure where you get that. Designated giving can absolutely be tax deductible.

 

[roadkill]

Designated giving is not tax deductible. Deductibility moves opposite control. If you give to a non-profit capital improvements fund and leave it in their hands it may be deductible. Using fund money for any reason not specified by that fund is illegal. Permission can be granted to repurpose gifts to funds. Not sure how matching finds would work.

Are you certain of this?

Not sure where you get that. Designated giving can absolutely be tax deductible.

I was about to mention same.

 

[stinger78]

Are you certain of this?

I was about to mention same.

Depends on how it’s defined. Tax deductible gifts to approved non-profits must allow the funds to be used at the discretion of the NP. They can be designated for a specific use, but must ultimately be under control of the NP and may be used for other purposes.

Restricted funds, those that can only be used in accordance with the expresses desire of the donor, not the NP, are not tax deductible.

 

[roadkill]

Depends on how it’s defined. Tax deductible gifts to approved non-profits must allow the funds to be used at the discretion of the NP. They can be designated for a specific use, but must ultimately be under control of the NP and may be used for other purposes.

Restricted funds, those that can only be used in accordance with the expresses desire of the donor, not the NP, are not tax deductible.

I do not believe this is correct. According to your statement, if I give to the AA and designate my gift for scholarships, I cannot take a tax deduction.

Can you link to the appropriate IRS or equivalent documentation that supports your statement?

 

[g0lftime]

I do not believe this is correct. According to your statement, if I give to the AA and designate my gift for scholarships, I cannot take a tax deduction.

Can you link to the appropriate IRS or equivalent documentation that supports your statement?

You do have to deduct the value of anything you receive as a result of the donation, eg a watch, shirt, hat, etc. Usually the charity will include the value of any recipient gift on the tax deduction acknowledgement letter.

 

[roadkill]

You do have to deduct the value of anything you receive as a result of the donation, eg a watch, shirt, hat, etc. Usually the charity will include the value of any recipient gift on the tax deduction acknowledgement letter.

While you are correct, that doesn't address my concern that @stinger78's statement is incorrect.

 

[g0lftime]

While you are correct, that doesn't address my concern that @stinger78's statement is incorrect.

Just adding information. Any contribution to a IRS tax exempt organization is tax deductible. Can be money, stocks, cars, artwork, etc. Donations to the GT Foundation can be designated for specific scholarship criteria for example. Same for Alexander Tharpe which can be designated for a specific sport. Unfortunately the IRS has taken away some tax deductions if using the standard deduction unless using provisions allowed in IRA/401 RMD donations.

 

[B Lifsey]

I think if you give a donation and designate it to benefit a specific individual, then it is not tax deductible. But if you give for a specific designated purpose like a scholarship and the organization controls which individual receives benefit from that donation it is deductible. For example, if you donate to GTAA and designate that the donation must be used as scholarship for Haynes King then it is not deductible. But, if you donate to a GTAA scholarship fund and GTAA selects to give funds to Haynes King then it is deductible.

 

[yeti92]

What does whether a donation is deductible have to do with Bobby Dodd's grass? How did we get here?

 

[TooTall]

What does whether a donation is deductible have to do with Bobby Dodd's grass? How did we get here?

Apparently some were smoking the Bobby Dodd grass

 

[stinger78]

I do not believe this is correct. According to your statement, if I give to the AA and designate my gift for scholarships, I cannot take a tax deduction.

Can you link to the appropriate IRS or equivalent documentation that supports your statement?

You can if they reserve the right to use it ultimately at their discretion.

Just google the IRS laws in charitable giving. Tax deductibility follows relinquishing control of the gift. Somewhere in the fine print the GTAA reserves the right to direct that money elsewhere at their discretion.

 

[stinger78]

I think if you give a donation and designate it to benefit a specific individual, then it is not tax deductible. But if you give for a specific designated purpose like a scholarship and the organization controls which individual receives benefit from that donation it is deductible. For example, if you donate to GTAA and designate that the donation must be used as scholarship for Haynes King then it is not deductible. But, if you donate to a GTAA scholarship fund and GTAA selects to give funds to Haynes King then it is deductible.

Yes.

 

[bobongo]

What does whether a donation is deductible have to do with Bobby Dodd's grass? How did we get here?

The segue was a concern raised about the cost of ripping up the fake stuff to install real grass. Perspectives on debt service, contributions, interest rates, and tax deductions soon followed.

As for me, I prefer real grass but if the fake stuff is in and it would save money for now to keep it, we should keep it until it starts getting worn down.