Forbes columnists M. Todd Henderson and Anup Malani make a compelling case for corporate philanthropy:

There is a tax efficiency to corporate giving. Both Pfizer and its shareholders lower their taxable income when the company donates Diflucan to Africa. If Pfizer instead maximized its profits, paid corporate income tax and then let shareholders make charitable donations to treat AIDS-related diseases out of their dividend checks, the money available for charity would be reduced, given the current 35% corporate income tax.

That's certainly true. The tax code is, I would argue, one of the few compelling arguments for charitable giving on the part of public companies. Without the tax benefits, I would argue that companies should stick to their income-earning knitting, delivering strong returns to shareholders who can then use the money to support the causes important to them.

Until 2003, Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway (NYSE: BRK.A) had an innovative giving program that I think was a model of good corporate governance: the company designated a chunk of earnings for philanthropy each year, and then allowed each shareholder to designate a charity for their prorated share.

I'm just concerned about companies donating money to causes that are objectionable to some of their shareholders. For instance, Wal-Mart (NYSE: WMT) is a leading supporter of the Salvation Army, which has a long track record of discriminatory treatment of the gay community.

The government should amend the tax code to make it more efficient for companies to give their shareholders a say in corporate philanthropy.

Is corporate philanthropy in the best interests of shareholders? originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Sun, 02 Mar 2008 11:10:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Google (NASDAQ: GOOG) has announced details of its philanthropic plan (Google.org) to combat climate change, poverty, and what the company called "emerging threats." In a press release, Google said that "Today's announcement includes more than $25 million in new grants and investments to initial partners. The resources come from a commitment by Google's founders to devote approximately 1 percent of the company's equity plus 1 percent of annual profits to philanthropy, as well as employee time."

While Google's founders should certainly be commended for their commitment to issues of social justice and making the world a better place, the donations do raise interesting questions about the purpose and goals of public companies.

Remember, Google's top executives are, in effect, using the capital of the company's shareholders to execute their own philanthropic aims. The "1% of equity and 1% of profits" doctrine certainly runs counter to Milton Friedman's assertion that the social responsibility of a corporation is to increase its profits.

As an investor, I'd rather see companies focus on generating profits, and then letting the shareholders -- the rightful owners of the company's income and equity -- decide what to do with it.

But as long as Google's stock is a strong performer, no one's likely to complain. Plus, you'll make very few friends arguing that corporate philanthropy at public companies is inappropriate.

Google to donate up to $175 million over next 3 years originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Fri, 18 Jan 2008 14:02:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Will you 'pay it forward' with Oprah or rely on good ol' consumption? originally appeared on BloggingStocks on Wed, 22 Nov 2006 15:03:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.