Latest news with #CharitiesAidFoundation
Western Telegraph
12-05-2025
- General
- Western Telegraph
St Davids named UK's most generous city after report
Research by the Charities Aid Foundation (CAF) shows that residents of St Davids donate an estimated 1.61 per cent of their disposable income to charity. This is the highest proportion of any city in the UK. The wider Mid and South Pembrokeshire constituency, which includes St Davids, gives 1.3 per cent of disposable income to charitable causes. The UK Local Giving Report, which explores regional trends in different parliamentary constituencies and places throughout the country, found that generosity does not always correlate with wealth. On average, people give 1.1 per cent of their income to charity. Despite contributing an estimated £49 million to good causes, Kensington and Bayswater residents donate approximately 0.5 per cent of their disposable income. The report also highlights the disparity in charitable contributions across the country. Some of the UK's most affluent areas donate the lowest proportion of their disposable income to charity. The least generous constituencies, by proportion of income, are Kensington and Bayswater (0.5 per cent), Chelsea and Fulham (0.6 per cent), Holborn and St Pancras (0.6 per cent), Battersea (0.7 per cent), and Tooting (0.7 per cent). In contrast, the most generous constituencies are Sheffield Hallam (1.9 per cent), Sutton Coldfield (1.9 per cent), Wirral West (1.6 per cent), Manchester Withington (1.6 per cent), and Sefton Central (1.6 per cent). The report also uncovers an imbalance between generosity, where charities are located, and where their services are most needed. London, which has some of the UK's least generous areas, recorded the highest levels of people using charities for day-to-day needs. More than 40 per cent of residents in Tower Hamlets, Peckham, and Hackney said they, or someone in their household, rely on charities. Tipton and Wednesbury, with 88 charities for a population of around 114,000, was found to have the lowest number of charities per capita. However, generosity in the area was only marginally lower than the UK average, with one per cent of disposable income donated to charitable causes. Neil Heslop OBE, chief executive of the Charities Aid Foundation, said: "Giving plays a vital role in building more resilient charities, to continue their work at the heart of our communities, improving outcomes and strengthening social cohesion. "But with uneven levels of generosity, we need to consider how we encourage those who can afford it, to give more and how we can empower places to attract more philanthropic investment to translate into a more resilient social fabric. "This is not just a challenge for local places. "The answer also starts at a national level, through a new strategic framework for giving that has place – and local communities – firmly at its heart."
Telegraph
11-05-2025
- Business
- Telegraph
Philanthropy is not the sinister tax dodge the Left would have you believe
Can charitable giving be a means to avoid tax? Whenever a story of some very rich person making a large donation is in the news, the sneering refrain of it being a tax write-off will soon be heard. The reality is that charitable giving does not work as a method of avoiding tax – or rather, it can indeed reduce your tax bill to zero, but at a cost that is under the most advantageous circumstances more than double what the tax liability would have been. How the rich use charitable donations to reduce their tax bills is rich fodder for Guardian columnists, but it has been a much hotter political issue for much longer on the other side of the Atlantic. In the United States it has fuelled progressive outrage for over a century. American philanthropy is on a much grander scale than ours. In 2023, charitable giving in the US is estimated to have totalled $557bn (£420bn). According to the Charities Aid Foundation (CAF), last year the UK public donated £15.4bn. Americans gave roughly 27 times more than Britons, while its population is only six times larger. If we were as generous per head of population, we would be giving around £70bn to charity every year. The US is much richer than us, and that gap is growing. But that can only be part of the story for such a large divergence. A popular explanation is that the US tax system treats donations more generously than that of the UK. But the problem with that argument is that it doesn't – our system is just more complex. In fact, as UK taxes are considerably higher (certainly if only US federal taxes are taken into account), our tax relief is also higher. Admittedly, our more complex rules will mean that a lower proportion of relief that is due will actually be claimed. For a higher rate taxpayer to donate £1,000 to charity, the net cost to them will be £600 and for an additional rate payer – someone earning over £125,140 – £550. Those wishing to give £1,000 to their chosen cause must make a payment of £800. Then the charity claims £200 from HMRC in Gift Aid, ie the 20pc basic rate tax paid on the gross amount. The donor can then declare the gift on their annual return, avoiding any higher or additional rate tax on that £1,000. There is a good reason why the UK has Gift Aid rather than the more straightforward US system of simply declaring donations on one's annual tax return to get the relief. In the United States all taxpayers are obliged to file a tax return; in the UK most people on PAYE without outside earnings don't have to. When donations are made to family charitable trusts, rather than what are generally understood as charities, the story becomes more intriguing. The donor will not lose full control of the funds. Set up a charitable trust with your nearest and dearest on the board, then donate £1m. HMRC will top this up with £250,000 and your tax bill will go down by £312,500 (as surely anyone who can afford to donate £1m will be an additional rate taxpayer). The same effect can be had for those with smaller sums to spare or those who don't want to go to the hassle of establishing their own charity by setting up a donor account with CAF or other charitable entities who provide this service. Under both arrangements, the funds don't need to be distributed straight away to deserving causes. But such trusts cannot simply be used to accumulate tax-free funds. In America the rules are complex, but broadly speaking 5pc of a foundation's funds need to be distributed each year. The UK guidelines are rather less rigid, but the same general principle applies. A family charitable trust's board, or in truth often the person who set it up, can still direct how its funds are invested. These decisions do need to be made in the interests of the charity, not those of the donor – but this should usually not be too onerous a requirement. The appeal of such an arrangement to plutocrats is unambiguous. They can put part of their wealth beyond the reach of the taxman while still having significant control over them. So why is this not a tax dodge? Because once the transfer has been made the funds can only be used for charitable purposes and the money can not be called back. They can't be dipped into when a desperate desire for a new yacht arises. One of the great success stories of British philanthropy since its founding in 1958 has been the Garfield Weston Foundation. Its donations have benefitted virtually all our great museums, art institutions and welfare charities across the country. Its funds have an intriguing source. British Sugar, Primark (both owned by Associated British Foods) and Fortnum and Mason all, indirectly, contribute to them. Associated British Foods, with a market capitalisation of around £14.5bn, is 56.6pc owned by Wittington Investments. Fortnum is wholly owned by Wittington. Just over 20pc of Wittington benefits the billionaire Weston family. The other 79.2pc is owned by the foundation, which annually makes donations of around £100m. That is what family charitable trusts can achieve. They are not a tax dodge, but rather make Britain a better place for all of us.
Telegraph
31-03-2025
- Business
- Telegraph
Gen Z stop donating to charity... to go travelling instead
Young people are turning their backs on giving to charities in favour of travel and experiences. Nearly two thirds (65 per cent) of Gen Z – those aged 13 to 28 – are instead prioritising travel, food, arts and live music, according to a survey. The research, carried out by Mastercard, found six in ten (61 per cent) plan to tick off a bucket-list experience this year. It comes as as data reveals the proportion of people in Britain making charitable donations has fallen to a near-decade low. The Charities Aid Foundation (CAF) reported that just half (50 per cent) of people in the UK made any kind of donation. In 2024, 36 per cent of 16- to 24-year-olds donated or sponsored a person for charity, a significant decline from 55 per cent in 2017. People aged 65 or older remain the most likely to donate. The CAF's findings are based on a YouGov policy survey of 13,459 people aged 16 and over. Neil Heslop, CAF's chief executive, said: 'This research starkly demonstrates that we need to do much more to build our culture of giving. We are relying on an ever smaller group of people to give. For the first time, the number who have donated or sponsored someone for charity in the past year has fallen to just half. 'While this is across all age groups, the decline is especially pronounced among young people. We need to write a new chapter in Britain's giving story. One that sees us encourage giving across all age groups and in every part of the country.'
Yahoo
29-03-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Millions give less to charity as bills rise
An estimated four million fewer people are donating money to charity compared to before Covid, owing to squeezed household budgets and a lack of interest from younger individuals. A survey by the Charities Aid Foundation (CAF) found that just half of the people it asked made donations last year. Only a third of 16 to 24-year-olds donated or sponsored someone during the year, down from about a half in 2019. Charities said they are increasingly reliant on a smaller group of people to give while at same time, seeing their own running costs rise. "This research starkly demonstrates that we need to do much more to build our culture of giving," said Neil Heslop, chief executive of CAF, itself a charity and an advisory group for the charitable sector. Pressure from the rising cost of living has hit the number of people donating, according to the survey, based on 13,000 responses. It found: Half of those asked, or 50%, gave money to charity last year, down from 58% in 2019 - the equivalent of four million people A fifth of people, some 21%, said they sponsored someone for charity last year, compared with 32% in 2019 Among 16 to 24-year-olds, 36% donated or sponsored someone over the year, down from 52% in 2019 Donor numbers fell in every area of the UK, but it was most significant in London, as well as the north west and north east of England. Wales saw the most modest decline. The biggest reason for failing to donate was a lack of money, but more than a third said it was due to a lack of interest in charity. Some charities have decided that collecting at scale from individuals requires significant investment and does not make economic sense. Nick Connolly, chief executive of EveryYouth, a network of youth homelessness charities, said: "Mass market individual giving is not on our radar - it's too expensive." Instead, he said they focused more on other sources of funding, such as from foundations or donations from businesses. The economic situation post-Covid had made collection harder, and there were more charities chasing the same donors, he said. "I've been fundraising for 20 years, and it has never been harder than now," he said. "Where we used to compete with 20 charities, we're now competing with 100. "Inevitably it is harder to stand out in such a crowded marketplace. With so much information to process, decision-making can become more of a tick-box exercise which makes it harder for new ideas to cut through."
Yahoo
28-03-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Millions give less to charity as bills rise
An estimated four million fewer people are donating money to charity compared to before Covid, owing to squeezed household budgets and a lack of interest from younger individuals. A survey by the Charities Aid Foundation (CAF) found that just half of the people it asked made donations last year. Only a third of 16 to 24-year-olds donated or sponsored someone during the year, down from about a half in 2019. Charities said they are increasingly reliant on a smaller group of people to give while at same time, seeing their own running costs rise. "This research starkly demonstrates that we need to do much more to build our culture of giving," said Neil Heslop, chief executive of CAF, itself a charity and an advisory group for the charitable sector. Pressure from the rising cost of living has hit the number of people donating, according to the survey, based on 13,000 responses. It found: Half of those asked, or 50%, gave money to charity last year, down from 58% in 2019 - the equivalent of four million people A fifth of people, some 21%, said they sponsored someone for charity last year, compared with 32% in 2019 Among 16 to 24-year-olds, 36% donated or sponsored someone over the year, down from 52% in 2019 Donor numbers fell in every area of the UK, but it was most significant in London, as well as the north west and north east of England. Wales saw the most modest decline. The biggest reason for failing to donate was a lack of money, but more than a third said it was due to a lack of interest in charity. Some charities have decided that collecting at scale from individuals requires significant investment and does not make economic sense. Nick Connolly, chief executive of EveryYouth, a network of youth homelessness charities, said: "Mass market individual giving is not on our radar - it's too expensive." Instead, he said they focused more on other sources of funding, such as from foundations or donations from businesses. The economic situation post-Covid had made collection harder, and there were more charities chasing the same donors, he said. "I've been fundraising for 20 years, and it has never been harder than now," he said. "Where we used to compete with 20 charities, we're now competing with 100. "Inevitably it is harder to stand out in such a crowded marketplace. With so much information to process, decision-making can become more of a tick-box exercise which makes it harder for new ideas to cut through."
