Ok, so I'm thoroughly confused by the reporting of this and the concomitant outrage.
1) If I understand the tax incentive correctly, it is impossible as a rich person to be better off by giving to charity, what in effect happens is that if someone in the 45% tax bracket donates money to charity, the tax they would have paid on it goes to the charity instead of the government.
2) We have for many years incentivised charitable giving, at some expense to the treasury. Now we can't afford to give so much so we are capping the amount the government can give to charities chosen, not democratically, but by the wealthiest people in the country.
3) Nothing in this plan prevents the government giving money to those charities that are deemed worthy of the funding.
What's the problem?
Recent discussions in the politics discussion forum
|Soft scoop?||26||2 hours ago|
|In other news today.||1376||3 hours ago|
|Generation Gap||173||3 hours ago|
|Chris and Claudia are the highest paid BBC "talent"?||80||3 hours ago|
|Is Sport News?||4684||3 hours ago|
|Doesn't a "Gay Pride Parade" nullify the assumed equality between sexual preferences?||145||12 hours ago|
|Abraham Lincoln...the banks and debt.||4||14 hours ago|
|Vince Cable is the new Lib/Dem leader?||22||15 hours ago|
|UK Speaker says Trump not welcome.||47||16 hours ago|
|Pour l'homme||28||17 hours ago|
|The Church of England needs to get back into the mainstream of society--Bible is largely scientifically accurate (water is older than the Sun like Genesis said)||173||18 hours ago|
|Remember the Labour Party well and good--- Tony Blair did disarm Gadhafi of much WMD by invading Iraq in 2003||615||18 hours ago|