Re: Please note: the Fund is not a Charity.

by Guest 27.10.12 19:32

aquila wrote:Now little old me understands that a limited company business is for either goods or services. What is the Fund's definition?

Goods and/or services?
Let's check.
Who was the accountant checking and writing that devastating report?

Any UK lawyer in town?

by ShuBob 27.10.12 20:11

candyfloss wrote:Leveson Inquiry.........Third witness statement of Colin Myler

We were very happy to undertake a number of things unconditionally on behalf of Kate

and Gerry. One example of this was the appeal we mounted to raise donations to the

Madeleine campaign fund. This was very successful and raised £1.5 million in 48 hours.

Additionally, we initiated discussions with Vodafone to endeavour to set up a Europe wide

Amber Alert system by which Vodafone would send without charge a message to all of its

MOD100051874

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

More evidence that the couple were actively canvassing for public donations right from the off despite giving the impression that it was just kind-hearted members of the public offering them money without prompt.

Thanks Myler for giving the game away and thanks Candyfloss for finding the witness statement.

by **tigger** 27.10.12 20:12

Portia wrote:
aquila wrote:Now little old me understands that a limited company business is for either goods or services. What is the Fund's definition?

Goods and/or services?
Let's check.
Who was the accountant checking and writing that devastating report?

Any UK lawyer in town?

From HM Customs and Excise website (I'm lost already!)

How VAT applies to fundraising events
Some fundraising activities are taxable business activities, so they're liable for VAT. However, charities and some other not-for-profit organisations get special VAT treatment for certain fundraising events. So, you may be exempt from charging VAT on supplies made at such events, if they meet certain conditions.
This guide explains what organisations qualify for this special VAT treatment, and what conditions fundraising events have to meet to be exempt from VAT.

etc.....

by sami 27.10.12 20:25

Portia wrote:
aquila wrote:Now little old me understands that a limited company business is for either goods or services. What is the Fund's definition?

Goods and/or services?
Let's check.
Who was the accountant checking and writing that devastating report?

Any UK lawyer in town?

Not a laywer, just my opinion.

The term "fund" is misleading, confusing and I question if it has any legal relevance.

They could not set up a Charity because it would only benefit one person (supposedly Madeleine) so immediately they failed to meet one of the two criteria required in order to register as a charity.

So they did the only thing they could and set up a company.

The use of the term "Fund" is merely another marketing ploy imo. Asking people to "please give money to my company" as opposed to "please donate to my fund" has a very different ring to it.

In the initial hype and hysteria the publics judgement was clouded and assumptions made or nothing questioned as to what they were paying into. It was helping to "find Madeleine", the framework was not questioned. When the smoke cleared, the "fund" was in place so more assumptions were made by an unsuspecting public. "Fund" sounds charitable, but to me it is just a word.

by **tigger** 28.10.12 6:08

@Sami
It's not quite correct that they could not set up a charity. Here is the relevant part of Ms. O'Dowd's report (see link on page one) well worth another read.
(BWB are Bell Worth and Braithwaite, lawyers. )
quote:
BWB emailed Alice Holt, Head of Legal Services (Status and Advice) at 9.39 pm on Monday evening with draft documents for the company as a charity. The email stated there was to be a press launch of the Foundation on Wednesday May 16 and that they awaited instructions on how the founders proposed to operate.

The minutes of the telephone conference held between BWB and the Charity Commission on the morning of Tuesday May 15 record that Alice Holt would look at revising the draft document to a form more acceptable to the Commission. The minutes also record that Commission official Kenneth Dibble was concerned that the press conference set for the next day might send out confused messages to the public unless it was settled what the fund could and could not be used for.

At 1.10 pm on May 15 the Charity Commission received an email from BWB saying their clients were likely to go the ordinary company route rather than pursue charity status. When that email was received Ms Holt was just finalising her promised revisions to the documents submitted to her the previous day. She sent her revised document anyway at 1.28 pm. To meet the Fund launch date of May 16, the McCanns had obviously decided to abandon the apparently hopeful charity negotiations in order to meet the deadline for same day company incorporation. Documents must be filed by 3pm for the company to be incorporated on that day.

It is odd that the McCanns committed themselves to a launch date, set it would appear, before BWB were engaged. In an email to the Charity Commission, BWB refer to being instructed 'this afternoon' (i.e. Monday May 14). What difference would a couple of days delay have made? And it is clear from the documentation that the Charity Commission officials were helpful, and that it was likely that charity status could have been obtained with only minor delay with a little compromise by the McCanns.

Charity status is valuable because it gives an organisation credibility with the public, grant making bodies and local government, making it easier to obtain funds. It also gives the organisation tax advantages. Individuals, sole traders and companies can also benefit from giving to registered charities. Higher rate tax payers may be able to claim a tax refund. Under the Gift Aid scheme a donation is treated as if standard rate tax (20%) has been deducted and this is equivalent to an extra 25p in the £ for the charity. For donations between 6.4.2008 and 5.4.2011 the government gave an extra 3p in the £ supplement. Individuals can also have charitable donations deducted from their salaries, and this is tax efficient as their income tax is calculated on their salary after the donation. See [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] for more information on the benefits to an organisation of charity status.

Charities must give an annual report and accounts to the Charity Commission and make these documents available to the public on request. There are also rules relating to fundraising. The trustees (directors) cannot normally receive salary, fees or contracts from the charity and nor can their spouses or other close family members. These requirements are not onerous or unreasonable. Having hired charity experts BWB on the advice of the paralegal, it is surprising that Kate did not let them have a day or two more to explore charity status. And it is surprising that the McCanns have not apparently revisited this issue.

In Chapter 9 in which Kate describes her activities of May 14 she does not mention any dealings with BWB who must have worked very hard that day.
unquote

Imo they never wanted charity status but simply went through the motions and it seems the excuse given took hold all too easily.

Calling it a 'Fund' a word that has connotations with 'Trust' was another extremely well thought out marketing ploy imo.

by sami 28.10.12 7:42

Morning Tigger

Reading through the Charities Commission website, there is a short "idiots" guide to setting up a Charity, which I thought would be the useful part for me to read.

They state one of two criteria that must meet in order to operate as a charity as follows:-

If you are to be a charity then your organisation must be established for public benefit and you will need to be able to demonstrate this.

They were clearly not willing or able to satisfy the public benefit requirement, as they wished the set up their "charity" to benefit only one person - Madeleine and the search to find her.

So of course it was technically and legally possible to set one up, they just had to satisfy the criteria. My opinion is that they would not do this, as it would mean Gerry running a completely different "campaign" and also sharing the money their "charity" would receive with others.

Like everything in life, I am sure there are ways and means around this, the infamous legal loopholes if you like. These take time to find and would require a good team of lawyers. The lawyers were not a problem for the McCanns, time was their enemy in this instance. They wanted to strike whilst the iron was hot so took the easy road, registered it as a company and the money poured in. And alll of that money was theirs, no sharing with other beneficiaries of a Charity.

It is the above that leads me to say the could not set up a Charity, but it is just my own opinion.

by **tigger** 28.10.12 9:19

@Sami.
I drew attention to the reasons for not using the Charity commission (e.g. Missing People is a charity and a company) because we are told by the McCanns that it was the Charity Commission who didn't want to make allowances for them.
In fact they were bending over backwards to help them. Imo the whole Charity issue is only used to show the many people who donated to the Fund that they really, really tried, but the Charity Commission wouldn't budge.

They certainly wouldn't have been able to pay libel lawyers out of donations I think, and why did they need lawyers that soon? It would be interesting to have a list of the lawyers employed by the McCanns with the dates they were engaged.

by pauline 28.10.12 9:31

tigger wrote:@Sami.
I drew attention to the reasons for not using the Charity commission (e.g. Missing People is a charity and a company) because we are told by the McCanns that it was the Charity Commission who didn't want to make allowances for them.
In fact they were bending over backwards to help them. Imo the whole Charity issue is only used to show the many people who donated to the Fund that they really, really tried, but the Charity Commission wouldn't budge.

They certainly wouldn't have been able to pay libel lawyers out of donations I think, and why did they need lawyers that soon? It would be interesting to have a list of the lawyers employed by the McCanns with the dates they were engaged.

I think the report on the fund includes a list of all the lawyers (all the lawyers the author found out about!). The lawyers BWB were engaged on may 14 2007 (thats in the book) but the exact dates of appointment of all the others isn't clear -only the Mccanns know that. I have never understood why they needed so many lawyers. Wouldn't it be interesting to see their invoices to see exactly what they did and what they charged. Though maybe the invoices merely say 'for professional services' ?

by Guest 28.10.12 9:34

Here's a link to the report on the fund.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by Liz Eagles 28.10.12 10:58

Snipped from Enid O'Dowd's Review

'Interestingly a revised Memorandum and Articles of Association was filed in Companies House in December 2011. This deleted the object to provide support including financial assistance to Madeleine's family. This particular object had attracted unfavourable comment in particular from internet bloggers. The motive for deleting this objective more than four years later is unclear. If the Board felt this minority criticism of the object was adversely affecting fundraising, it would presumably have changed it earlier.'

Snipped TODAY from FindMadeleine website re Fund Objectives

Fund Objectives

The full objects of the Fund are:

To secure the safe return to her family of Madeleine McCann who was abducted in Praia da Luz, Portugal on Thursday 3rd May 2007;
To procure that Madeleine's abduction is thoroughly investigated and that her abductors, as well as those who played or play any part in assisting them, are identified and brought to justice; and
To provide support, including financial assistance, to Madeleine's family.

If Enid's statement is accurate this is another little thing that hasn't been updated on the McCann website.

by **PeterMac** 28.10.12 11:08

Just to set the record straight - it is
Bates, Wells and Braithwaite London LLP

by ShuBob 29.10.12 10:01

Well, I believe yesterday's Express article was calling into question the fund objectives. Can the McCanns justify continuing to ask for donations on their website from members of the public to fund their "search" when they no longer use the services of PIs? Isn't that deception? I hope someone with knowledge of company law can address my question.

by Guest 29.10.12 10:14

It certainly sounds fraudulent to me but I have no legal knowledge.

This link gives information on how to complain about a limited company.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

by **tigger** 29.10.12 16:22

ShuBob wrote:Well, I believe yesterday's Express article was calling into question the fund objectives. Can the McCanns justify continuing to ask for donations on their website from members of the public to fund their "search" when they no longer use the services of PIs? Isn't that deception? I hope someone with knowledge of company law can address my question.

I suppose they can argue that by selling the posters etc. they are still searching. However, if the searchers are paying for the merchandise, there is no need for donations at all. The posters and search material should be free imo, the public have already paid the Fund, bought the book and the T shirt and the armbands, and paid their taxes towards the unending SY review, which I understand will go on although the three million must by now be used up.
So asking the public to dig deeper, pay more taxes, buy a poster, that's searching?

by **Nina** 29.10.12 16:36

tigger wrote:
ShuBob wrote:Well, I believe yesterday's Express article was calling into question the fund objectives. Can the McCanns justify continuing to ask for donations on their website from members of the public to fund their "search" when they no longer use the services of PIs? Isn't that deception? I hope someone with knowledge of company law can address my question.

I suppose they can argue that by selling the posters etc. they are still searching. However, if the searchers are paying for the merchandise, there is no need for donations at all. The posters and search material should be free imo, the public have already paid the Fund, bought the book and the T shirt and the armbands, and paid their taxes towards the unending SY review, which I understand will go on although the three million must by now be used up.
So asking the public to dig deeper, pay more taxes, buy a poster, that's searching?

Tigger, I can remember the launch of mass posters search campaign on the Costa del Sol, or the telling there were to be a lot in the larger supermarkets, the airport, the bus station. I visited ever supermarket, nothing, the airport, nothing and you guessed it also nothing at the bus station. Not to be deterred and thinking maybe some delay I went to those venues each week for a month and never a poster. I seem to recall this campaign also had a cost attached, think it might have been 8000 or was it 80000, will have a little check around, cos I know we need links.

by **Nina** 29.10.12 17:36

Here is something about it.....

Madeleine Toys Will Be Sent To Belarus
Updated: 10:36, Thursday September 27, 2007

Friends and family of Gerry and Kate McCann are to send more than 2,000 toys left by well-wishers after Madeleine vanished to needy children in eastern Europe.

Thousands of ribbons at memorial

Cuddly toys and dolls were left at a war memorial in the family's home village of Rothley, Leicestershire, in May.

They were intended as a symbol of hope and support for efforts to find the four-year-old after she went missing in Praia da Luz, Portugal.

The gifts were removed over the summer along with thousands of yellow and green ribbons tied to railings at the memorial, which became a focal point for prayers for Madeleine.

The toys were gathered up and carefully washed by parents from the village's two primary schools and are now set to be shipped to children in Belarus.

Janet Kennedy, Kate McCann's aunt, will be among a handful of people meeting today to package up the toys into shoeboxes.

Each will be sent with a small picture of Madeleine.

Friends of the couple also urged holidaymakers to continue the search for Madeleine.

It emerged last night that nearly �300,000 has been spent so far on the search for Madeleine by the fund set up to that end.

Fund directors meeting in Leicestershire said the cash had gone on the campaign launch, advertising, producing yellow and green wristbands and employing a campaign manager.

A new �80,000 advertising campaign is to begin in Portugal, Spain and Morocco.

Individuals and organisations have so far given �1,036,104 to Madeleine's Fund, a non-charitable not-for-profit company.
- - - - - -
nd it came from this very interesting blog,

Madeleine Toys Will Be Sent To Belarus
Updated: 10:36, Thursday September 27, 2007

Friends and family of Gerry and Kate McCann are to send more than 2,000 toys left by well-wishers after Madeleine vanished to needy children in eastern Europe.

Thousands of ribbons at memorial

Cuddly toys and dolls were left at a war memorial in the family's home village of Rothley, Leicestershire, in May.

They were intended as a symbol of hope and support for efforts to find the four-year-old after she went missing in Praia da Luz, Portugal.

The gifts were removed over the summer along with thousands of yellow and green ribbons tied to railings at the memorial, which became a focal point for prayers for Madeleine.

The toys were gathered up and carefully washed by parents from the village's two primary schools and are now set to be shipped to children in Belarus.

Janet Kennedy, Kate McCann's aunt, will be among a handful of people meeting today to package up the toys into shoeboxes.

Each will be sent with a small picture of Madeleine.

Friends of the couple also urged holidaymakers to continue the search for Madeleine.

It emerged last night that nearly �300,000 has been spent so far on the search for Madeleine by the fund set up to that end.

Fund directors meeting in Leicestershire said the cash had gone on the campaign launch, advertising, producing yellow and green wristbands and employing a campaign manager.

A new �80,000 advertising campaign is to begin in Portugal, Spain and Morocco.

Individuals and organisations have so far given �1,036,104 to Madeleine's Fund, a non-charitable not-for-profit company.
- - - - - -
and it came from this very interesting blog..........http://www.bebo.com/Blog.jsp?MemberId=4051964389

and another......http://www.mccannfiles.com/id113.html about half way down,

and another.......http://www.mccannfiles.com/id58.html and the kms I travelled to search for them on the Costa del Sol, never a one, other than photocopied ones in a few shops aimed at the UK ex pat or tourist, whare the much needed Marmite can be purchased at huge cost.

by ShuBob 29.10.12 19:30

Yes Nina I remember the £80,000 poster campaign that never materialised. IIRC, it was Uncle John who publicly spoke about it. I hope when the proverbial hits the fan, he and others will be compelled to give evidence.

by ShuBob 29.10.12 19:52

tigger wrote:
ShuBob wrote:Well, I believe yesterday's Express article was calling into question the fund objectives. Can the McCanns justify continuing to ask for donations on their website from members of the public to fund their "search" when they no longer use the services of PIs? Isn't that deception? I hope someone with knowledge of company law can address my question.

I suppose they can argue that by selling the posters etc. they are still searching. However, if the searchers are paying for the merchandise, there is no need for donations at all. The posters and search material should be free imo, the public have already paid the Fund, bought the book and the T shirt and the armbands, and paid their taxes towards the unending SY review, which I understand will go on although the three million must by now be used up.
So asking the public to dig deeper, pay more taxes, buy a poster, that's searching?

I suspect their army of very expensive lawyers have told them the barest minimum they need to do justify asking members of the public for money to fund their non-visible "search" campaign. It's all very cloak and dagger and prima facie it doesn't look right. This is supposed to be about a missing child. Where is their moral obligation to members of the public they implore to search both physically and financially for their daughter?

by Liz Eagles 29.10.12 20:02

ShuBob wrote:
tigger wrote:
ShuBob wrote:Well, I believe yesterday's Express article was calling into question the fund objectives. Can the McCanns justify continuing to ask for donations on their website from members of the public to fund their "search" when they no longer use the services of PIs? Isn't that deception? I hope someone with knowledge of company law can address my question.

I suppose they can argue that by selling the posters etc. they are still searching. However, if the searchers are paying for the merchandise, there is no need for donations at all. The posters and search material should be free imo, the public have already paid the Fund, bought the book and the T shirt and the armbands, and paid their taxes towards the unending SY review, which I understand will go on although the three million must by now be used up.
So asking the public to dig deeper, pay more taxes, buy a poster, that's searching?

I suspect their army of very expensive lawyers have told them the barest minimum they need to do justify asking members of the public for money to fund their non-visible "search" campaign. It's all very cloak and dagger and prima facie it doesn't look right. This is supposed to be about a missing child. Where is their moral obligation to members of the public they implore to search both physically and financially for their daughter?

The army of very expensive lawyers, advisors, PR top notch bods and private investigators all failed Madeleine. She is still missing. Whatever the McCanns have or have not done it just goes to show that a lot of 'top' people made money with no results. Now how can that be a shining beacon for anyone with a missing child?

It's all disgraceful imo.

by **tigger** 29.10.12 20:15

Nina wrote:Here is something about it.....

Madeleine Toys Will Be Sent To Belarus
Updated: 10:36, Thursday September 27, 2007

Friends and family of Gerry and Kate McCann are to send more than 2,000 toys left by well-wishers after Madeleine vanished to needy children in eastern Europe.

Thousands of ribbons at memorial

Cuddly toys and dolls were left at a war memorial in the family's home village of Rothley, Leicestershire, in May.

They were intended as a symbol of hope and support for efforts to find the four-year-old after she went missing in Praia da Luz, Portugal.

The gifts were removed over the summer along with thousands of yellow and green ribbons tied to railings at the memorial, which became a focal point for prayers for Madeleine.

The toys were gathered up and carefully washed by parents from the village's two primary schools and are now set to be shipped to children in Belarus.

Janet Kennedy, Kate McCann's aunt, will be among a handful of people meeting today to package up the toys into shoeboxes.

Each will be sent with a small picture of Madeleine.

Friends of the couple also urged holidaymakers to continue the search for Madeleine.

It emerged last night that nearly �300,000 has been spent so far on the search for Madeleine by the fund set up to that end.

Fund directors meeting in Leicestershire said the cash had gone on the campaign launch, advertising, producing yellow and green wristbands and employing a campaign manager.

A new �80,000 advertising campaign is to begin in Portugal, Spain and Morocco.

Individuals and organisations have so far given �1,036,104 to Madeleine's Fund, a non-charitable not-for-profit company.
- - - - - -
nd it came from this very interesting blog,

Madeleine Toys Will Be Sent To Belarus
Updated: 10:36, Thursday September 27, 2007

Friends and family of Gerry and Kate McCann are to send more than 2,000 toys left by well-wishers after Madeleine vanished to needy children in eastern Europe.

Thousands of ribbons at memorial

Cuddly toys and dolls were left at a war memorial in the family's home village of Rothley, Leicestershire, in May.

They were intended as a symbol of hope and support for efforts to find the four-year-old after she went missing in Praia da Luz, Portugal.

The gifts were removed over the summer along with thousands of yellow and green ribbons tied to railings at the memorial, which became a focal point for prayers for Madeleine.

The toys were gathered up and carefully washed by parents from the village's two primary schools and are now set to be shipped to children in Belarus.

Janet Kennedy, Kate McCann's aunt, will be among a handful of people meeting today to package up the toys into shoeboxes.

Each will be sent with a small picture of Madeleine.

Friends of the couple also urged holidaymakers to continue the search for Madeleine.

It emerged last night that nearly �300,000 has been spent so far on the search for Madeleine by the fund set up to that end.

Fund directors meeting in Leicestershire said the cash had gone on the campaign launch, advertising, producing yellow and green wristbands and employing a campaign manager.

A new �80,000 advertising campaign is to begin in Portugal, Spain and Morocco.

Individuals and organisations have so far given �1,036,104 to Madeleine's Fund, a non-charitable not-for-profit company.
- - - - - -
and it came from this very interesting blog..........http://www.bebo.com/Blog.jsp?MemberId=4051964389

and another......http://www.mccannfiles.com/id113.html about half way down,

and another.......http://www.mccannfiles.com/id58.html and the kms I travelled to search for them on the Costa del Sol, never a one, other than photocopied ones in a few shops aimed at the UK ex pat or tourist, whare the much needed Marmite can be purchased at huge cost.

80.000 pounds would buy a lot of posters, cheaper by the thousand, plus some postage stamps and then what? Sounds to me as if the cost was multiplied by a large number - probably administrative costs, thinking up a slogan, buying a dictionary and perhaps a slight mistake crept into the figure in the form of a zero or two on the wrong side of the decimal point, tricky things decimal points...

I do know that they used the disappearance of a little Spanish girl and used her photograph on a poster without permission from her parents, who hadn't had the foresight to make their daughter's image and name a trademark. Unlike some

But the date of the launch of this intensive poster campaign is stunning: 27th September, fully four months after she went missing, nearly five.
Why wasn't this done immediately? Plenty of money rolled into the Fund in just a few weeks, plenty to start a poster campaign over the whole of the Iberian peninsula - Well, Nina, you were there, you saw few posters, besides - how were they distributed? I think the ones you saw were the ones sent, to ex pat points. Which would make it around a couple of hundred posters at most.

by Liz Eagles 29.10.12 20:22

disgusting isn't it Tigger?

I'm not into theories but were a child of my family to go missing there is a huge bloody list of people I'd avoid.

I lived in Greece when Madeleine went missing. The Greeks didn't know about it. I lived in South Africa and people don't know about Madeleine. So much for a worldwide campaign.

by **tigger** 01.11.12 7:27

For good measure, this is from Company House on registering a name for a ltd. Company.

Types of company (from Companies House website)

Private company limited by guarantee - members' liability is limited to the amount they have agreed to contribute to the company's assets if it is wound up. This includes all RTM (Right to Manage) companies-, commonhold associations and those community interest companies which are companies limited by guarantee.

What types of words and expressions are sensitive?

The following words imply specific objects or functions:

benevolent, foundation or fund - names that include any of these words will be refused if they unjustifiably give the impression that the company has charitable status. If the company is limited by guarantee and has a non-profit distribution clause in the memorandum of association, then the name will normally be approved.

Note that the words 'Fund' and 'Foundation' are used in the memorandum of association (detailed in 'objects of Madeleine's Fund' ). It is item 1.2 that allowed Madeleine's Fund to register as a private limited company as that clause indicates that any profit will be used to pursue 'such purposes in similar cases'.

It is highly unlikely the average person donating to the Fund would have investigated the memorandum of association before contributing. The use of the word 'Fund' in the title would clearly have led people to believe that they were donating to a charitable fund to help in the search for Madeleine.
From McCannfiles, unquote.

thinking

by **tigger** 28.11.12 6:19

I'm copying this from another topic:

Such a sum should show up in the accounts as well and it seems it has been paid out. But where is it?

I can't believe the RB can't remember the actual sum, even half a million is a very considerable sum to pay out and must be exceptional. Add to that the fact that the McCann case is not one amongst many and that whatever sum paid out RB was likely to have to agree to it personally.

Quote from topic: Is Operation Grange, the 37-strong Scotland Yard Review Team reviewing the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, a wholehearted, no-holds-barred search for the truth?
candyfloss
The strangest thing is that RB 'couldn't remember' how much was paid to the McCanns for the serialisation of the book...when Robert Jay suggested £1 million pounds she denied saying half a million maybe - I cannot remember. Such a huge amount being paid out yet she couldn't remember????

Mark Watts‏@MarkWatts_1

@Bridgiew @MarkWatts_1 Far be it from me to give away Leveson team's confidential source. But strange that Rebekah could not remember.

Mark Watts‏@MarkWatts_1

@Bridgiew @MarkWatts_1 Robert Jay QC suggested to Rebekan Brooks £1m. She denied, saying: "Half a million, maybe. I cannot remember."

unquote

by Liz Eagles 28.11.12 11:34

1 million or half a million. It's not petty cash either way and one would think it would be memorable. The interesting question is how was it paid and to whom?

by **PeterMac** 28.11.12 11:40

And if it appears in the accounts.

by Guest 28.11.12 13:08

The quote "all ROYALTIES donated to Madeleine's FUND" comes to mind. I'm curious too. Won't hold my breath until end of next month, but am certainly interested to see, if they make a difference between royalties and income, if you get my drift.

by **PeterMac** 28.11.12 16:02

Or if they put it in at all.

Royalties on the book and the paperback might well be zero - after deducting the advance there may be nothing left. The paperback is £ 3 on Amazon. 1 p second hand
In which case what happened to the advance ? Is it shown in the accounts ?
The million, or half million, for the serialisation rights in the paper might well not have been donated to the Fund at all. It might have been passed direct to Kate.
In which case is it taxable ?
Actually, in either case is it taxable ?
As a Company the "Fund" is liable to Corporation Tax.

Verrry interesting !!
Follow the money.

by monkey mind 28.11.12 16:17

PeterMac wrote:Or if they put it in at all.

Royalties on the book and the paperback might well be zero - after deducting the advance there may be nothing left. The paperback is £ 3 on Amazon. 1 p second hand
In which case what happened to the advance ? Is it shown in the accounts ?
The million, or half million, for the serialisation rights in the paper might well not have been donated to the Fund at all. It might have been passed direct to Kate.
In which case is it taxable ?
Actually, in either case is it taxable ?
As a Company the "Fund" is liable to Corporation Tax.

Verrry interesting !!
Follow the money.

I must admit I've considered that very same thing Peter. The advance and the million/halfmilion for the serialisation rights ought to show up either in this years fund accounts or this years tax return. If not, why not?

by **tigger** 28.11.12 16:20

PeterMac wrote:Or if they put it in at all.

Royalties on the book and the paperback might well be zero - after deducting the advance there may be nothing left. The paperback is £ 3 on Amazon. 1 p second hand
In which case what happened to the advance ? Is it shown in the accounts ?
The million, or half million, for the serialisation rights in the paper might well not have been donated to the Fund at all. It might have been passed direct to Kate.
In which case is it taxable ?
Actually, in either case is it taxable ?
As a Company the "Fund" is liable to Corporation Tax.

Verrry interesting !!
Follow the money.

The Advance is part of the Royalties. It is referred to as "advance on royalties" in contracts - so the advance is exactly the same as royalties.
So it should jolly well be there, along with the one million paid by Oprah Winfrey, I wonder too, what became of the film rights which were being discussed in December 07 and January 08. Even CM admitted these talks were taking place.

by **tigger** 11.12.12 7:20

On MM I came across a post with the following extract from Enid O'Dowd's analysis (see page 1, post 1 here)
quote
When I looked at the audited accounts to see what they said about taxation I found a note 1.3 Taxation as part of the Notes to the Financial Statements in accounts 2008, 2009 and 2010 which read:

'The company remains accountable for taxation liabilities arising from capital gains, interest, trading activities and any other surplus other than from donations received'

In the accounts to 31 March 2008, there is a surplus of £1,064,489 before taxation but the corporation tax payable per the accounts is only £12,462. This is because most of the income for that period was from donations.

Note 1.2 Income. The 2008, 2009 and 2010 accounts all state –

'Income comprises donations received by the company along with revenue recognised in respect of merchandise supplied, exclusive of VAT.'

But in the 2011 accounts the heading Income changes to Turnover and the note reads –

'Turnover comprises revenue recognised by the company in respect of goods and services supplied by the company, exclusive of Value Added Tax and trade discounts.'

Why has the word donations been deleted?
unquote

My question is: why were donations not taxed? This is a limited company, not a charity. I thought that donations will be taxed just the same as other income.
Is there an accountant in the house?

Latest topics