Charities to avoid in 2011
Posted by Christie Malry on January 4, 2011 at 8:47 am
From the same article.
But a group of charities – including Barnardo's, Save the Children and Oxfam, warned last night that the tax rise would hit the poorest disproportionately, with some families now having to pay more than £1,600 in VAT each year. It called on the government to spread the pain more fairly by also increasing its levy on banks, which are generally exempt from VAT.
The charities, all part of the Robin Hood Tax campaign, which is arguing for higher bank levies, pointed to research from the thinktank the Institute of Public Policy Research, which found that banks could afford to pay an extra £20bn – which is also more than the £13bn that the VAT hike is expected to raise.
Shouldn't these charities be focussing on their charitable objects, i.e. helping children in poverty, saving children and helping the poor, by encouraging people to give them money voluntarily Instead of wasting their income devising ever new ways to force people to pay for them? If you're obtaining money by force, then you are, by definition, no longer a charity.
And now they think they can force other people to pay for them, they don't need my donations in 2011. I'll focus on real charities that do.
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by James Hellyer. James Hellyer said: RT @fcablog: New blog post: Charities to avoid in 2011 http://bit.ly/fXOm7P [...]
I would argue that the RHT campaign is specifically political. Charities are of course allowed to lobby government / politicians on issues that are directly related to their own charitable objects.
In this case, they are lobbying to change the way in which taxes are raised, an issue that is not related to their charitable objects, is therefore political, and therefore not legal for charities to do.
Agreed. "Force taxpayers to give us money" can't be a charitable object.