It's not a witch hunt. It appears that David Beckham's charitable endeavours are at least as much about gaining status and income for himself as they are about helping people.
Perhaps more so. If he's open about it, then we will see. But he's not.
I don't think setting up a separate charity, with all the costs involved, is ever going to be as cost effective as just turning up for Unicef - it's not exactly as if we haven't heard of them.
He should have learned his lesson because he and Victoria set up their own charity, The David and Victoria Beckham Charitable Trust, piggybacking on that other little-known charity, the NSPCC, in 2006 on the eve of the WAG World Cup. They threw a star pocked party at their house in Hertfordshire that aimed to raise £10m. I wonder how much the NSPCC got and how much was swallowed up in admin costs?
If it was such a success why did David feel the need to set up the 7 Foundation? Surely it's better to stick with an established name.
It is also not only legitimate for HMRC to place a red flag on his participation in a tax avoidance scheme, it is desirable. It alerted the people responsible for doling out honours to the danger of being embarrassed at a time when public opinion was against tax avoidance and warned anyone against getting involved in that particular scheme.
The Beckhams have a long history of this. They ruthlessly exploit publicity, seek to control it and then stamp their feet when it goes wrong instead of thinking about all the times when it has gone right for them and keeping quiet.