美国高校团体集中反对国税局免税提案，意见征集截止时收到近2400条意见
美国华盛顿消息，美国财政部与国税局关于私立非营利高校免税资格的提案，在意见征集截止日遭到高校团体集中反对。据《高等教育内幕》11 月 4 日报道，截至 11 月 3 日星期二、即意见征集最后一天，国税局已收到近 2,400 条意见，机构在最终确定规则之前必须审阅并回应这些意见。提案本身于 9 月公布，本稿的新进展是意见征集截止与各团体提交的反对意见，不是提案首次公布。
提案规定，如果认定一所私立学院或大学存在基于种族或族裔的歧视，官员可撤销其免税资格。国税局称，该规则意味着“一切形式的种族歧视”，无论其意图或合法性如何（例如以补救或多元化目标为理由的歧视），都违反美国的基本公共政策，从而使学校无法享受联邦所得税豁免。规则覆盖的范围包括教育政策管理、招生政策、奖学金与贷款项目、体育项目以及其他由学校管理或学校支持的项目。美国大学与学院企业管理人员协会称，失去免税资格可能“严重损害机构的财务稳定性”，因为捐赠人将无法再为捐款抵税。
反对意见集中在规则的模糊性与适用范围。美国教育理事会主席特德·米切尔代表本机构与另外 40 个高等教育团体提交了约 15 页的意见，参与团体包括全国独立学院与大学协会、美国大学教授协会。米切尔写道，目前不清楚“有争议甚至冒犯性的关于种族或历史议题的课堂讲授”是否会落入国税局宽泛的“歧视”定义，也不清楚哪些校园或学生活动会被视为“学校管理或学校支持”；他还称，鲍勃·琼斯大学案设定的撤销门槛很高，而提案可能惩罚招生之外的孤立、偶发或无意的事件。加州独立学院与大学协会主席克里斯汀·索亚雷斯代表 85 多所院校写道，提案“没有明确的安全港、事先通知与纠正期、纠正行动程序，也没有在机构免税资格受到威胁之前的中间制裁”。财政部长斯科特·贝森特 9 月公布提案时称，学校把基于种族的优惠“重新包装为公平、包容或多元化”并不能改变其歧视性质；国税局为提案援引的依据是 1983 年鲍勃·琼斯大学诉美国案，该案以 8 比 1 裁定维持撤销一所因拒绝录取跨种族婚姻者而被认定歧视的学校的免税资格。本稿不写最终规则内容与生效时间，两者均未公布。
U.S. Higher Education Groups Rally Against IRS Tax-Exemption Proposal as Comment Period Closes With Nearly 2,400 Comments
WASHINGTON — A Treasury Department and Internal Revenue Service proposal on the tax-exempt status of private, nonprofit colleges drew concentrated opposition from higher education groups as its comment period closed. According to Inside Higher Ed on November 4, as of Tuesday, November 3 — the last day to submit public comments — the agency had received nearly 2,400 comments, which it must review and respond to before possibly finalizing the change. The proposal itself was unveiled in September; the new development in this report is the close of comments and the opposition filings, not the proposal's first publication.
Under the proposal, officials could revoke a private college or university's tax exemption if they determine it has discriminated based on race or ethnicity. The IRS said its regulation would mean "all forms of racial discrimination in education, regardless of the intent behind or the legality of such discrimination (for example, where such discrimination is defended as serving remedial or diversity-related objectives), are against a fundamental public policy of the United States and thus preclude a school's exemption from Federal income tax." The rule would cover the administration of educational and admissions policies, scholarship and loan programs, athletic programs, and any other school-administered or school-supported program. The National Association of College and University Business Officers said losing the exemption could "severely undermine institutional financial stability," because donors would no longer be able to write contributions off on their taxes.
Opposition focused on the rule's vagueness and scope. American Council on Education President Ted Mitchell submitted a roughly 15-page comment on behalf of his organization and 40 other higher education groups, including the National Association of Independent Colleges and Universities and the American Association of University Professors. Mitchell wrote that it is unclear whether "contentious or even offensive classroom instructions on race or history topics" could fall into the IRS's broad definition of "discrimination," or what campus or student activities could be deemed "school-administered or school-supported"; he also wrote that the Bob Jones case set a high bar for revocation, while the proposal could punish isolated, episodic or unintentional incidents outside admissions. Kristen F. Soares, president of the Association of Independent California Colleges and Universities, which says it represents more than 85 institutions, wrote that the proposal offers "no clear safe harbors, notice-and-cure period, corrective action process, or intermediate sanctions before an institution's tax-exempt status is put at risk." Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said when he unveiled the plan in September that schools rebranding race-based preferences as "equitable, inclusive, or diversity-enhancing" does not change their discriminatory nature; the IRS cited the 1983 case Bob Jones University v. United States, decided 8-1, which upheld revoking the exemption of a school that denied admission over interracial marriage. This report does not state the final rule's content or effective date; neither has been announced.
来源：美国国税局
发布：GSM·美国（发布链接）
图片来源：图片来源：位于华盛顿联邦三角区的美国国税局大楼，摄影 Carol M. Highsmith，公共领域（Wikimedia Commons）
GSM Global · 本篇英文版 English edition of this story
