How much should you give?

By Liz Pulliam Weston

New York's new governor, David Paterson, clearly didn't anticipate the series of events that led to his abrupt rise to power: the prostitution scandal involving Eliot Spitzer and Spitzer's subsequent resignation.

We know this because of Paterson's recently released tax return. Paterson and his wife apparently gave just $150 to charity in 2007 -- out of an income of $269,815 -- and earned a rousing Bronx cheer from many New Yorkers.

Surely the Patersons would have given more had they known the rest of us would have a chance to pass judgment.

Politicians used to the scrutiny of the national stage know they need to show deductible proof that they care. For example:

• President-elect Barack Obama and his wife, Michelle, donated just under 6% of their $4.2 million income to charitable causes last year.

• Hillary and Bill Clinton contributed 9.4% of their $109 million income from 2000 to 2007.

• President Bush and his wife, Laura, bestowed nearly 18% of their $936,111 income in 2007 on various charities.

• Republican nominee John McCain, married to an heiress, donated 26% of his $405,409 income.

Of course, the rest of us don't have to worry much about our generosity, or lack thereof, becoming a national issue.

But many of us wonder: Are we giving enough? How much should we give?

Give -- even when you're hurting?

The issue gets even stickier when the economy stumbles. There's more need as people lose jobs and turn to charities for help with food, clothing and other necessities. But those of us who still have work may feel like we should be boosting our savings to cope with possible setbacks rather than giving more away.

Now, most of us give at least something to worthy causes. Two-thirds of U.S. households with incomes of less than $100,000 give to charity, according to the Giving USA Foundation, the leading researcher on philanthropy.

Charitable contributions added up to $295 billion in 2006, the latest year for which the Giving USA Foundation has statistics. That was a 6.6% increase from 2005. Not bad.

But many of us give "kind of willy-nilly," says Sandra Miniutti, the vice president of nonprofit evaluator Charity Navigator. About half of charitable donations are made between Thanksgiving and New Year's Eve, as people who itemize their deductions rush to get last-minute tax write-offs and others respond to an influx of end-of-year pleas or the spirit of the holiday season.

• Smart Spending blog: How to give even when you're broke

But if charitable giving is important to us, shouldn't we be a little more systematic about it? Shouldn't it be a part of our budgets from the beginning of the year, rather than just an afterthought?

And shouldn't we try to eke out a little more?

Savvy givers, Miniutti says, don't leave their contributions to the last minute. They take some time at the beginning of the year to decide what type of good works they want to support. Then they research their options to find the worthiest charities.

They also concentrate their giving, rather than spreading themselves thin by handing out smaller donations to lots of different causes.

"It's the exact opposite of the stock market, where you want to diversify to reduce risk," Miniutti says. "If you concentrate on just a few charities, your contributions will make more of a difference . . . and the charity is likely to value you more."

That means, Miniutti says, that the charity will be less tempted to sell your name to other charities, which then pelt you with yet more appeals. These appeals are often a waste of money for the charities that send them out and are certainly annoying to the recipients, she says, but many nonprofits feel compelled to try to beef up their returns from small donors by selling their names.

Continued: IRS requires evidence for deductions

 1 | 2 | next >