Archewell only had two donors

[Blip]

Interesting to see that Archewell donations were 99% made up of donations from just TWO one-off donors, one of £10M and one of £3M.
Speculation that this was £10M from Oprah for the interview and £3M from Tyler.

This doesn't look very sustainable to me.

Which foundation? All 3? Both public charities and private foundations can be registered under 501 (c) (3)

Yes, but the IRS determined they were a public charity.

I don’t think that’s accurate. It’s a non profit. That’s all IRS would determine. Where did you get that from?

The IRS wrote them a letter informing them of their tax exempt status under section 501c3 and said they'd determined they were a public charity. The letter was published. I read it.

That doesn’t mean it’s not a foundation. Did they say: you’re not running a foundation, you’re running a charity? No. They are a foundation that give to charitable causes. They’re set up that way, that’s the name, that’s how it’s recorded on their filings.

Maybe post the letter. They deem you eligible for that exemption as a ‘charitable organisation’ and list all those types of organisations that fall under that term. Including foundations.

To be fair, Charles has already this year donated £1bn in profits that would have been paid to him from wind farms.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jan/19/king-charles-redirects-1bn-windfarm-profits-towards-public-good

Here’s the classification for Archewell Foundation:
*

• CLASSIFICATION(S)
• Categories under which an organization may be tax exempt
• 501(C)(3)
• Charitable Organization

A charitable org includes foundations.

Once more, you as an individual, do not donate to Archewell !

Not to give them to distribute to other charities, nothing.

To be fair, Charles has already this year donated £1bn in profits that would have been paid to him from wind farms.
Yes, because of the deal Cameron gave him he would have been due that ridiculous sum he doesn’t need. I read that the treasury were already planning to address it anyway but he got in first, good PR.

@Whaeanui I've told you I've read the letter saying it's been dedetermined to be a public charity. Is that not good enough? The difference between public charities and private foundations is how they get their money.

@notanotheroneagain just proves, yet again, to be misinformed. The public can donate to Archewell because its a public charity.

Once more, you as an individual, do not donate to Archewell !

@MrsMaxDeWinter I certainly wouldn’t expect them to give all their money away

Oh, how generous of him to 'donate' extra funding taxpayer money that he did not earn, back to the people who inadvertently paid for it in the first place.

I've told you I've read the letter saying it's been dedetermined to be a public charity. Is that not good enough? The difference between public charities and private foundations is how they get their money.

No. because it is absolutely wrong. The category is ‘charitable organisation’. Do you understand the difference from that term used for tax purposes, and the word ‘charity’? It is absolutely factual to state it is a private foundation. They come under the tax category as ‘charitable organisation’. The IRS did not reclassify their foundation to a charity. It’s simply not true.

Treasury plans. Charles does. And Charles has always pushed environmental concerns. No one could ever say he hasn't tried to do his best in that quarter, not just nationally but internationally too. This would be online with that.

Are you saying that the IRS did not designate them as a public charity? How do you know that for a fact?

Because there is zero evidence of it and the filings and name show it’s a foundation. I don’t know how else to say it. The IRS classification is online and reads ‘charitable organisation’. That’s the tax category. It is NOT the same as classifying it as a charity. You cannot donate directly to it. Go and try. Come back when you’ve found the donate button. They have calls to action which encourage you to donate to actual charities, not to their foundation. Literally nobody anywhere is claiming it’s a charity not a foundation so I’m not sure why you are, or why it matters so much. If you’ve seen a letter, where did you see it?

I read that the treasury were already planning to address it anyway but he got in first, good PR.

Right, so royal family members making charitable donations are just doing it for good PR? That also applies to Meghan and Harry via the (much smaller) donations they make via Archewell too, then.

I don’t see that as a charitable donation by Charles. He shouldn’t ever be in a position to receive that much. It’s obscene.

Except for one little detail..................the RF are gaining that money via the taxpayer, H&M are not.

Much like Harry and the obscene income from selling his family out for profit, I guess.

No. He sold his story, that involved people in his life, much like loads of other people do. Like Charles did. Like Diana. Fergie also, she even gave Oprah an interview. All very different things to the sovereign grant.

But what made his story worth the huge amount of money he got for it? I bet I know people with much more interesting stories than his who would never command those fees. He simply got them because of his Royal connection. Yes it’s different to the sovereign grant, but why does Harry need that amount of money if he wants to live as a private citizen? The Royals get the lifestyle and money they get because, rightly or wrongly, they are members of a certain family and live in their gilded cage. Harry chose to leave. What has he done to deserve the huge amount of money he got for his book, Netflix documentary etc? I’m not suggesting he should wear sack cloth and live in a cave, but he had enough money for a comfortable lifestyle. Why does he need to live in a huge house for example? What does it add to his life other than outward show?

That’s one assessment. Others are available.