Which IRS rules define the required contents of a contemporaneous written acknowledgement for QCDs?
Executive summary
The internal rules that govern what a contemporaneous written acknowledgment (CWA) must contain are rooted in the substantiation rules of Internal Revenue Code §170(f) and the IRS guidance that implements it, and those rules—summarized in IRS guidance such as the Substantiating Charitable Contributions page and Publication 526—set the baseline requirements donors and donees must meet for qualified charitable distributions (QCDs) to be recognized for tax purposes [1] [2] [3]. For QCDs the CWA must include enough information to substantiate the amount and timing of the gift and must explicitly address whether any goods or services were received—failure to meet these elements has been treated strictly by courts and can jeopardize the QCD treatment [2] [4] [5].
1. Legal authorities that define the requirement
Congress placed the contemporaneous written-acknowledgment requirement in §170(f) of the Internal Revenue Code, and the IRS has incorporated that provision into its donor substantiation guidance; professional summaries and IRS publications consistently reference §170(f) as the statutory source for the CWA rules that apply to contributions of $250 or more [1] [2] [6]. QCDs themselves are governed by separate IRA statutes and IRS guidance—e.g., Section 408(d) and Pub. 590-B describe eligibility and mechanics for QCDs—but the substantiation requirement for the charitable side relies on §170(f) and related IRS substantiation rules [7] [3].
2. What the IRS says must appear in a contemporaneous written acknowledgment
The IRS guidance states there is no single prescribed form, but the CWA must supply "sufficient information to substantiate the amount of the contribution" and generally must be obtained by the donor no later than the due date of the tax return for the year of the contribution to be “contemporaneous” [2]. Practitioners and nonprofit guides emphasize specific, recurring elements that the IRS expects to see: the amount of the cash contribution, the date of the contribution, identification of the donee organization, and a clear statement about whether any goods or services were provided in exchange for the gift—language that explicitly confirms "no goods or services were received" is commonly required for QCDs to be accepted as non-taxable distributions [2] [8] [4].
3. How these requirements intersect with QCDs specifically
Although a QCD is a distribution from an IRA (governed by IRA rules such as Section 408(d) and Pub. 590-B), IRS substantiation doctrine still applies: QCDs of $250 or more must be substantiated with a CWA meeting §170(f) requirements, and many practitioners treat the “no goods or services” statement as indispensable because courts have applied a strict standard to substantiation and acknowledgments in similar contexts [7] [1] [5]. IRS publications and nonprofit guidance therefore advise charities to issue acknowledgments that confirm the QCD amount and date, identify the organization, and state whether any goods or services were provided so the donor can substantiate the QCD on Form 1040 [2] [8] [3].
4. Practical implications, enforcement, and debate
In practice this means charities should prepare acknowledgments that combine the cash-record elements and the CWA elements so donors can meet the contemporaneous requirement and avoid losing QCD treatment [2] [8]. Courts and the IRS have little tolerance for loose compliance, prompting nonprofit and advisory firms to recommend conservative, explicit language in acknowledgments [5] [4]. There is, however, a policy debate: the Taxpayer Advocate has urged reconsideration of the strict contemporaneous CWA rule as burdensome and sometimes harsh, suggesting alternative recordkeeping that could reduce inadvertent denials, an implicit critique of current IRS rigidity [9]. The reporting analyzed here reflects that tension—statutory rigor under §170(f) and implementation by IRS guidance on one hand, and practitioner and taxpayer calls for reform on the other [1] [9].