The Indiana bulletin of charities and correction.

Some issues have also a distinctive title.

The Annual charities register and digest

1917 incl. How to help cases of distress by C. S. Loch

The public benefit requirement for charities in England and Wales:a qualitative study of its impact

The Charities Act 2006 introduced at least three changes leading to renewed emphasis on the public benefit requirement for charities in England and Wales: changes which have the potential to alter substantially society’s understanding of what it means for a body to be a charity. There has been a great deal of technical discussion of the changes, but against that background, this article presents a qualitative assessment of perceptions of the practical impact. The changes made by the 2006 Act took effect in 2008, and by 2012 four years had elapsed for the impact to settle down. We assessed the perceived impact of the renewed public benefit emphasis, using in depth interviews with a number of major stakeholders and open workshops with charity staff, trustees and advisers. We found that most study participants valued public benefit as a central concept distinguishing charitable and non-charitable organisations, although for many charities the impact is experienced mainly at the time of registration and when producing their annual reports.

Keeping giving going : charitable bequests and Australians

The potential of bequests to contribute to the sustainability of charities1 is immense, with social and economic trends opening up the bequest landscape. Yet so much is unknown about how Australians think about charitable bequests – particularly about the motivations, barriers and triggers surrounding this behaviour. Do bequestors differ from other donors? What prevents good intentions from becoming good actions? Where do charities figure in this process? This study aims at a better understanding of those Australians who make a charitable bequest and those who might. It offers individual charities, and the sector as a whole, empirical evidence to support and extend the anecdotal knowledge of those working with donors around this sensitive, but vital, area. This research has been supported by the Perpetual Foundation, the EF and SL Gluyas Trust and the Edward Corbould Charitable Trust under the management of Perpetual Trustee Company Ltd.

Every player wins a prize? Family provision applications and bequests to charity

This research deals with the interaction of family provision law and charitable bequests in wills, including qualitative research relating to the practical issues arising with both legal practitioners and charities’ bequest officers.

Differences between students and non-students’ willingness to donate to a charitable organisation

This paper reports on a comparative study of students and non-students that investigates which psycho-social factors influence intended donation behaviour within a single organisation that offers multiple forms of donation activity. Additionally, the study examines which media channels are more important to encourage donation. A self-administered survey instrumentwas used and a sample of 776 respondents recruited. Logistic regressions and a Chow test were used to determine statistically significant differences between the groups. For donatingmoney, importance of charity and attitude towards charity influence students, whereas only importance of need significantly influences non-students. For donating time, no significant influences were found for non-students, however, importance of charity and attitude towards charity were significant for students. Importance of need was significant for both students and non-students for donating goods, with importance of charity also significant for students. Telephone and television channels were important for both groups. However, Internet, email and short messaging services were more important for students, providing opportunities to enhance this group’s perceptions of the importance of the charity, and the importance of the need, which ultimately impacts on their attitudes towards the charity. These differences highlight the importance of charities focussing on those motivations and attitudes that are important to a particular target segment and communicating through appropriate media channels for these segments.

Beyond charity : outlines of a jurisprudence for civil society

There is not a single, coherent, jurisprudence for civil society organisations. Pressure for a clearly enuciated body of law applying to the whole of this sector of society continues to increase. The rise of third sector scholarship, the retreat of the welfare state, the rediscovery of the concept of civil society and pressures to strengthen social capital have all contributed to an ongoing stream of inquiry into the laws that regulate and favour civil society organisations. There have been almost thirty inquiries over the last sixty years into the doctrine of charitable purpose in common law countries. Those inquiries have established that problems with the law applying to civil society organisations are rooted in the common law adopting a ‘technical’ definition of charitable purpose and the failure of this body of law to develop in response to societal changes. Even though it is now well recognised that problems with law reform stem from problems inherent in the doctrine of charitable purpose, statutory reforms have merely ‘bolted on’ additions to the flawed ‘technical’ definition. In this way the scope of operation of the law has been incrementally expanded to include a larger number of civil society organisations. This piecemeal approach continues the exclusion of most civil society organisations from the law of charities discourse, and fails to address the underlying jurisprudential problems. Comprehensive reform requires revisiting the foundational problems embedded in the doctrine of charitable purpose, being informed by recent scholarship, and a paradigm shift that extends the doctrine to include all civil society organisations. Scholarly inquiry into civil society organisations, particularly from within the discipline of neoclassical economics, has elucidated insights that can inform legal theory development. This theory development requires decoupling the two distinct functions performed by the doctrine of charitable purpose which are: setting the scope of regulation, and determining entitlement to favours, such as tax exemption. If the two different functions of the doctrine are considered separately in the light of theoretical insights from other disciplines, the architecture for a jurisprudence emerges that facilitates regulation, but does not necessarily favour all civil society organisations. Informed by that broader discourse it is argued that when determining the scope of regulation, civil society organisations are identified by reference to charitable purposes that are not technically defined. These charitable purposes are in essence purposes which are: Altruistic, for public Benefit, pursued without Coercion. These charitable puposes differentiate civil society organisations from organisations in the three other sectors namely; Business, which is manifest in lack of altruism; Government, which is characterised by coercion; and Family, which is characterised by benefits being private not public. When determining entitlement to favour, it is theorised that it is the extent or nature of the public benefit evident in the pursuit of a charitable purpose that justifies entitlement to favour. Entitlement to favour based on the extent of public benefit is the theoretically simpler – the greater the public benefit the greater the justification for favour. To be entitled to favour based on the nature of a purpose being charitable the purpose must fall within one of three categories developed from the first three heads of Pemsel’s case (the landmark categorisation case on taxation favour). The three categories proposed are: Dealing with Disadvantage, Encouraging Edification; and Facilitating Freedom. In this alternative paradigm a recast doctrine of charitable purpose underpins a jurisprudence for civil society in a way similar to the way contract underpins the jurisprudence for the business sector, the way that freedom from arbitrary coercion underpins the jurisprudence of the government sector and the way that equity within families underpins succession and family law jurisprudence for the family sector. This alternative architecture for the common law, developed from the doctrine of charitable purpose but inclusive of all civil society purposes, is argued to cover the field of the law applying to civil society organisations and warrants its own third space as a body of law between public law and private law in jurisprudence.

Modernising charity : steps to an alternative architecture for common law charity jurisprudence

This chapter addresses the question, how can the common law concept of charity law be modernised? There are difficulties with the present jurisprudential conception. The focus of the chapter is not on those difficulties, however, but rather on the development of an alternative architecture for common law jurisprudence. The conclusion to which the chapter comes is that charity law can be modernised by a series of steps to include all civil society organisations. It is possible if the ‘technical’ definition of charitable purpose is abandoned in favour of a contemporary, not technical concept of charitiable purpose. This conclusion is reached by proposing a framework, developed from the common law concept of charities, that reconciles into a cohesive jurisprudential architecture all of the laws applying to civil society organisations, not just charities. In this section, first the argument is contextualised in an idea of society and located in a gap in legal theory. An analogy is then offered to introduce the problems in the legal theory applying, not just to charities, but more broadly to civil society organisations. The substantive challenge of mapping an alternative jurisprudence is then taken in steps. The final substantive section conceptualises the changes inherent in a move beyond charities to a jurisprudence centred on civil society organisations and how this would bring legal theory into line with sectoral analysis in other disciplines.

Sell, give away, or donate : an exploratory study of fashion clothing disposal behaviour in two countries

This study investigates the antecedents to clothing disposal methods in two countries: Scotland and Australia. Increasing volumes of textiles are disposed of in landfill sites to the detriment of the environment. Extant research has identified the influences affecting an increased rate of purchasing and the trend to keep clothing for an ever shorter time. As such, it is imperative to examine the factors that affect consumers’ choice of clothing disposal method as limited research has been undertaken in this area of socially responsible consumption. The results of a survey administered to a sample of female consumers in the two countries identify antecedents of three forms of clothing disposal methods: selling through eBay or second-hand shops, giving away to family or friends or donating to charities. Findings show differences between the countries regarding clothing disposal behaviour. Nevertheless, general recycling behaviour was found to be the strongest predictor for donating to charities in both countries.

Charity law

Charity Law - 2nd edition addresses the modern law relating to this sector. Like the first edition, it comes at a time of public concern about the law regulating charitable activity. While concentrating on both legal and practitioner issues, this book also explores the modern concept of charity. It examines and explains the regulatory framework for charity and the need for transparency and public accountability. It gives you a complete understanding of the changes introduced by the Charities Act 2009, giving particular attention to the responsibilities of the new regulatory authority for charities, the importance of the role now statutorily allocated to the public benefit principle, and the significance of a new extended range of charitable purposes.

Consumer clothing disposal behaviour: A comparative study

Fast fashion retailing is leading consumers towards an increased rate of purchasing and the trend to keep clothing for an ever shorter time with the resulting rise in clothing disposal. The aim of this paper is to empirically explore antecedents of two methods of sustainable clothing disposal behaviour in two countries: donating to charities and giving away to family and friends. Using data from females located in Australia and Chile, the authors test the proposed model with structural equation modelling (SEM). The results of this study show that consumer recycling behaviour is a strong and direct driver of donating to charity. In addition, results find that consumer awareness of the environment and consumer age affect donating behaviour. The findings have value for fast fashion retailers, marketers, environmental activists, ecological researchers, charity institutions and public policy makers.

Charity law, advocacy and the aid/watch decision : compatibility of charitable purposes and political objects — the view from Australia

Introduction In 1952 the Nathan report stated that: Some of the most valuable activities of voluntary societies consist, however, in the fact that they may be able to stand aside from and criticize State action or inaction, in the interests of the inarticulate man in the street. Some 60 years later it remained the case that if a voluntary society wanted to gain or retain charitable status then, contrary to the Nathan report, the one thing it could not do was set itself up with the purpose of criticizing State action or inaction. This legal position was adopted by the authorities in Australia with the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) noting in Taxation Ruling TR2005/21: 102. An institution or fund is not charitable if its purpose is advocating a political party or cause, attempting to change the law or government policy, or propagating or promoting a particular point of view. So, why, if it is such a valuable activity, have governments steadfastly refused to allow charities to have as their purpose the freedom to advocate in this way and how has this situation been affected by the recent High Court of Australia decision in Aid/Watch v Commissioner of Taxation? This article proposes to address such questions. Beginning with some background history, it explains that, initially, the current constraints did not apply. Then it looks at the nature of these constraints: how does the law define what constitutes the type of political activity that a charity must not undertake? What is the rationale for prohibition? How has the judiciary contributed to the development of the law in this area in recent years? This will lead into a consideration of the Aid/Watch case and the implications arising from the recent final decision. The article concludes by reflecting on what has changed and why the view on this contentious matter now looks different from Australia.

Marketing charitable bequests to lawyers

There is scant literature about the role of the lawyer in influencing the likelihood of a charitable bequest being made in a will. Charities regularly advertise in legal journals and supply bequest materials to lawyers, but the effectiveness of these strategies for influencing lawyers appears not to have been measured in the literature or in practice. Our exploratory research indicates that specialist estate lawyers report that they pay little or no attention to traditional marketing of charitable bequests to them and that lawyers’ specific information needs from charities about bequests are not being satisfied appropriately. Our study reveals that lawyers do seek information from charities in order to write a will’s bequest clause, once a bequest has been considered by the client. Lawyers indicated frustration with obtaining this information from charities, and we recommend some actions for charities to rectify this situation. Recommendations for enhanced bequest solicitation are made together with suggestions for pathways for future bequest research involving lawyers.

Motives and barriers to bequest giving

Much is known about motivations for giving to charities generally. However, much less has been identified about bequestors as a unique type of charitable donor. This paper explores the motives and barriers for charitable bequest giving. Hypotheses are drawn from the general philanthropic literature and tested using survey data from Australia, a nation distinguished by very high lifetime (inter vivos) giving but low estate (post mortem) giving. The results show that belief in the efficacy of charitable organizations is requisite for leaving a bequest, as the deceased donor has no control over the enactment of the gift. This effect is mediated by the perceived difficulty of making a charitable bequest, which forms an important barrier for leaving such a legacy. Having family whose financial needs are perceived as not taken care of and the perception of financial inability to make a difference also form barriers for bequest giving. The results confirm that bequests constitute a distinctive charitable behaviour, with unique motives and barriers compared to other types of inter vivos giving. While charitable behaviour in general is driven by altruistic attitudes and political and religious values, as well as social reputation, these factors do not affect charitable bequest making as expected. Surprisingly, we find a negative relationship between financial resources and the inclination to leave a charitable bequest. The article ends with suggestions for ways charities might connect more meaningfully with their bequestors or with donors who might consider bequeathing to them.

The Australian nonprofit sector legal and accounting almanac 2011

Summaries of legal cases, legislation and developments in law and accounting relevant to nonprofit organisations and charity law during 2011; including articles on special issues such as accounting standards and the chart of accounts; law reform (e.g. the new national regulator, the Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission); and taxation.