Thread by @robreich

Some questions about philanthropy, large and small, and the re-building of Notre Dame.

nytimes.com/2019/04/17/wor…

1. Tax breaks will be given to French donors. Significant tax concessions, according to @nytimes: 66% deduction for individual donations and 60% for corporate donations. So a 100K Euro donation only costs the donor 34K Euro.

Will foreign donations also be tax advantaged?

2. Will large donors be permitted to wrap themselves in the glory of the restored cathedral? Perhaps even claiming some naming rights?

Will some part of Notre Dame now be known as the Pinault Visitor Center and the Arnault spire?

3. We've been down this road before in the United States. David Rubenstein donated millions to help restore the Washington Monument after a 2011 earthquake damaged the structure. And here's Rubenstein's webpage about that:
davidrubenstein.com/washington-mon…

Rubenstein joined repair workers atop the monument. And then this:

4. Perhaps most important, what say will any of these large donors have in Macron's government? Will their donations buy them access and influence?

5. If Rubenstein's example is any guide, it's complicated.

Has draping himself in the mantle of "patriotic giving" insulated himself from criticism for championing the preposterous carried interest tax loophole for private equity that is the source of his wealth?

Maybe so:

propublica.org/article/how-da…

6. The lesson for me: this is a moment for citizens and journalists to resist the impulse to shower praise on donors to Notre Dame. It's time instead for scrutiny and to ask uncomfortable questions about tax breaks, naming rights, and political access and influence.

Maybe at the end of the day we should celebrate donors to civic monuments and cultural heritage. But we must first scrutinize the arrangement and learn more about what's happening behind the scenes, if anything.