Would you support blood donation as a non-cash charitable donation on Schedule A of your taxes?

I am not trying to assign a value to human life with this suggestion but I think it would encourage people to donate blood more.

Nobody likes paying taxes and the Red Cross needs blood constantly. What would be wrong with the IRS stating that you get a $100 itemized deduction for each time you donate? Doesn't the IRS somewhat put a value on human life already with their personal exemptions?

I know people hate getting stuck by needles but I know they hate getting stuck by the IRS even more.

Response to first answerer
If people want to lie and infect people they are going to do it..regardless of the deduction. Screening matters are in place for this reason. Sure, you are going to have some "bad eggs" but that still leaves the vast majority of "good eggs".

Also the deduction would be an incentive to donate....similiar to non-profit donations. People donate because they want too but it doesn't hurt that they get a tax break. In my years doing tax work, I have yet to come across anybody that has charitable contributions but refuses to take them as a deduction...in the event it is better for them to itemize.

No, I would not support this.

For starters it is an exclusionary deduction, everyone can donate a couch, but not everyone can donate blood.

Second, the couch has to be resold to be a contribution. If the donation has no resale it is not a legal donation. I would be surprised to hear that the only people receiving donated blood had to pay for it.

Third, it is just another tax deduction that really will not help anyone, but hurt the country with further drain. That, and the cost of setting everything up for the blood banks to start reporting to the IRS who is giving blood would not be worth any benefit of blood.

Also, I am not sure that it would increase the blood supply. Sure, you would have some odd people coming in as they would be selling blood...blood unlikelyto pass drug and health screens, but also there will be others who will resent government control of their donation and simply stop donating to avoid being on the IRS blood donor list.

Well, the IRS cannot do it, because the law is clear that body parts have no "value". However, Congress could.

I quite agree that there would be little cost to the Red Cross or other organizations that collect blood; all _they_ would have to do is sign a form similar to the blank forms you get at most thrift stores.

The only question in my mind is whether those who OFFER to donate blood, but are ineligible, should get the deduction -- and, if not, whether distinguishing between them is a violation of privacy laws.

It seems a reasonable suggestion, although a $25 credit is probably more appropriate (and politically correct) than a $100 deduction.

For what it's worth, the last few times I've donated, the Red Cross offered $5 coupons (presumably donated to them). I don't think the checked whether the person was eligible to donate.

Not really.

Let's say this passes. A whole bunch of people go out and donate.

Some aren't healthy, but wanted the deduction so they lied at intake and infect someone.

Others are healthy, but don't itemize and don't understand why they didn't get a tax break.

It's an interesting suggestion. Although, I will say that if the IRS adopted such a deduction, they'd probably allow for just a single $100 deduction added into your contributions. Maybe a separate line item or something. I doubt they'd allow $100 for each donation. People would abuse the system. They've had enough problems with charitable contributions; they're not going to create more.

It'd be a hard sell, but outside of that, I think it's a great idea!

P.S. An aside to Landlord below me, IRS doesn't receive record of ANY contributions, cash, non-cash, or otherwise. So, there would be no system to set up, no IRS donor list for people to be concerned about, etc. A slip of paper showing the date of donation given to the donor would be enough.