(Of course, it is possible that the Obamas may have made gifts to other worthy causes that were not deductible for federal income tax purposes.)

What is surprising, given the recent controversy over Obama's membership in the Trinity United Church of Christ, is how little the Obamas gave to charity

Let's call this sentence what it is, shall we? This is an invention, a tool to leverage one controversy out of another.

if you check out the IRS Statistics of Income, you'll find that the average taxpayer, in the obama's bracket, contributes about the same amount (as a % of gross income) as the obamas do.

i'm surprised that prof. caron (whose blog i have on my favorites list) failed to note that, he should have.

as well, what stood out for me was the relative pittance of interest & dividend income earned by the obamas, as a % of their AGI; whatever it is they're doing with their money, clearly they aren't investing much of it. however, i must also note that investments in deferred funds (IRA's, 401(k)'s, etc) aren't listed on tax returns, so that could be where they are putting that money.

in the grand scheme of things, this isn't something i'd really consider pertinent, with respect to deciding on the democratic nominee for president.

I also believe that Mr. William Jefferson Clinton has given/raised hundreds of millions including efforts for Tsunami victims, Katrina fundraising, and many other worthy causes.

Anchor: Have you donated regularly
BO    : Yes

As to the specific facts on this issue, what strikes me is that they have very little investment or interest income to match their very little "claimed" charitable giving.  Absent some evidence that they're buying lots of fancy cars and home electronicsl, that indicates to me that they are using a lot of money to pay off large student loans which makes sense.

And only $1000?  I realize they may not have reported everything, but that's still pretty low.  I believe a report showed the most generous American's come from the Deep South--not the "wealthy" states.

We need an Agency Of Giving that would allow Public Figures to show that they are giving 10% of their income. Maybe a Parade featuring needy people lining the streets shouting "Thank You!"

I really think this is the issue that will put Hillary in The White House, especially if it turns out that Bill often devotes 10% of his speaking fees to charity: that is about 10 or 15 thousand dollars. When you measure that against Obama: the choice is clear.

Clearly feeling a bit stung by our earlier note that according to their 2000-2004 tax returns, Barack and Michelle Obama gave less than 1% of their income to charity, Obama campaign spox Tommy Vietor writes to note that even though their 2007 tax return is not yet ready, the Obamas "gave $240,000 to charity in 2007."

The Obamas' returns are striking on a number of levels. They show that the couple made very few charitable contributions, sometimes less than 1 percent of taxable income, until Mr. Obama began his run for the White House.

In 2004, before Mr. Obama entered the Senate, he and his wife gave $2,500 to charity, 1.2 percent of the taxable income. The next year, the donations jumped, to $77,315, or nearly 5 percent of the taxable income.

"Their charitable giving only went up when it looked like he was campaigning for the presidential office," said Paul L. Caron, a professor at the University of Cincinnati College of Law and editor of the TaxProf Blog, which examines tax questions and has posted the returns.

And then there's the matter of Obama wrongfully deducting a contribution and having to file an amended return:

The 2006 return also show a charitable deduction for a $13,000 donation to the Congressional Black Caucus. It is illegal to deduct political contributions as charitable contributions. The campaign said Mr. Obama had filed an amended return to eliminate that item as a deduction.