|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
by Don Keelan
At significant personal risk, I ask, can the thousands of Vermont nonprofit organizations be considered a potential source of State revenue?
The Vermont nonprofit sector is one of the largest sectors of the State’s economy, measured by revenue generated and employees. It also has significant influence and is primarily unregulated, except for the healthcare sector.

I noted back in May 2024 that, according to the Secretary of State’s office, there were over 19,000 registered nonprofits, with approximately 8,597 active. In addition, according to the State, there are approximately 2,200 foreign nonprofits, of which about 1,100 are active in Vermont.
The revenue generated is staggering. In its December 2024 issue, VB VermontBiz listed the most recent annual revenue of 707 domestic nonprofits in a six-page article. The total revenue disclosed was $8,594,065,769. This is only from the 707 listed nonprofits; it does not include the other 7,890 active nonprofits.
If one assumes that the non-listed ones have an average annual revenue of $500,000, the total to be added to the above would be $3,945,000,000, bringing the total (only domestic nonprofits) to approximately $12.5 billion of revenue.
With our State desperate for new revenue sources besides its traditional ones—real estate taxes, income taxes, a plethora of fees, and sales taxes—would it make sense to assess an excise tax on the gross revenue of the State’s nonprofits?
An excise tax of one percent of annual gross revenue would generate $125 million in new revenue ($12.5 billion X 1%). Of course, as with all tax programs, there would be exceptions.
One such cohort of the nonprofit industry to which an exception or a partial exception could be provided is the healthcare industry. It is not well known that healthcare provider organizations currently pay a tax to the State.
The regional hospital in Bennington must pay the State “a Provider Tax.” In its Fiscal 2023 report, this amounted to approximately $11 million—generally, 6% of net patient revenue—and part of the nearly $200 million the State collects annually.
Not far from the hospital is the Vermont Veterans Home, a quasi-state/nonprofit institution. According to a senior executive, the Home pays the State $639,539 annually. The Provider Tax is assessed at $4,919.53 times the number of beds the Home has licensed.
Unlike other taxes the State receives, the tax collected from the healthcare sector is then matched by the federal government to cover the cost of Medicaid. In other words, it is collected for a specific program.
The concept of matching or earmarked could also apply to the proposed excise tax on nonprofits. In this case, the funds collected could be specifically assigned to rebuild the State’s and localities’ defenses against future flood damage.
The state once provided significant funding to mitigate the damage from flooding. Bridges were rebuilt, concrete barriers were installed to channel potential flood waters, and sediment and stones were removed from the State’s rivers and brooks.
Also, before 2008, the State contributed upwards of 30% to local school construction programs. However, the State has had to fund a massive social welfare program that now takes up a significant portion of its funds.
While the State has retail, agricultural, tourist, and manufacturing sectors, none have grown as the nonprofit sector over the years. While many of the organizations that make up the latter and provide valuable services, many still masquerade as nonprofits and are, in fact, private corporations taking advantage of an almost unregulated industry—answerable only to themselves.
I cannot say with any degree of certainty that the State’s spending on education, healthcare, or social programs will ever come under fiscal control. But what is out of the State’s power is Mother Nature and how it has created enormous devastation in recent years.
It is time for the State to step up its game and mitigate future damage. This will likely cost billions of dollars, and our Vermont DC delegation can only provide so much funding. Therefore, a new source of funding must be created.
I know many will scream at me for suggesting such a suggestion. However, they can join the chorus of homeowners, small business owners, and renters who have been screaming for years, “Vermont, get spending under control and do something to control our tax burden.”
The author is a U.S. Marine (retired), CPA, and columnist living in Arlington, VT.
Discover more from Vermont Daily Chronicle
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Categories: Commentary, State Government, Taxes









Posting this puts ideas in many minds – legislators included. I’m not savvy enough to say it’s good to suggest this. Perhaps it is needed, but not without some tight handcuffs to prohibit additional expenditures, while trying to right some wrongs and slash some hefty spending packages from the picture.
I’ll toss out a controversial thought being bantered about nationally. Might it be time to let school funding and curriculum be locally managed and get rid of the Department of Education.
Perhaps it is needed? I will say this despite vehemently saying VERMONT HAS A SPENDING PROBLEM! Too many “bigger state” ideas have permeated Vermont since 9/11, Amtrak adding stops, and covid have shifted a bunch of “population dense mindset” people into Vermont. In a state that notoriously does not promote non-tourism based business well, is it a good idea to now bruise the other businesses budgets? I really feel we need to look inward as first and progressively set the non-commiefornia mindset standard of progressiveness and start thinking about our foundation. This state does not have enough budget for big state ideas, plain and simple, and nothing in the current outlook supports attempting to change it. If someone out there not toking on a pipe dream has information that shows otherwise, please feel free to share it with me. Much of the news, especially that revolving around people who have taken government seats in our state without having lived here for at least a decade first, very much feels to me like a gig mindset get rich fast scheme has taken over our state. As I have said before – hunt em down and give em an earful. Long time Vermonters are sick of the abuse and the mess many of you have brought with you. You were supposed to leave that crap at the border when you moved here, plain and simple, much like your impatient driving habits.
You nailed it. Vermont has a population of just over 647 thousand and an average working age of 43 or so. Half of that population maybe, works and of that not everyone pays taxes. Vermont is aging, the legislature taxing those same people and young people see that and leave. Until the legislative mindset changes, the exodus from Vermont will continue. Our legislators need to realize what you stated that big state policies just won’t work here.
All non-profits should pay some amount of tax, including religious ones.
Don, I always look forward to your articles, and this is one of the best. But, remember, you’re in Vermont, and when you speak the word “non-profit,” you should do so nearly in a whisper, and ever so reverently.
Meanwhile, they are one of the biggest consumers of our tax dollars, many have overlapping missions, and each has a well paid executive director whose primary job seems to be to lobby the legislature for more money.
There’s no reason why most of them can’t be taxed, as you suggest. Is it time, perhaps, to do some digging to see what this alternative semi-governmental structure is really doing, and how well it’s doing it?
How about we make nonprofits truly nonprofits. No employees everyone is a volunteer and all money goes to the purpose of the nonprofit!
Also no more public private partnerships. Government should not be picking winners and losers.