Shadow minister wades in to Big Society Network funding controversy
22 May 2013
Shadow minister for civil society Gareth Thomas has tabled a series of Parliamentary questions to minister...
Sorry for interrupting, but there is something we need to tell you...
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website.
If you wish to restrict or block web browser cookies which are set on your device then you can do this through your browser settings, the Help function within your browser will tell you how.
The Treasury has published data showing that some of the UK’s wealthiest citizens pay as little as 10 per cent of their income in tax by claiming tax reliefs, as its seeks to justify its plan to limit the amount of reliefs they can claim.
The Treasury said the figures clearly illustrate the importance of the principle behind the cap, “showing that people earning £20,000 pay a higher rate of tax than some people earning millions”.
“Data like this hasn’t ever been published before,” it said. “By making it available, the government is shining a light on the way the current tax system works and demonstrating a clear commitment to creating a fairer system.”
The published figures show that while the vast majority of high earners do pay at least 40 per cent of their incomes in tax, a minority use various tax reliefs to slash their tax bills.

The government also said today that it would launch a formal consultation on the proposed cap in the summer. NCVO said this was "old news" and would come too late.
Meanwhile, a YouGov survey of 1,650 adults on 12 and 13 April commissioned by the Sunday Times found that 60 per cent agreed that charitable donations should be excluded from the new limits. A quarter said tax relief on donations should be capped, while 15 per cent didn’t know.
And a poll of 71 Conservative and Liberal Democrat MPs commissioned by Charities Aid Foundation and conducted by ComRes, found that 65 per cent supported exempting charitable donations from the cap. Some 68 per cent said the government should review the proposal.
Philanthopists added their own voices to the clamour, with 46 major donors and foundations signing a letter to the Sunday Telegraph opposing the cap. The signatories, who included BodyShop founder Gordon Roddick, Localgiving.com founder Marcelle Speller and three members of the Sainsbury supermarket family, described the proposal as “confusing and dispiriting”, and urged the government to think again.
Various media outlets were today claiming that government sources were hinting at a climbdown over the issue.
The FT claimed the Treasury was considering a separate tax relief limit for donations, or the possibility of allowing donors to ‘roll over’ unused tax reliefs into future years.
The Today programme suggested the Treasury was considering introducing a system of lifetime legacies in order to compensate charities for the losses they would sustain because of the cap.
Meredith
16 Apr 2012
By publishing these data, the proponents of this policy are trying to frame the debate over tax relief in terms of fairness, but that is patently not the issue at stake when looking specifically at the exemption for relief on charitable donations. For starters, it is impossible to disaggregate from this data how much of the reduced tax bill enjoyed by (a minority of) wealthy taxpayers is down to charitable donations vs. other, potentially more questionable, tax reliefs. With respect to the charity cap specifically, it would be unfair if poorer taxpayers were KEEPING a smaller percentage of their income than wealthier taxpayers who give money to charity, but that's not what's going. When a donor makes a gift to a charity, they no longer benefit personally from that money. In the context of the debate over whehter charitable donations should be exempt from the cap, a more fair set of data would show the percentage of income retained after tax and donations, which would paint a far different picture. If the objective is greater fairness in the overall tax regime, there are ways of accomplishing this without punishing charities, who are the real losers here; the wealthy taxpayers who will be affected by this change are financially no better nor worse off whether the money they are currently giving away goes to the state or to charity.
Trevo
16 Apr 2012
We live in a country where it has been reported that granmothers are jailed because they could not pay their council taxes and single mothers for stealing food.
If the government had any cojones they'd publish the details of these rich parasites in the same way that Sarah's list was considered for sex offenders.
Instead they'll repeat the same rubbish mantra that fewer people believe about having to pay these people at absurdly high levels to attract the 'right people'. These 'right people' then repay us through tax avoidance and evasion while the government will tell us that if we tax them equitably then they'll fly away. If only.
To stop them flying away, jail them.
22 May 2013
Shadow minister for civil society Gareth Thomas has tabled a series of Parliamentary questions to minister...
22 May 2013
The trustees of the Jimmy Savile Charitable Trust are not donating any funds to the National Association...
22 May 2013
Charities’ membership or non-membership of the Fundraising Standards Board could be included on the...
23 May 2013
Big Society Network has finally filed its 2012 accounts with Companies House, nearly five months late,...
23 May 2013
The Disclosure and Barring Service, which has replaced CRB checks, has announced details of its new Update...
23 May 2013
Help for Heroes has expressed its “deep sadness” about the murder of a soldier in south London who...
22 May 2013
Google has shortlisted ten UK charities which stand the chance of winning £500,000 as part of its Global...
20 May 2013
Your CivilSociety rounds-up the most read stories from the previous week.
17 May 2013
The voluntary sector should create a “data manifesto” that identifies who holds data about the sector...
29 Oct 2013
29 Oct 2013
29 Oct 2013
27 Nov 2013
Jo Wood
17 Apr 2012
I don't understand this, at all.
Would someone please explain how someone can cut their tax bill significantly by donating.
As I see it a single person earning 100K will pay just under 30K in tax.
To reduce to that 20K, they would need to donate 50K; clearly impossible on 100K income; so how do they do that ?
[Reply]