Gordon Brown has no choice but to grant tax 
relief on the Madeleine McCann search fund on humanitarian grounds. How could any government feel comfortable in boosting its coffers this way, profiteering from the tragedy of these horrific and exceptional circumstances?
Every penny is desperately needed to finance an international search and pay for private investigators to track down the four-year-old girl snatched from her bed.
As things stand, the fund will have to pay 28p tax for every £1 it receives in donations as it is exempt from gift aid, and it is also liable for VAT. And tax will have to be paid on all interest accrued by the fund. The McCann’s were hoping for charitable status, but their request was turned down by the Charity Commission because the money raised was not for the “wider public good”. How cold and inhumane does that sound, knowing these dreadful facts?
I wonder how comfortable Gordon Brown feels about this after promising the family he would help in any way he could. Now is the time to demonstrate that. The fund stands at almost £116,000.
And I hope other deserving cases will be shown the same compassion, like the children from Chernobyl whose charity is forced to pay airport tax on their respite breaks to the UK. After I highlighted the story on my blog, a very generous blogger Tom Paine paid the money on their behalf.
Surely charity begins at home, let’s see some of it please, Gordon ….
Hi Ellee, I’m not really sure about this one. I can see why chairtable status is being sought, but I also see the Charity Commission’s point. In awarding charitable status, they have to take account of the tests as to what constitutes a chairty. A fund set up for the benefit of one person (Madeleine/her family) obviously fails this test. I know the family said that any money left over will be used to help find other missing persons, but perhaps that on its own is not enough to rescue this fund from non-charitabe status.
All manner of people suffer all manner of misfortunes. Everyone is free to set up a fund if they need money to address their problems. Shall all such funds be entitled to charitable status? And if not, what is so special about the Madeleine McCann fund that should qualify it for charitable status against the general rules? Is it because of the publicity?
This is a tough decision, but I suspect the Charity Commission got it right. As to whether the Government shoud step in with a special concession for this case, I suppose they might, who knows? But if they do so, they should be prepared with an answer to this question: why give a concession in this case, and not in any others?
Well done on your work Ellee – its a good job you are doing.
I agree that this is a complex issue. Has the Shadow Chancellor commented, I wonder?
We can only hope she (and others) turn up soon. The agony of having a child abducted is unimaginable.
I, too, can see the Charity Commission’s point. I know that the McCanns have said that the fund will eventually be used to find other missing children but the point is that, at the moment, it is not. I of course see the need for the fund: the McCanns are in a nightmare situation, unable at the moment to carry on with their jobs or their lives. But I was disturbed to see a report on a garage owner in Britain forcing his customers to contribute: there should still be choice in this matter.
That you Mutley.
I think there should be a review of exceptional cases like this, as well as the children from Chenobyl, so they are exempt from paying tax when the money is clearly needed for charitable reasons. One definition of charity is “benevolence or generosity toward others or toward humanity.” These cases fit that description perfectly.
I question the setting up of the fund in the first place. It was very business like and organised. It is not the kind of situation generally associated with the need for a fighting fund. I have likened this to ambulance chasers, the announcement was made too early in the police investigation and has diverted attention. The only fact to emerge is that Madeliene is missing. It is not a fact that she was abducted. It is not a fact that the flat was broken into. The media is reporting hearsay as fact and it does not help matters. In my view, if this case had occurred over here the police would be concentrating on the McCanns.
I too understand the decision of the Charity Commission. Who would decide what an “exceptional case” was? I bet everyone on here could come up with half a dozen cases they know of which could very easily be regarded as an exceptional case. People set up funds for all sorts of reasons – medical treatment abroad is probably the most common, should these all be counted as exceptional?
I’m also not convinced that paying a team of private investigators or possible witnesses is a good use of money at this stage or if it is creating distractions from the main police investigation.