Monday, 9 July 2012

2. Gang charities - should we be concerned?

 If you think the information on this blog is useful, please click on the advertisements on this webpage (at the right) before you leave.  If you really like the blog you can click multiple times!  Every ad click – which earns me about 14 cents - helps pay for the late night coffees I went through writing it and is much appreciated J .  You can also check out the CharityWatchNZ contents page if you want quick access to all my charity blog topics. 

Introduction

If you’re registered as a charity you have to meet certain standards so the public can have confidence in your charity and the charitable sector as a whole.

A charity engaged in serious wrongdoing can be removed from the register by the regulator.  The serious wrongdoing definition includes engaging in an unlawful or corrupt use of funds or resources of the charity, as well as committing any act that constitutes an offence.  In addition, individuals can be disqualified as officers of a charity if they have been convicted of a crime involving dishonesty and sentenced for that crime within the last seven years.

It is worth bearing in mind that convicted criminals who have not been convicted of a dishonesty offence can still serve on a charity.  The reason given by Government at the time the legislation was passed was that some charities are established to assist current and former prisoners and the appointment of officers with past experience of prison would be of positive benefit to that charity (see p.10 of the Charities Bill commentary).


Recently there have been two reported incidences of the Mongrel Mob being behind registered charities.  No doubt other gangs are also involved with the charitable sector.   What do we know about them and should we be concerned?

We Against Violence
In May 2012 Otago Daily Times reported that a Mongrel Mob charitable trust called “We Against Violence” received government funding via Whanau Ora. A four-month investigation by Dunedin police had led to the arrest of 10 men, some with Mongrel Mob Notorious connections. Four Dunedin men were charged with dishonestly converting $20,000 of trust money.

We Against Violence is still a registered charity today, with purposes that include promoting philosophies of non-offensive, non-violent, pro-social behaviours.  No financial information is available for this charity yet – their 2011 return to the charities regulator is not required because they did not register until 8/7/2011. The charity is on the IRD website listed as an approved donee organisation.  So in addition to the Whanau Ora government funding, there may well be a flow of donation tax credits Inland Revenue paid out to assist this charitable trust.

Although gang charitable activity must be, by its nature, “high risk” for funders, as Tariana Turia noted, sometimes that is a risk worth taking.  In this case the Mongrel Mob charity did meet all their contracted outcomes.  However the problems arise when not all use of the funding is transparent.

Te Ara Tika o Te Whanau Trust

In 2006 there was a lot of publicity about the Notorious chapter of the Mongrel Mob starting a labour hire business called Rent a Bro and at the same time trying to see P eradicated by setting up a charitable trust called the Te Ara Tika o Te Whanau Trust.

In 2009 Rent a Bro came under the spotlight when director Mark Tipene (formally Mark Stephens, the convicted rapist also known as the Parnell Panther), was found guilty of intimidating a woman when collecting debts.  However it has also attracted positive publicity, such as carving the Bilingual School Marae at Sylvia Park.  Rent a Bro’s sole director is Roy Dunn, leader of the Notorious chapter.  The company is still active on the Companies Register today.

The related charitable trust Te Ara Tika registered as a charity in June 2008.  It filed its 2009 financial accounts showing income of about $11,000 and expenses of $23,000.   The three sources of income were donations ($2,920), Mangere East Family Service Centre youth plan ($6,667) and Tamaki Ki Raro Trust – now called Strive Community Trust ($1,778).  However no future returns were filed and the charity was deregistered in May 2011.  Despite this, the trust is still listed as a donee organisation on the IRD website.

Although no more information is available about the charity on the charities register, the JR McKenzie Trust website shows that in the year ending 31 March 2012 it made Te Ara Tika a grant of $181,600.  This is part of a 3-year commitment of grant funding, so the total funding will be approximately $545,000.  No doubt it is difficult for the Mongrel Mob to get government funding for its projects, which is probably why the JR McKenzie Trust has got involved.

Unfortunately, this is an example of how easy it is for registered charities to slip out of public view and outside the scrutiny of the charities regulator.   As soon as it doesn't file a return it is deregistered and no-one really knows what the entity is doing, how much money it is receiving or where it is going. 

By continuing to list the entity as having donee status, IRD lets the organisation’s donors continue claiming donation tax credits from the government.  That is the result of donee status not being linked to whether the entity is a registered charity, but instead whether IRD interprets the entity as being charitable, cultural, benevolent or philanthropic under its own legislation.

Conclusion

Gangs like the Mongrel Mob are involved with registered charities and this isn’t surprising.  When the charities legislation was passed there was an expectation that people convicted of crimes would be officers of registered charities.

The unfortunate aspect of NZ’s current system is that charities can easily be deregistered from the charities register without providing financial statements or information to show what they did when they were registered. 

Furthermore, this example shows that deregistration as a charity does not prevent the organisation from retaining IRD donee status, so donors can continue to claim back 1/3rd of donations from the government.  This means, even though the government is put under the spotlight when it provides direct funding to these types of entities (for example, through Whanau Ora), the funding it provides to these types of entities through the donation tax credit system remains opaque. 

Perhaps the Mongrel Mob charities are doing good work – there’s no published evidence to suggest they don’t.  But we should be concerned about a system that allows these types of charities to easily slip off the charities register, and for donation tax credit support to continue after they are deregistered, with no public accountability or transparency whatsoever.      

Sunday, 1 July 2012

1. Reducing transparency

In most cases charities are forced to disclose financial information on the NZ charities register even if they don’t want to.  Transparency is the price they pay for being registered charities with tax exemption benefits and public support.

However the regulator allows charities to withhold information in certain circumstances.  Charities also have the option of filing “grouped” accounts which will minimise transparency while still including their financial totals on the register.

Withheld Information

The reasons why the Charities regulator can withhold information are outlined on this ‘restricting information’ webpage.


One instance where a charity will not have to disclose financial accounts is if disclosure “may unreasonably prejudice the commercial position of the charity…”  That means there may be some significant businesses which have had their financial information withheld from the register on the basis that they are commercially sensitive.

It is not possible to easily identify all of the charities which have had information withheld based on the register search engine.  However, examples can be found using individual charity searches.  

The multinational, Christchurch-based communications business Tait Radio is one example.  This corporation has permission from the regulator to have its business accounts withheld.

As reported in a media article posted on Tait’s own website, in 2011 Tait’s revenue exceeded US$150 million (NZ$187m), of which 95 percent was earned offshore. It appears that most of this revenue was earned by Tait’s registered charities, or overseas subsidiaries of the registered charities, but it has been withheld from the public register.  As can be seen by this one example, withholding financial information will have understated the aggregate totals on the register by a significant amount. 

Analysis of data on the register can be even more problematic if the regulator allows different approaches from one year to the next.  The Tindall Foundation is an example where its financial data summary has been supplied in 2009 and 2010 but formally withheld in 2011.  The Tindall Foundation's assets were $131m in 2009 and $144m in 2010, so omitting 2011 figures can make trend analysis challenging.

Grouping Accounts

Unlike Tait Radio and the Tindall Fourndation, the Seventh Day Adventist Church does not have formal approval to withhold its accounts.  However it has elected to group all of its entities together and report on total group figures. 

There are two Seventh Day Adventist groups on the Register: Seventh Day Adventist Church in New Zealand 1 and Seventh Day Adventist Church in New Zealand 2.  The 2011 financial accounts show that Group 1 controls assets of $50m as at 30/06/2011 and Group 2 controls assets of $157m as at 31/12/2010.  Total group revenue is approximately $112m.

Sanitarium Health Food Company is mentioned in the notes to the accounts of Group 1.  It is one of a number of legal entities in that group which includes entities that run community development projects in NZ and overseas, retirement villages and hospitals.  No individual financial details are provided for any of these activities. 



Conclusion



In comparing these examples, the public may have no insight into the profits or distribution policy of Sanitarium Health Food Company, but at least we know that its financial information is included in the publicly available data totals.  That is not the case with Tait Radio or the Tindall Foundation (for 2011) where we are in the dark about knowing what assets are and are not used for charitable purposes.

The lesson here?  Beware of taking financial totals from the charities register at face value.  Some of the important information is either hidden in aggregate totals or not provided to the public at all.

Saturday, 30 June 2012

Why CharityWatchNZ?

According to the New Zealand Charities Register there are 25,279 registered charities in New Zealand - that's one for every 175 New Zealanders.

Why do we have so many charities? 

For the first time ever we have the ability to look closely at who these charities are and what they are doing.  When the Charities Act 2005 came into force it required each registered charity to publish an annual return as well as financial statements.  So today we can analyse several years' worth of data to understand this growing sector.

Although most charities are no doubt doing great work, are there some charities on the register that the public should be concerned about?  There have been news stories of gangs running charities in the past, as well as multi-national businesses switching from for-profit to tax-free charitable status.  Some of the charity structures are suprisingly complex.  Why?

I've started this blog to dig into the rich data on the Charities Register to see what I can find out.  Maybe there will be some surprises.  Or maybe everything is above board.

If you have any feedback or suggestions then send them through - the more eyes watching charities in New Zealand the better.