Charities are lovely source of income for those fortunate working there as top-level management. I would call it “milk cow” because they just sit there and take money for it. The only requirement is to be old, white and have noble title – sir is okay but duke is even better. Royalty is double boost of prestige.
[deleted]
It’s almost like “marca.com” is a Spanish tabloid rag written by third-rate journalists and ChatGPT, and isn’t an accurate or meaningful source of information on anything, or indeed even particularly intelligble or coherent. Asking faux-naive questions off the back of this article is intellectually dishonest and simply a way to encourage hatred of our royal family.
I always approach charities or anything labelled as ‘not for profit’ with caution. I’m no expert on this but I’ve seen several cases of employees in Charities or NFPs on HUGE salaries, probably well above what would be normal for that role in a private company.
Even some of the TV adverts the small print will read things like 7% is guaranteed to go to the children. This isn’t an exact example, but if you read the small print, sometimes the percent of money that actually go to the cause you’re donating to can be in the single digit in terms of a percentage.
I’m trying to think of dates now, I’d say it was around 2007(ish). A friend of mine, in Cornwall (this is important due to how bad wages are in that area) was employed to approach people in the street by a charity. I really can’t recall who but it was one of the heart ones like the BHF. He had a Salary of about £21,000, plus some sort of commission on the number of people he signed up for a direct debit (it wasn’t asking for an instant pay out, just a monthly commitment of x). He was provided a car, a fuel card/allowance but also some personal miles were part of the contract as well which I found totally crazy.
For the time it was actually an amazing offer, given the NMW now is about £24k a year (based on 37.5 hours) and this was almost 18 years ago. He actually left when he realised how little of the money he was collecting was going to places it needed to be, and where the public believed the majority of their donations would be going to.
It was really sad, he was someone who wanted to work for a Charity and do some good, but also couldn’t put two and two together and see that his salary wasn’t paid by anything other than the donations of the people who thought they were giving £5 a week to the BHF or whoever it was.
To specifically answer your question, you earn £10m working for charity, by treating them like any other organisation and charging them fees for your time and input. If you do enough and charge enough, you get £10m. Whether princess Anne does that or not I couldn’t say.
“Non-profit” doesn’t mean they don’t make money. It means they can’t make profit.
They can pay staff salaries, overheads for office space, buy equipment relevant to the non-profit etc.
Any money they earn beyond these expenses needs to disappear by spending it on what the charity/non-profit does or donating it to another charity/non-profit.
It’s immoral, you take a small fee as possible but too many charities take too high a percentage which is why I never give to majority of the charities and give to a few that have almost 100% donation policy that claim through gift aid and donors
Because as part of The Civil List/Sovereign Grant 2011+. All working Royals get an allowance to fund their public duties, transportation, security etc. With the Monarch and the Prince of Wales in particular having substantial access to private funds and assets which they don’t hold in trust for the nation. So the Prince of Wales has access to the funds from The Duchy of Cornwall. The Queen had substantial secret share holdings. As all of her shares were owned in the name of “The Bank of England Nominees”. A potnof research discovered that she owned a substantial share holding in something like Brighthouse. A catalogue credit company which charges about double for a TV then Harrods would but then also adds on a substantial APR for years. So that customers payback say 4 times what the TV is worth. But £30 per month for 5 years is the only that they can see themselves budgeting for a new TV. Either because their credit is so poor that mainstream lenders won’t touch them or they can’t save the money up, in order to buy it outright.
Charities are generally just a way for rich people to give money away so they don’t have to give it to the government in tax. Anyone can start one and fix their own salary. All your expenses come out of the funds you raise, including payments to friends (sorry, consultants!), fancy dinners (sorry, fund raising events), hotels while you meet friends on holiday (sorry, do research) and all sorts of other things you can charge for. Doesn’t actually matter if you only contribute £100 a year to the things you support, it’s the fact that the whole business (sorry, charity fund) is set up just to raise that £100 a year. It’s the same as not for profit organisations. They make profits, they just spend them before the end of each year on whatever they fancy!
You’d be amazed how much you can earn working for a large Charity. I’ve seen jobs advertised for the larger Charities with salaries which would make the Private Sector blush. It’s for that reason I will not donate to a larger charity.
Nor will I donate to one which uses a Celebrity to front it, as they are also willing to splash the cash to get them on board
Anne’s net worth probably comes from mostly the massive estate given to her by the Queen, inheritances (George VI, Queen Mother etc), prudent investment of civil list/sovereign grant money and her showjumping/equestrian career.
I don’t think she gets any money from her charity work
Princess Anne has a net worth of £10 million. That’s not the same as an income of £10 million. Net worth of the total value of all the assets an individual owns, less their income. It includes the values of properties and shares etc. It doesn’t mean she earns that amount per year – from charity or any other source.
Royal patronage Members of the royal family, including Princess Anne, are typically figureheads for charities and give their time for free. They do not have formal power over the charities they support.
The Princess Anne’s Charities The trustees of The Princess Anne’s Charities do not receive any payments, benefits, or remuneration from the charity. The charity’s main way of carrying out its purposes is through grants.
You don’t, it’s bollocks. I work for a very large charity of which she is a patron, there is absolutely no payment whatsoever. (except for lunches when she turns up to open something, and a bump in expenses because everyone decides they just have to be at that site on that day.. for reasons…)
Some people need to realise how charities work.
There’s a reason every billionaire sets up various charities and puts their kids at the head.
It’s a great way of keeping control of your money and avoiding tax. Some of these orgs even have lobbying as their main purpose, so they are using their money to buy influence tax-free.
15 comments
Charities are lovely source of income for those fortunate working there as top-level management. I would call it “milk cow” because they just sit there and take money for it. The only requirement is to be old, white and have noble title – sir is okay but duke is even better. Royalty is double boost of prestige.
[deleted]
It’s almost like “marca.com” is a Spanish tabloid rag written by third-rate journalists and ChatGPT, and isn’t an accurate or meaningful source of information on anything, or indeed even particularly intelligble or coherent. Asking faux-naive questions off the back of this article is intellectually dishonest and simply a way to encourage hatred of our royal family.
I always approach charities or anything labelled as ‘not for profit’ with caution. I’m no expert on this but I’ve seen several cases of employees in Charities or NFPs on HUGE salaries, probably well above what would be normal for that role in a private company.
Even some of the TV adverts the small print will read things like 7% is guaranteed to go to the children. This isn’t an exact example, but if you read the small print, sometimes the percent of money that actually go to the cause you’re donating to can be in the single digit in terms of a percentage.
I’m trying to think of dates now, I’d say it was around 2007(ish). A friend of mine, in Cornwall (this is important due to how bad wages are in that area) was employed to approach people in the street by a charity. I really can’t recall who but it was one of the heart ones like the BHF. He had a Salary of about £21,000, plus some sort of commission on the number of people he signed up for a direct debit (it wasn’t asking for an instant pay out, just a monthly commitment of x). He was provided a car, a fuel card/allowance but also some personal miles were part of the contract as well which I found totally crazy.
For the time it was actually an amazing offer, given the NMW now is about £24k a year (based on 37.5 hours) and this was almost 18 years ago. He actually left when he realised how little of the money he was collecting was going to places it needed to be, and where the public believed the majority of their donations would be going to.
It was really sad, he was someone who wanted to work for a Charity and do some good, but also couldn’t put two and two together and see that his salary wasn’t paid by anything other than the donations of the people who thought they were giving £5 a week to the BHF or whoever it was.
To specifically answer your question, you earn £10m working for charity, by treating them like any other organisation and charging them fees for your time and input. If you do enough and charge enough, you get £10m.
Whether princess Anne does that or not I couldn’t say.
“Non-profit” doesn’t mean they don’t make money. It means they can’t make profit.
They can pay staff salaries, overheads for office space, buy equipment relevant to the non-profit etc.
Any money they earn beyond these expenses needs to disappear by spending it on what the charity/non-profit does or donating it to another charity/non-profit.
It’s immoral, you take a small fee as possible but too many charities take too high a percentage which is why I never give to majority of the charities and give to a few that have almost 100% donation policy that claim through gift aid and donors
Because as part of The Civil List/Sovereign Grant 2011+. All working Royals get an allowance to fund their public duties, transportation, security etc. With the Monarch and the Prince of Wales in particular having substantial access to private funds and assets which they don’t hold in trust for the nation. So the Prince of Wales has access to the funds from The Duchy of Cornwall. The Queen had substantial secret share holdings. As all of her shares were owned in the name of “The Bank of England Nominees”. A potnof research discovered that she owned a substantial share holding in something like Brighthouse. A catalogue credit company which charges about double for a TV then Harrods would but then also adds on a substantial APR for years. So that customers payback say 4 times what the TV is worth. But £30 per month for 5 years is the only that they can see themselves budgeting for a new TV. Either because their credit is so poor that mainstream lenders won’t touch them or they can’t save the money up, in order to buy it outright.
Charities are generally just a way for rich people to give money away so they don’t have to give it to the government in tax. Anyone can start one and fix their own salary. All your expenses come out of the funds you raise, including payments to friends (sorry, consultants!), fancy dinners (sorry, fund raising events), hotels while you meet friends on holiday (sorry, do research) and all sorts of other things you can charge for. Doesn’t actually matter if you only contribute £100 a year to the things you support, it’s the fact that the whole business (sorry, charity fund) is set up just to raise that £100 a year. It’s the same as not for profit organisations. They make profits, they just spend them before the end of each year on whatever they fancy!
You’d be amazed how much you can earn working for a large Charity. I’ve seen jobs advertised for the larger Charities with salaries which would make the Private Sector blush. It’s for that reason I will not donate to a larger charity.
Nor will I donate to one which uses a Celebrity to front it, as they are also willing to splash the cash to get them on board
Anne’s net worth probably comes from mostly the massive estate given to her by the Queen, inheritances (George VI, Queen Mother etc), prudent investment of civil list/sovereign grant money and her showjumping/equestrian career.
I don’t think she gets any money from her charity work
Princess Anne has a net worth of £10 million. That’s not the same as an income of £10 million. Net worth of the total value of all the assets an individual owns, less their income. It includes the values of properties and shares etc. It doesn’t mean she earns that amount per year – from charity or any other source.
Royal patronage
Members of the royal family, including Princess Anne, are typically figureheads for charities and give their time for free. They do not have formal power over the charities they support.
The Princess Anne’s Charities
The trustees of The Princess Anne’s Charities do not receive any payments, benefits, or remuneration from the charity. The charity’s main way of carrying out its purposes is through grants.
You don’t, it’s bollocks. I work for a very large charity of which she is a patron, there is absolutely no payment whatsoever. (except for lunches when she turns up to open something, and a bump in expenses because everyone decides they just have to be at that site on that day.. for reasons…)
Some people need to realise how charities work.
There’s a reason every billionaire sets up various charities and puts their kids at the head.
It’s a great way of keeping control of your money and avoiding tax. Some of these orgs even have lobbying as their main purpose, so they are using their money to buy influence tax-free.
Comments are closed.