by David Safier
Commenter MindlessMama makes a good point about the need for stricter regulation of STOs.
As I read this, it makes me think there's a big opening for fraud. I'm not suggesting that's the case w/Yarbrough's STO. But we see what a lack of oversight has yielded for our mortgage industry, kids. So what I see here, is without oversite and/or regulation of STOs, an uninformed contributor could potentially contribute their tax credits to a sham organization that never delivers funds to a school and/or a child's tuition. In one solid year, with some good advertising, a fly by night STO could collect contributions, pocket money, and be gone before those dollars would ever be called for a child's tuition payment. And with a reciept from the STO, the state would still be required to honor that dollar-for-dollar reduction of tax liablitlies. After all, how could the state declare the STO was a fraud? There isn't a mechanism or industry standard that I've found that would prevent it.
Mama's comment is to the side of what we've been discussing, but it's in the same ballpark. A sham STO is an extreme example. The question I've been asking is, does Yarbrough's STO shave extra expense money off the top? Better oversight and some careful analysis of the books would add needed transparency in both situations.
Discover more from Blog for Arizona
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.