Comments

[Anoneumouse]

There is no doubt abuse is taking place with the Government giving tax payers money to fake charities and NGO's.

[Commentator]

Is this the level of economic illiteracy that a PPE degree from Oxford gets you? People get a tax deduction for giving to charity. Even after that tax deduction has been taken into account, they have paid out substantially more than any tax saved. If that is "abuse", then so is deducting interest on a business loan.

By the way, we are most unlikely to get to the bottom of Cameron's real income. He lives tax-free at our expense at Chequers and in Number 10, and I suspect that much of his and Sam's millions are tied up in trusts which distribute little income.....so none of this will show up on his tax return, even if he publishes them.

[Clr Ralph Baldwin]

Indeed, i know a few Labour MPs and ex-MPs who set up charities to "donate" to.....

[david1]

I get this feeling that errrr those proposals might get lost in the post.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/who-are-you-calling-tax-dodgers-philanthropists-enraged-by-slur-7631365.html

[Clr Ralph Baldwin]

Here's a clue...look for location based charities with vague objectives....

[It doesn't add up...]

Repeal the Charities Act 2008 and sack Suzy Leather who approved these fake charities. Job done.

[Cleethorpes Rock]

If there is any abuse, it's because of the sorts of organisations that are allowed to pass themselves off as charities. Real good causes shouldn't lose out and any changes should be aimed at tightening the rules on what counts as a charity, not hammering hospices and fighting philanthropists.

The headlines this generates will be a disaster for the coalition. Another case of the juice not being worth the squeeze.

[Dave B]

From what Mr Cameron said, it sounds like people have been able to claim relief on donations to foreign charities. It should be a simple matter to restrict the tax relief to donations to UK charities.

[david1]

I'm sure you'll name them, afterall we now live in an era of transparency.

[Dave B]

Yes! That's an abuse I'd like to see being tackled. They could start with the FCO.

http://www.spectator.co.uk/essays/all/5592938/the-foreign-offices-new-green-orders.thtml

[Faustiesblog (ex-Conservative)]

When is the government going to cut its spending?

Tax revolt needed!

[It doesn't add up...]

Here is one high profile case from the past:

http://order-order.com/2008/11/30/electoral-commission-is-investigating/

Gordon Brown no less.

[It doesn't add up...]

Not in EU law...

[Elaine Turner]

Babies and bathwater. Sledgehammer and nuts. This wouldn't be a difficult problem to solve with a little common sense and application.

[Anoneumouse]

It is worth visiting http://fakecharities.org/

[A. Stonish]

The Royal Opera House pays its chief executive nearly 400,000 pounds per annum. Voters probably consider that this charity is being very charitable towards the chief executive. Voters who rely on the NHS and state schools might reasonably question the wisdom of unlimited tax breaks for donations to such charities.

Other charities, however, are not so profligate.

[Clr Ralph Baldwin]

I won't have to. The press will and i agree an age of transparency is coming and it's long overdue. To re-build faith in the system and avoid some of the troubles other countries will endure.

[Dave B]

Thanks. I already check any new charities with that website before making a donation. A genuine public service.

[david1]

So you don't actually know of any then?

[perdix]

The problem is that the Charity Commission, even assuming they were competent, has no jurisdiction outside the UK.So they are unable to effectively monitor allowed donations to charities in the EU outside the UK.Did I read something about Romania...?

[Clr Ralph Baldwin]

Lol thats a very clumsy attempt to call a bluff on reality, of course I do i even checked one out and found Tony Blair had contributed to it and this "charity" was based in the North of England. This particular example was referenced by a prospective Parliamentary candidate on Labourlist which got me curious in the first place. Thing is David the press have the greater ability to investigate it further to see how commonplace and widespread this "business" is and obtain more information. I have little doubt they will, they are cool like that and timing is best ;)

[Surreybill]

To Cllr Ralph Baldwin above - If what you are saying is true that is political dynamite, and it will make expenses gate look like a tea party.

[david1]

Wow! quite the little news hound, so give us so more details, I'm agog, my gogs have never been so a: yawn!!

The one thing I'm quite sure about, that when a government goes down this road, they are always the ones that suffer. Even as I type this, I'm sure the Daily Mail's finest are going through the affairs of Dave's best mates and they won't rest until they've got a list, a list which they'll spread all over the front page, with the sort of typeface normally reserved for the second coming.

I'm also quite sure, that this will be another 'trees' and it won't belong before its heavily modified, heavily modified out of existence.

[Dave B]

Tax policy is not yet set at an EU level.

[Clr Ralph Baldwin]

I'm not sure Ken Livingstone would agree with you Dave, I'm afraid you are more wrong than you know and are completely out of your depth, I was exposing cretins in the Labour Party whose "flunk tanks" and platforms usually with a charity status was being funding by the big corporations years ago and I know precisely what most MPs genuinely fear. In terms of Labour well, its not quite the Socialist or moral behavior one expects is it? perhaps you would like to explain to me what Labours position is on Big Corporations funding future MPs and forming policy directly and indirectly? What do you think Attlee would have thought of it or Kier Hardy? But then we would not have ATOS, a private company assessing the diabled would we, without dear Purnell, another product of a Corporate funded charitable think-tank lol.

[Public Sector Worker]

Who cares what they think? If they're really feeling that charitable then losing the tax relief won't stop them. After all, I'm forever seeing interviews with millionaires who quite happily bang on about how they'd love to pay more tax. Well now they can.

Again, though, isn't this the sort of action that UK Uncut were looking for? Rich people paying their fair share of tax? Or is only a certain type of rich person that the left want to pay all the tax?

[It doesn't add up...]

But the EU does demand that all EU charities are treated alike.

[It doesn't add up...]

It's no more than voters expect. I noted from a recent poll that 74% of Labour voters consider politicians corrupt compared with about 50% for other parties: I presume that is because of their knowledge of their own.

[Dave B]

Sorry, you're quite right.

But the FT reports that this angle is a red herring. So what the actual motive is for the proposed change is a mystery.

http://blogs.ft.com/westminster/2012/04/how-the-offshore-charity-tax-scam-works/

[Mick mcgough]

Where there is abuse,sort it,where there isn't leave be:simples.

Remember publication of a politician's tax return won't disclose the corrupt bung,the cash for questions/influence or even the morally corrupt tax free gain from lying ( to HMRC or Parliament) by flipping one's home.