Is Supporting Warriors a Charitable Activity? The Canadian Answer is Pending
Trump recently referred to Canada as our “51st state.” He’d just as soon sink Mexico into the Pacific Ocean and I bet I know why. He can be such an insulting asshole sometimes. But we love him, anyway, I guess. As if Canadians really want to be a part of us. Right now? Are you kidding me? The weather is better but it’s Dodge City around here most of the time. Tesla car bombs and Ford pick-up trucks barreling down Bourbon Street. And those are home grown terrorists, they didn’t sneak across the southern or northern borders.
Besides, we can learn a lot about tax exemption from our Canadian neighbors. I told you a while back that Canada doesn’t buy the ridiculous fiction that fraternity and sorority foundations exist for public benefit when what they really do is finance private fraternity and sorority houses. Greek letter foundations are perfectly exempt in the U.S. Canada is apparently much more serious about policing the definition of “charity” for tax exemption purposes. A Canadian Federal Court of Appeal petition asking whether supporting warriors is a charitable activity proves the point.
We reflexively think two things about the question: (1) supporting warriors who make war on our behalf is charitable, deserving of tax exemption and charitable contributions. But also (2) supporting warriors who make war against us is not charitable, not deserving of tax exemption or charitable contributions. The rational distinction is not as easily articulated as it seems. If it were possible to free ourselves of our self-interest and bias, we would probably be forced to conclude that supporting warriors because they are warriors can never be a charitable activity.
I was not aware of the Canadian case last month, when I posted a thought exercise entitled “Why is supporting warriors a charitable activity?” I intend to use the question this semester to explore the definition of “charity.” The question requires us to articulate a logical rationale for whatever definition we adopt. I just can’t think of a rationale that objectively supports the notion that supporting warriors is a charitable activity. Supporters warriors is either patriotic or treason, but are those labels all that distinguish charity from its opposite?
That seems the question pending before Canada’s Federal Appeals Court. The Revenue Agency came to the intellectually honest conclusion that supporting warriors cannot be charity. Unless they are our warriors. Here is a summary from the Winnipeg Sun:
A Jewish aid group, Ne’eman Foundation Canada of Thornhill, Ontario, was stripped of its charitable status for indirectly providing aid to the Israeli Defence Forces, as revealed by Access To Information records. The foundation argued that its assistance helped individual ex-military personnel and that national service is an integral part of Israeli life, as reported by Blacklock’s Reporter.
“While increasing the effectiveness and efficiency of Canada’s armed forces is charitable, supporting the armed forces of another country is not,” wrote auditors at the Canada Revenue Agency. The Ne’eman Foundation and a separate charity, the Jewish National Fund of Montréal, were both deregistered on Aug. 10 after being accused of violating the Income Tax Act. The Jewish National Fund challenged its ruling in Federal Court, while the Ne’eman Foundation remained silent.
The Foundation was cited for $40,886 in payments to Israel’s Benji Hillman Foundation. The group “aims to help lone combat soldiers and soldiers from deprived backgrounds in the Israeli Defence Forces both during and after their army service,” wrote auditors. Another $25,536 was paid to Lone Soldier, an Israeli charity with a mission “to assist lone soldiers before, during and after their army service.” Auditors documented $1.9 million transferred from the Ne’emen Foundation to Panim el Panim, a charity that operates Israeli high school programs “to strengthen Jewish identity and values and motivation to serve in the Israeli Defence Forces.”
The Ne’emen Foundation consistently asserted that Canadian auditors failed to recognize the significance of military service in Israeli society. In the case of the Lone Soldier charity, “individuals are lone soldiers because they are immigrants without a family” and in need of aid.
I get the feeling Canada is more intellectually honest about tax exemption than we are. CRA admits the proposition that supporting warriors is not charity. That is logical. But supporting Canadian warriors is charity. That is an understandable expression of bias. CRA admits both the objective definition of charity and that its own bias determines what is charity. The JNF asserts that CRA yanked its exemption not because of a bias in favor of Canadian troops. That would be legitimate and defensible. But because of a bias against Jews, which would be illegitimate and indefensible. The Court is going to have to determine whether supporting warriors can be a charitable activity, either way. It can say supporting warriors is not charitable and still say supporting Canadian warriors is charity. That conclusion is only possible, of course, by admitting to an inevitable and justifiable expression of bias in our definition of charity.
The case is now pending before the Federal Court of Appeal. JNF’s initial appeal was dismissed because it was filed in the wrong court. Canada is maybe not as advanced technologically. There is a whole case file online relating to the Jewish National Fund’s pending case. You can obtain copies of “certain documents” [the petitions and briefs?] by emailing the Canadian Federal Court or Court of Appeals. It’s 2025 and public online access is still just a “pilot project.” In the meantime, you can get a sense of JNF’s arguments in support of the notion that supporting warriors is indeed a charitable activity from the JNF webpage.
darryll k. jones