Natwest mastercard - interest charged on charity donations

Can't help you with that but have you considered a CAF account:

When I had one they gave you something that worked much like a credit card for many charities. You also get "cheques" that you can use to donate to charity. Another advantage is that you have a single place where all your donations go so it makes it easier at the end of the tax year to work out what to put on your tax return.

Currently I use South West Charitable Giving:

I only changed from CAF because my employer has a GAYE scheme but it has to be via SWCG. That's even easier because I don't have to remember to put anything on my tax return as the donation comes out of my gross pay. Unfortunately SWCG only provide cheques, not a "credit card" that you can use online. (You can give direct to charities - some of my monthly donation goes straight to charity and some goes into my account to be dished out by me for one off things) and they've just written to me about having some sort of online service so maybe you can give via that (although the letter suggests I should email them with the password I want to use which just feels wrong to me :- ( )

These options do charge fees (it's a few percent of your donation) so you might still prefer to give direct, especially if you always fill in a gift aid form.

Tim.

Why on earth should they, they're a bank not a charity.

Because, presumably, they're taking a margin from the charity, just like with any retail purchase.

"Martin" wrote

But that's because, as the other poster said, they are a business (a bank) and not a charity themselves.

Why should they do their work for free, just because the OP wants to make a charitable donation?

Quite so. If you were to send a charitable donation by cheque, would you expect the post office to make no charge for delivering the letter containing it? Some charities have FREEPOST addresses, but of course the PO still charges them. I'm sure most of will have seen their envelopes, which bear the words "this envelope does not need a stamp, but if you use one, it will save us money".

That's not what was being suggested. They are already, reckons Martin, getting their 3% or however much it is from the charity, so why should they get an *additional* amount of interest from the donor as a result of treating the transaction like a cash advance?

Alternatively, is it the case that *because* it's treated like a cash advance, *all* the cash goes to the charity

*without* deduction of the 3% cut? That would, I suggest, be rather more acceptable.

snipped-for-privacy@woodall.me.uk wrote: ...

d a CAF account:

...

CAF's "just a few percent" was more than enough for me to stop using them years ago.

Check before signing up.

Interesting... you could be right, cos otherwise HMRC would be giving a few pence tax relief to the bank, and that would never do... :-)

That said, we use c/cards quite often for charity stuff, both direct and via Just Giving, and never get an extra charge - so maybe (as implied by OP) this is just a NatWest thing.

If you always fill in the gift aid paperwork, and always remember to claim everything on your tax return, then yes, you would probably be foolish to use one of these.

But especially for HRT payers you don't have to forget to claim for many donations before the 4% is more than paid for.

Tim.

You've misunderstood - please re-read...

But that's not the question.

The question is, why should they charge more to do their work, just because it it a charitable donation rather than a purchase from a profit-making company.

In message , Ronald Raygun writes

This is the case, as I understand it.

In message , Moo writes

I see no problem with the payment being treated as a cash advance, what I dont understand is why you are being charged interest for three months if you pay your bill off properly every month, but are you sure you do pay it off in full? If it is a cash advance then there will be interest charged from the day of the advance and so you need to pay the accrued interest as well as the total of all the debits.

I see no reason at all as to why they should give any of the interest to the charity and dont see how the bank can be accused of 'profiting from charitable donations'. The use you put to the money you draw on the card is of no business of theirs.

Having said all of the above, you should have been made aware of the transaction being treated as a cash advance before you made the donation.

interest

accrued

Because if, say, your statement date is the 1st of the month and your payment date is the 25th, and you make the donation on the 10th Sept.

On your 1st Oct statement: you'll get charged interest on the cash advance from the 10th Sept till 1st Oct.

On your 1st Nov statement: the cash advance is still outstanding until the 25th Oct when you pay it off, so you get charged interest on the cash advance from 1st Oct till 25th Oct.

On your 1st Dec statement: Interest is often treated in the same way as the item on which the interest was charged, so as the interest charged to your 1st Nov statement will not get paid off till the 25th Nov, you will pay interest on this interest. This is likely to be just a few pence.

Theoretically this goes on forever, but by the fourth month your talking about interest on interest on interest which is likely to be zero to the nearest penny.

But presumably you have to remember to claim for your CAF donations, or do they send you an annual statement?

If you had mailed them a cheque would you find it equally "appalling" that the Royal Mail wanted a stamp and some stationery company expected you to pay for the envelope? Why should for-profit companies bear any unreimbursed expense because of your decision to make donations?

By collecting the donation as a cash advance the charity will be getting

100% gross of your gift amount instead of paying some %age of it in merchant commissions to their bank.

RBS, parent of NatWest, makes charitable donations to the causes they choose and those are not necessarily the same as the ones you choose.

"Jonathan Bryce" wrote

But they *don't* charge *more* ! -- they charge the same as for a 'cash advance' from any "profit-making company."

"Ronald Raygun" wrote

I was considering the "interest + commission" as their total payment (the commission maybe zero, per other posts).

If they *did* get both in the case of a "profit-making company", then why shouldn't they get both when it's a charity?

"Martin" wrote

Which bit do you think I've misunderstood?

In message , Martin wrote

Probably a lot less than the charity spends on administration.