Gift aid can be claimed on National Trust membership fees yet the benefit provided by free entry to all their properties must be immense. Family membership for two adults and all children under 18 is £126 a year. Six family visits to typical properties would cost more than that. In theory you could visit every property in the country during a membership year. That would be worth well into four figures for £126.
'Give me my bike, a bit of sunshine - and a stop-off for a lunchtime pint - and I'm a happy man.' - Reg Baker
pete75 wrote: ↑10 Apr 2021, 10:08am
Gift aid can be claimed on National Trust membership fees yet the benefit provided by free entry to all their properties must be immense.
For some reason unknown to me, the rules changed some years ago to exclude entry to a charities properties as a members benefit for the purposes of Gift Aid.
pete75 wrote: ↑10 Apr 2021, 10:08am
Gift aid can be claimed on National Trust membership fees yet the benefit provided by free entry to all their properties must be immense.
For some reason unknown to me, the rules changed some years ago to exclude entry to a charities properties as a members benefit for the purposes of Gift Aid.
Even though almost all who join the NT and English Heritage "charities" do so for that very reason.
'Give me my bike, a bit of sunshine - and a stop-off for a lunchtime pint - and I'm a happy man.' - Reg Baker
pete75 wrote: ↑10 Apr 2021, 7:46pm
Even though almost all who join the NT and English Heritage "charities" do so for that very reason.
Yep, those are the rules. They were specifically changed to allow free entry to members, so someone must have made a case for it.
Whatever the reason, it only applies to a charities properties, so it has no relevance to the Cycling UK Gift Aid situation.
I believe that a lot of the stately homes that admit paying visitors are owned by charitable trusts ie there are more charities involved besides the NT. This is another tax-efficient wheeze.
pete75 wrote: ↑10 Apr 2021, 7:46pm
Even though almost all who join the NT and English Heritage "charities" do so for that very reason.
Yep, those are the rules. They were specifically changed to allow free entry to members, so someone must have made a case for it.
Whatever the reason, it only applies to a charities properties, so it has no relevance to the Cycling UK Gift Aid situation.
Maybe something to do with the government spinning off the historic building part of English Heritage as a charity a few years ago.
'Give me my bike, a bit of sunshine - and a stop-off for a lunchtime pint - and I'm a happy man.' - Reg Baker
Part of the T&Cs for what is essentially a season ticket to Chatsworth House:
Friends of Chatsworth Gift Aid scheme
The Chatsworth House Trust can claim gift aid on Silver Friends memberships. The Gift Aid scheme allows charities to reclaim 25p on every £1 you give as a membership subscription. If you are a tax payer please complete the Gift Aid declaration below. This will allow us to increase the value of your donation by a quarter at no extra cost to yourself. I agree to Chatsworth House Trust reclaiming tax on the enclosed membership subscription and on any donations I make in the future or have made in the past four years. ...
PH wrote: ↑10 Apr 2021, 9:14pmYep, those are the rules. They were specifically changed to allow free entry to members, so someone must have made a case for it.
Whatever the reason, it only applies to a charities properties, so it has no relevance to the Cycling UK Gift Aid situation.
Indeed, tours of our Guildford HQ have never been on the list of member benefits.
High on a cocktail of flossy teacakes and marmalade
Oldjohnw wrote: ↑19 Jan 2021, 5:51pm
Tax relief is one of the great 'inequalisers'. The more you have the more you get.
This was observed way back in biblical times and probably long before:
"To every one who has will more be given, and he will have abundance; but from him who has not, even what he has will be taken away". — St Matthew 25:29
(Not strictly relevant to the thread):
I think Matthew the evangelist is a different person from Matthew the apostle, who was of course a tax collector. Or are they the same person?
Since membership fees are about 2/3 of unrestricted income for the charity, isn't this going to leave a bit of a hole? I don't know how many members opted for Gift Aid.
Oldjohnw wrote: ↑19 Jan 2021, 5:51pm
Tax relief is one of the great 'inequalisers'. The more you have the more you get.
This was observed way back in biblical times and probably long before:
"To every one who has will more be given, and he will have abundance; but from him who has not, even what he has will be taken away". — St Matthew 25:29
(Not strictly relevant to the thread):
I think Matthew the evangelist is a different person from Matthew the apostle, who was of course a tax collector. Or are they the same person?
They were by tradition same person but some dispute this. As a tax collector he was known as Levi. St Matthew the Apostle was by tradition one of the four Evangelists although there is plenty of doubt. St Matthew’s gospel which I quoted is written anonymously (the “according to Matthew” was added later). So I was quoting from a book rather than a person, where the statement, attributed to Jesus Christ, was recorded. I wasn’t saying that Matthew wrote this but the book in which it was written is attributed to him. I will agree, this is probably a somewhat isoteric digression, although it is quite possibly the origin of gift aid,
[edited for clarity]
Last edited by Oldjohnw on 12 Apr 2021, 5:40pm, edited 2 times in total.
Oldjohnw wrote: ↑19 Jan 2021, 5:51pm
Tax relief is one of the great 'inequalisers'. The more you have the more you get.
This was observed way back in biblical times and probably long before:
"To every one who has will more be given, and he will have abundance; but from him who has not, even what he has will be taken away". — St Matthew 25:29
(Not strictly relevant to the thread):
I think Matthew the evangelist is a different person from Matthew the apostle, who was of course a tax collector. Or are they the same person?
They were the same person. As a tax collector he was known as Levi. St Matthew the Apostle was 9ne of the four Evangelists.
Bmblbzzz wrote: ↑12 Apr 2021, 9:43am
(Not strictly relevant to the thread):
I think Matthew the evangelist is a different person from Matthew the apostle, who was of course a tax collector. Or are they the same person?
They were the same person. As a tax collector he was known as Levi. St Matthew the Apostle was 9ne of the four Evangelists.
You will see that I amended my post as you were writing yours. I had to quote St Matthew, whether an apostle or an evangelist or both or neither, because that is where it is written. I was not commenting on Matthew’s religious standing.