The issue which was raised was the reputation of the charity, not the cost of the vouchers.
Bear in mind that WMF received £2M from Google in 2010 which falls within the period covered by the Public Accounts Committee report on Google published this summer: http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/public-accounts-committee/news/tax-avoidance-google/ The companys highly contrived tax arrangement has no purpose other than to enable the company to avoid UK corporation tax. Googles reputation has been damaged by these revelations of aggressive tax avoidance. That damage will not be repaired until the company arranges to pay its fair share of tax in the country where it earns the profits from the business it conducts." So, the Wikimedia movement in general, through this donation to the WMF can be seen as benefiting from Tax Avoidance. Whilst I do not think WMUK's reputation is necessarily damaged by this historic situation, I do feel that it would be helpful if staff, trustees and members all had a certain sensitivity to this issue, as this still remains a matter for public concern. all the best Fabian User:Leutha > Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2013 03:01:07 +0000 > From: Michael Maggs <[email protected]> > To: UK Wikimedia mailing list <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Amazon Tax avoidance > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 > > > On 30 Nov 2013, at 22:01, Charles Matthews > <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Actually, I despair of the entire thread. There is all of £20 at stake >> here. There is every reason to economise on staff time, on this scale. >> The waste of volunteer time and good will that has been generated is >> unconscionable. The object of the exercise has been completely >> forgotten. The objects of the charity hardly enter. >> >> Charles > > Absolutely. After 43 emails all we have learned that the mailing list is > not a remotely efficient way of deciding how the charity should spend > £20. The staff have plenty to go on, and they should be perfectly able > to move ahead now without need for any further commentary. > > I suggest that this thread should be treated as closed. Thank you for your > comments everybody. > > Michael > > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimediauk-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l > > > End of Wikimediauk-l Digest, Vol 101, Issue 1 > ********************************************* > _______________________________________________ Wikimedia UK mailing list [email protected] http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
