Prove tax-exempt status
Published: Thursday, March 28, 2013, 8:55 p.m.
The news story “Ravenstahl: Pittsburgh sues to remove UPMC's tax-exempt status” (March 21 and TribLIVE.com) included this quote from UPMC spokesman Paul Wood: “The challenge to UPMC's tax-exempt status appears to be based on the mistaken impression that a nonprofit organization must conduct its affairs in a way that pleases certain labor unions, certain favored businesses or particular political constituencies — in other words, the way that some local governments are also run.”
As nonprofits expand in local municipalities, taking properties off of tax rolls while utilizing municipal infrastructure and public safety services, it is not unreasonable to request verification of an organization's nonprofit status and claim to tax exemptions. In fact, it is within the scope of good governance.
Historically, hospitals were started by religious or civic groups as nonprofits having no direct relation to a particular health insurance corporation, and accepting most major insurances, treating those unable to pay as part of charitable outreach. Now, as corporations purchase or direct these hospitals/properties, the legacy “charity/nonprofit” designation seems a right. Reapplication will clarify whether the nonprofit designation still applies.
Local governments, with ever-shrinking resources, work hard to provide services to their constituents, as well as to the for-profit and nonprofit businesses within their borders. Many local government officials also contribute their own time and money to free care funds and nonprofit fundraisers.
The writer, a Democrat and full-time oncology nurse, is council president in Edgewood.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Ethanol’s benefits
- ‘Chained’ sellout
- Thanks to our veterans
- Privatization disastrous
- Leave ‘God’ out
- Immigration a local issue
- Carnegie Free Library’s friends
- More overreach
- Not in public’s interest
- Mayors & guns
- Problems with Roenigk driver