GA GA - Shirley, 87, & Russell Dermond, 88, Putnam County, 2 May 2014 - # 7

[mck16]

Here's a question:
Does that mean that an organization or person can donate a large sum of money to receive a charitable deduction, and then later if an organization or person that did contribute to the reward, has found out knowledge about who the perp(s) is/are, will they then be able to reap the reward and reap the charitable deduction as well? Or only receive the reward and not the charitable deduction?
IMOO.

Why would they even claim it if they are getting it back? Don't think that would be possible. jmo

 

[Treelights]

Why would they even claim it if they are getting it back? Don't think that would be possible. jmo

It equates to a tax break, in addition to receiving the reward money, just a question I had.
IMOO.

 

[al66pine]

Cutting and pasting from my post on thread #6, on 06/07/14 ~12:45a.m.

Contributions, per Sheriff's Letter
Quote:
Originally Posted by Razz
A little off topic for a bit. About the tax deductible reward money. I guess if you take the deduction, you don't expect to get it back. And since most rewards aren't paid out, where does that money go?

Short answer
Contributions remain in same a/c, to be used for purposes specifically authorized by state statute or county ordinance for that a/c, imo, jmo, moo.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Long answer
IIRC, sheriff's letter soliciting reward money asked the public to remit $$$ to a certain bank and account (presumably to sheriff a/c or county a/c).

If those contributions are not disbursed as a reward, would GA state statute, Putnam County ordinance, or other legal stricture re budget or appropriations require that those monies remain in that sheriff ac or county account?
Likely yes, imho, unless the law authorizes a 'refund' of such contributions, if a reward is not made.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2nd issue, re deductibility.
IIRC sheriff's letter also stated that an accountant advised sheriff that these contributions would be tax deductible to the donor.

Per IRS website info, certain contributions may qualify as a charitable deduction (for federal income tax purposes).
"You may deduct charitable contributions of money or property made to qualified organizations if you itemize your deductions...."
"Qualified Organizations

"You may deduct a charitable contribution made to, or for the use of, any of the following organizations that otherwise are qualified under section 170(c) of the Internal Revenue Code:

1. A state or United States possession (or political subdivision thereof), or the United States or the District of Columbia, if made exclusively for public purposes;..."

http://www.irs.gov/Charities-&-Non-P...eductions. BBM


Putnam County is a political subdivision of the state of GA.

Are such contributions made 'exclusively for public purposes'? IDK if a reward for providing info leading to an arrest and/or conviction is 'exclusively for public purposes.'

ETA.
N.B. IANAL; I do not play one on TV; although I have stayed at Holiday Inn.

 

[mck16]

It equates to a tax break, in addition to receiving the reward money, just a question I had.
IMOO.

It was a good question and who knows it may be okay to do that. Tax law is so convoluted these days. And another question would be if they deduct it, and the reward money is not collected for several years, would they have to pay it back? Confusing. jmo

 

[atthelake]

Why would they even claim it if they are getting it back? Don't think that would be possible. jmo

Well, not a CPA - but what makes "common logical sense" to me is that they are two separate events. I (theoretically) write off the $40.00 just the same as if I gave to cancer society or goodwill as SS has said may be tax deductible.

Then the second event is income... like winning a lottery per se... and have to pay taxes on the income of $50,000.00.

That seems logical to me and intuitive but perhaps CPA's can chime in.

Also, I'm assuming in another train of thought that this donation is non-refundable. In other words, that if it is never paid out to anyone, my original $40.00 is NEVER gonna be returned.

Again, perhaps a CPA etc can chime in.

ETA: Have seen posts that were after the OP. I would assume if you contributed in 2014, you could write off the $40.00.

Then if you received the $50,000.00 in 2017, you would pay taxes on that income (for sure a 1099 would be issued imho!) in 2017. Again, just intuitively logical for me -who knows if others agree - but CPA could perhaps chime in.

 

[Treelights]

Well, not a CPA - but what makes "common logical sense" to me is that they are two separate events. I (theoretically) write off the $40.00 just the same as if I gave to cancer society or goodwill as SS has said may be tax deductible.

Then the second event is income... like winning a lottery per se... and have to pay taxes on the income of $50,000.00.

That seems logical to me and intuitive but perhaps CPA's can chime in.

Also, I'm assuming in another train of thought that this donation is non-refundable. In other words, that if it is never paid out to anyone, my original $40.00 is NEVER gonna be returned.

Again, perhaps a CPA etc can chime in.

Logic and taxes don't always go together.
Your post makes sense, though.

 

[mck16]

Well, not a CPA - but what makes "common logical sense" to me is that they are two separate events. I (theoretically) write off the $40.00 just the same as if I gave to cancer society or goodwill as SS has said may be tax deductible.

Then the second event is income... like winning a lottery per se... and have to pay taxes on the income of $50,000.00.

That seems logical to me and intuitive but perhaps CPA's can chime in.

Also, I'm assuming in another train of thought that this donation is non-refundable. In other words, that if it is never paid out to anyone, my original $40.00 is NEVER gonna be returned.

Again, perhaps a CPA etc can chime in.

But, the original question was if later they are awarded the reward after they have claimed it as a deduction. So, I was just thinking it is a wash. But, yes, let's have a CPA chime in. And do you have to pay tax on the reward you receive? lol jmo

 

[atthelake]

It was a good question and who knows it may be okay to do that. Tax law is so convoluted these days. And another question would be if they deduct it, and the reward money is not collected for several years, would they have to pay it back? Confusing. jmo

Hmmm, interesting. I had never considered that the monies that folks contributed would not be processed and taken out of the bank accounts if folks wrote a check. Hmmm, if that was true, then they cannot accept cash as that is processed and taken from the person immediately :doh:

Guess this is one for those who are experienced to answer for the threads. TIA

 

[Treelights]

Well, let's hope the Reward does help nab the perp(s) and there is Justice for the Dermonds.

 

[Treelights]

:banghead:

This lack of leads is becoming frustrating. Apparently not just for me.

Maybe there will be another tidbit, morsel, or crumb released in the news. It has been quiet of late.
IMOO.

 

[Litig8ter]

But, the original question was if later they are awarded the reward after they have claimed it as a deduction. So, I was just thinking it is a wash. But, yes, let's have a CPA chime in. And do you have to pay tax on the reward you receive? lol jmo

I'm not a CPA, but rewards are taxable if you receive one. Not sure how you handle it if you contribute and then collect. It could be deduction in year of contribution and income the year the reward is collected. Or it could be your contribution would be treated like gambling winnings ... If I bet $100 on a Kentucky Derby horse and won $1000, I would report winnings of $900. I think most people would prefer to treat it like the gambling win, but if the events happen in seperate tax years and the deduction has already been claimed, it may not be worth amending the donation-year return just to get a bit more direct reduction of income.

Also, I strongly suspect in the fine print on the reward, any donations will not be refundable if no one is caught. To be deductible, it cannot have strings that would include a possible return.

 

[mck16]

I need some help please. I know at one point we had a link for the Probate Cts. in Putnam County. It showed the executors of the estate, etc. I can't find it and I would like to see it again. I want to know if the Will has been executed, and also want to be able to follow along in the future.

Thanks if anyone has it. tia

 

[tlcya]

was it the county clerk website here: http://www.putnamcourtclerk.org/civil.php

Or was it a death/probate notice as published in a newspaper? Can you recall?

 

[mck16]

was it the county clerk website here: http://www.putnamcourtclerk.org/civil.php

Or was it a death/probate notice as published in a newspaper? Can you recall?

I found the link you provided above, but it did not provide the info I was looking for or that I remember seeing. I don't think it was a notice by publication, but it might have been. It said who the executors were, and all debt should be directed to so and so (don't remember who). Do you know if the will has been probated? Do we know who inherited what, etc.? I guess I am morbidly curious, but I would really like to know.

thanks for your help.

 

[mck16]

I really wish that all who are viewing as Guests would sign up and join the forum. I know that you all have something to say and add to this discussion. Please join. Thanks.

 

[Cardinal47]

There has been a tremendous amount of Awareness and interest created in the Dermond abduction/murders/decapitation. Seldom does a crime of this nature that happens in a rural area of the South get the amount of ms media attention that this crime has received, imo.

Some have shared that many of the locals have put this horrific crime behind them and moved on. Considering the total posts and viewership of this Websleuths thread, combined with the boardreader numb3rs over the past 45 days. This case is not loosing interest, imo. Nor will it until the many unanswered questions are solved and Justice is served for the Dermond family.
There is now seven Shirley and Russel Dermond WS threads with total views approaching 400,000. That is an average of almost 9,000 views per day.. The S & D Dermond WS Thread has consistently been a hot thread for six weeks now. Awareness is the key in missing/murdered persons cases.

Boardreader Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community
http://boardreader.com/site/Websleuths_Crime_Sleuthing_Com_9288.html

I certainly agree and as I wrote in one of my earlier postings I think this is what the killer/killers wanted. They wanted it to be written about and talked about and speculated about.

They wanted it in the newspapers and many boots on the ground. They wanted fear and terror and a family and community to be scared.

Who wouldn't be scared of 'the devil'!

The real puzzle is who is that smart, lucky and evil. When we figure that out we will have our killer/killers.

 

[mck16]

I certainly agree and as I wrote in one of my earlier postings I think this is what the killer/killers wanted. They wanted it to be written about and talked about and speculated about.

They wanted it in the newspapers and many boots on the ground. They wanted fear and terror and a family and community to be scared.

Who wouldn't be scared of 'the devil'!

The real puzzle is who is that smart, lucky and evil. When we figure that out we will have our killer/killers.

I think this may have been what it escalated into, but I don't believe this was the initial intention. I think that they were surprised and angered by Mr. D. and that anger turned to rage and total death and destruction. I do not think they were targeted and probably did not even know who they had killed except the man at the dock. I think it was an incident of horrible rage and it went horribly and totally wrong. GW will never be the same because I am not sure they will ever make an arrest or find the people who did this.

It is a sad ending to two lives that had made a contribution and were just living out the years that they deserved. I really think it is over and there will never be any kind of retribution for what befell the Dermonds. I so hope I am wrong. But, it has been silent too long. jmo

 

[Cardinal47]

I think this may have been what it escalated into, but I don't believe this was the initial intention. I think that they were surprised and angered by Mr. D. and that anger turned to rage and total death and destruction. I do not think they were targeted and probably did not even know who they had killed except the man at the dock. I think it was an incident of horrible rage and it went horribly and totally wrong. GW will never be the same because I am not sure they will ever make an arrest or find the people who did this.

It is a sad ending to two lives that had made a contribution and were just living out the years that they deserved. I really think it is over and there will never be any kind of retribution for what befell the Dermonds. I so hope I am wrong. But, it has been silent too long. jmo

I might have agreed with you but how then would you explain how thorough they were in leaving not a clue anywhere?

This to me was not an argument between a fisherman and the Dermonds. This was well planned and well executed and well thought out killing by a mad man!

I think the Dermonds were targeted for whatever reason and I think the killer made NO mistakes.

I just can't believe they did all this and nobody saw or heard or knows anything.

Amazing.

 

[mck16]

I might have agreed with you but how then would you explain how thorough they were in leaving not a clue anywhere?

This to me was not an argument between a fisherman and the Dermonds. This was well planned and well executed and well thought out killing by a mad man!

I think the Dermonds were targeted for whatever reason and I think the killer made NO mistakes.

I just can't believe they did all this and nobody saw or heard or knows anything.

Amazing.

I understand what you are saying. I just think something happened at the dock. Mr. D was mad and it turned into something of total violence. He killed Mr. D. and then attacked Mrs. D. Took her in the boat and disposed of the body down river.

Not complicated, and not a lot of trouble. There was no monetary gain to this crime. They did not rummage the house. So what was the motive? Not a revenge killing. If revenge where is the message? It was a rage killing. No one heard anything because there is no one around. And it happened very quickly. This is just my theory. For this sweet family I can't buy into cults or targeted killing. No, just wrong place wrong time. jmo

 

[Montjoy]

I might have agreed with you but how then would you explain how thorough they were in leaving not a clue anywhere?

rsbm --

I'm sure that there were 'clues'/evidence. It may just not point to a particular person at this time, which doesn't mean it isn't useful for the investigation or prosecution.