{"id":56355,"date":"2026-09-25T12:19:35","date_gmt":"2026-09-25T16:19:35","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.millerthomson.com\/?p=56355"},"modified":"2026-09-25T12:19:38","modified_gmt":"2026-09-25T16:19:38","slug":"one-hand-gives-the-other-hand-takes-why-charities-are-still-hesitant-to-use-the-qualifying-disbursements-rules","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.millerthomson.com\/en\/insights\/social-impact\/one-hand-gives-the-other-hand-takes-why-charities-are-still-hesitant-to-use-the-qualifying-disbursements-rules\/","title":{"rendered":"One hand gives, the other hand takes: Why charities are still hesitant to use the qualifying disbursements rules"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p>In 2022, Parliament gave charities a new way to provide resources to non-qualified donees:<a href=\"#_ftn1\" id=\"_ftnref1\">[1]<\/a> the qualifying disbursements rules. In the same legislation, it quietly extended the \u201canti-directed giving rule\u201d to registered charities for the first time, making it a potential ground for revocation if a charity accepts a gift that is expressly or implicitly conditional on granting funds to a non-qualified donee. As a result, many charities are too uncertain about the risks to use the very framework that was designed to help them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The anti-directed giving rule, <a href=\"https:\/\/laws-lois.justice.gc.ca\/eng\/acts\/I-3.3\/section-168.html\">paragraph 168(1)(f)<\/a> of the <em>Income Tax Act<\/em> (\u201c<strong>ITA<\/strong>\u201d), threatens common fundraising practices across the sector, from international aid organizations raising funds for local affiliates to charities supporting specific community projects through non-profit partners. Until Parliament clarifies the rule&#8217;s scope, charities in some circumstances will face a difficult choice between taking advantage of the qualifying disbursement rules and protecting their registration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">What is the anti-directed giving rule?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>Paragraph 168(1)(f) of the ITA currently states:<\/p>\n\n\n<p style=\"padding-left: 80px;\">\n\n\n<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><strong>168<\/strong>\u00a0<strong>(1)<\/strong>\u00a0The Minister may, by registered mail, give notice to a person described in any of paragraphs (a) to (c) of the definition\u00a0<strong><em>qualified donee<\/em><\/strong>\u00a0in\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.canlii.org\/en\/ca\/laws\/stat\/rsc-1985-c-1-5th-supp\/latest\/rsc-1985-c-1-5th-supp.html#sec149.1subsec1_smooth\">subsection 149.1(1)<\/a>\u00a0that the Minister proposes to revoke its registration if the person<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 120px;\">\n\n\n\n<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\">[\u2026]<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 120px;\">\n\n\n\n<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 80px;\"><strong>(f)<\/strong>\u00a0in the case of a registered charity, registered Canadian amateur athletic association or registered journalism organization, accepts a gift the granting of which was expressly or implicitly conditional on the charity, association or organization making a gift to another person, club, society, association or organization other than a qualified donee.<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 80px;\">\n\n\n<\/p>\n\n\n<p>The effect of this provision is that a charity cannot accept a gift that is conditional (either expressly or implicitly) on the charity making a subsequent gift to a non-qualified donee. In other words, a charity can fundraise and accept donations generally, but it cannot accept a gift that is conditional on the charity subsequently making a gift to a non-qualified donee.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Before this provision was amended in 2022, paragraph 168(1)(f) did not apply to registered charities; rather, it only applied to registered Canadian amateur athletic associations and registered journalism organizations. &nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>In recent correspondence, the federal Department of Finance indicated that it had amended this provision in 2022 to capture charities deliberately. Ottawa was concerned that, without the amendment, the qualifying disbursement rules could inadvertently allow charities to act as flow-through vehicles for donors wishing to support non-qualified donees. In other words, Finance did not want registered charities to use the qualifying disbursements regime to become fundraising arms for non-qualified donees.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">How does the anti-directed giving rule affect charities?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>Unfortunately, the overbroad wording of paragraph 168(1)(f) has created significant uncertainty in the charitable sector.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Specifically, questions continue to surround what it means for a gift to be \u201cimplicitly conditional.\u201d In its guidance, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.canada.ca\/en\/revenue-agency\/services\/charities-giving\/charities\/policies-guidance\/charities-making-grants-non-qualified-donees.html#toc12\">\u201cRegistered charities making grants to non-qualified donees\u201d<\/a> (CG-032) (the \u201c<strong>Guidance<\/strong>\u201d), the Canada Revenue Agency (\u201c<strong>CRA<\/strong>\u201d) provides the following example of an implicitly conditional gift:<\/p>\n\n\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><em>A charity includes the name of a non-qualified donee in its own name, purposes, or other formal documents, indicating this would be the sole recipient of any grants the charity makes. Any funds the charity receives from a donor could be implicitly conditional on the charity granting them to the specified non-qualified donee, and could jeopardize the charity\u2019s registration.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n<p>This illustration in the Guidance is concerning, as it potentially puts many common fundraising practices and arrangements in the sector offside the anti-directed giving rule. For instance:<a href=\"#_ftn2\" id=\"_ftnref2\">[2]<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>The Canadian arm of an international humanitarian aid charity raises funds in Canada for a crisis overseas where there is a local affiliate of the international charity. The local affiliate has a very similar name to the name of the Canadian charity. The Canadian charity provides grants to the local affiliate to fund its humanitarian work on the ground; or<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>A registered charity with charitable purposes that include providing public amenities raises funds that it plans to grant to a non-profit organization for the exclusive purpose of restoring a community park; or<br><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>A charity whose purposes and programs include assisting specified First Nation communities with building homes and improving housing conditions accepts a donation directed toward supporting that program.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p>In all these examples, the work to be undertaken by the non-qualified donee is clearly charitable and beneficial to the public. It seems counterproductive that, by fundraising for and funding such work, a charity would be putting its own registration at risk.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Some charities might rely on other parts of the Guidance for comfort. In particular, the CRA has said that charities can \u201cavoid concerns\u201d about the anti-directed giving rule if they retain authority over the use of their resources and clearly communicate this to donors. Essentially, CRA has accepted that charities can apply gifts in accordance with donor preferences if they communicate to the donor that the gift is not truly conditional.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>While this is helpful, it does not eliminate the risk for charities. The wording of paragraph 168(1)(f) does not contain the exception in the Guidance, and, at any point, the CRA could choose to interpret and enforce this broad provision in the ITA more strictly. As a result, many charities are hesitant to take advantage of the new qualifying disbursement regime.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>It is a pity that the qualifying disbursements rules may not be living up to their full potential and achieving their stated objectives of creating new partnerships and helping underserved communities.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">Is the anti-directed giving rule necessary?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>Before the qualifying disbursement rules were introduced, charities had only one way to work with, or make grants to, non-qualified donees: the \u201cown activities\u201d option.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Under this option, charities wishing to fund a non-qualified donee\u2019s work would need to structure that work as the charity\u2019s \u201cown activity\u201d and engage the non-qualified donee as the charity\u2019s intermediary or agent to carry on that work. The charity at all material times would have to exercise direction and control over how the non-qualified donee uses the charity\u2019s resources.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Many in the sector had viewed (and continue to view) the \u201cown activities\u201d regime\u2014with its direction-and-control requirements\u2014as cumbersome, antiquated, patriarchal, colonial, and unbefitting of how charities actually work with organizations in the real world. The sector\u2019s concerns and complaints gave rise to the introduction of the qualifying disbursements rules. However, with the anti-directed giving rule also in place, many charities that had initially hoped to take advantage of the new qualifying disbursement rules are continuing to rely on and make grants to non-qualified donees through the \u201cown activities\u201d option.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The CRA has always been concerned about non-qualified donees leveraging the tax privileges of charities and using charities to act as flow-through vehicles or \u201cconduits.\u201d In its guidance on <a href=\"https:\/\/www.canada.ca\/en\/revenue-agency\/services\/charities-giving\/charities\/policies-guidance\/using-intermediary-carry-a-charitys-activities-within-canada.html\">\u201cUsing an intermediary to carry on a charity\u2019s activities within Canada\u201d<\/a> (CG-004), the CRA describes a conduit as \u201c\u2026a charity that funnels its resources to a non-qualified donee without direction or control\u201d and states that acting as a conduit could jeopardize a charity\u2019s registration. The CRA&#8217;s definition of a conduit suggests that a charity that provides resources to a non-qualified donee while maintaining appropriate direction and control would generally not be viewed as acting as a conduit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Given this, it seems bizarre then that a charity that properly structured a grant to a non-qualified donee in accordance with the qualifying disbursement rules (i.e., ensuring the grant furthers the charity\u2019s own charitable purposes, is exclusively applied to charitable activities, and is supported by adequate documentation), could still put its registration at risk if a donor directs that a grant be used in support of a specific charitable program that involves a non-qualified donee. The qualifying disbursement rules were designed to ensure there is accountability over the use of charitable resources. So long as those rules are being followed, it is unclear why there would be concerns regarding the flow of charitable resources to non-qualified donees.&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">What advocacy efforts have been made to change the anti-directed giving rule?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>On March 5, 2026, the Charities and Not for Profit Law Section of the Canadian Bar Association (the \u201c<strong>CBA Section<\/strong>\u201d) provided a written <a href=\"https:\/\/cba.org\/Our-Impact\/Submissions\/Anti-Directed-Giving-Rule\" data-type=\"link\" data-id=\"https:\/\/cba.org\/Our-Impact\/Submissions\/Anti-Directed-Giving-Rule\">submission to the Minister of Finance and National Revenue <\/a>requesting that the anti-directed giving rule be either removed from the ITA or amended such that it would apply only to gifts to non-qualified donees that do not constitute \u201cqualifying disbursements.\u201d The Minister of Finance responded to the submission by explaining the rationale for the rule, but the response letter did not fully address the CBA Section&#8217;s concerns or proposed solutions. Nonetheless, the CBA Section continues its advocacy efforts with respect to this important issue.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">What should charities do now?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong>Don&#8217;t abandon the qualifying disbursements framework.<\/strong> The rules remain a legitimate and potentially valuable tool for making grants to non-qualified donees. The anti-directed giving rule creates uncertainty where certain donation or fundraising practices are used, but it does not prohibit qualifying disbursements. Charities should work with legal counsel to determine whether and how the framework can be used within their existing programs.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong>Review your fundraising language and donor communications.<\/strong> The CRA has indicated that charities can reduce risk by retaining authority over the use of their resources and clearly communicating this to donors. Ensure that fundraising materials, gift agreements, and donor correspondence do not create an express or implied condition that donations will be granted to a specific non-qualified donee.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong>Audit your organizational documents.<\/strong> The CRA&#8217;s guidance flags that naming a non-qualified donee in your charity&#8217;s name, purposes, or formal documents could create an implied condition. Review your constating documents, program descriptions, and public-facing materials for language that could be read as directing funds to a specific non-qualified donee.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong>Update your gift acceptance policy.<\/strong> If your charity does not already have a gift acceptance policy addressing directed gifts, create one. If you do, review it against the anti-directed giving rule to ensure it clearly preserves the charity&#8217;s discretion over how resources are applied, even where the charity intends to honour a donor&#8217;s preference.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong>Document your qualifying disbursement decisions independently. <\/strong>Where your charity makes a qualifying disbursement to a non-qualified donee that aligns with a donor&#8217;s stated preference, ensure the decision is documented as an independent exercise of the charity&#8217;s own judgment, not as a fulfilment of a donor condition. Board minutes, grant agreements, and internal memos should reflect that the charity evaluated the grant on its own merits.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong>Consider joining advocacy efforts.<\/strong> The CBA Section has formally requested that the anti-directed giving rule be removed or narrowed. Other sector organizations may wish to add their voices. The public comment process remains a channel for pushing Parliament toward clarification.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\">How can Miller Thomson help?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>The anti-directed giving rule creates real compliance risk for charities that fundraise or accept donations directed toward certain programs and want to use the qualifying disbursements framework. However, the risk can be mitigated with the right structures in place. Miller Thomson&#8217;s award-winning <a href=\"https:\/\/www.millerthomson.com\/en\/industries\/charity-not-for-profit\/?utm_source=google&amp;utm_medium=cpc&amp;utm_campaign=brand-lets&amp;utm_term=miller%20thomson&amp;utm_content=180136986714&amp;gad_source=1\">Charities and Not-For-Profit Group lawyers<\/a> advise registered charities on qualifying disbursements, gift acceptance policies, donor communications, CRA compliance, and advocacy before Parliament and the Department of Finance.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Whether you need to review your fundraising practices against the anti-directed giving rule, structure a qualifying disbursement to a non-qualified donee, or update your gift acceptance policy, our team can help.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<hr class=\"wp-block-separator has-alpha-channel-opacity\"\/>\n\n\n\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref1\" id=\"_ftn1\">[1]<\/a> <a href=\"https:\/\/www.canada.ca\/en\/revenue-agency\/services\/charities-giving\/charities\/policies-guidance\/qualified-donees.html\">Qualified donees<\/a> are registered charities and other prescribed entities. For the purposes of this article, a \u201cnon-qualified donee\u201d refers to any person or organization that does not fall under the definition of qualified donee.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><a href=\"#_ftnref2\" id=\"_ftn2\">[2]<\/a> Note: all these situations assume that the charity is providing resources to a non-qualified donee as a qualifying disbursement.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>In 2022, Parliament gave charities a new way to provide resources to non-qualified donees:[1] the qualifying disbursements rules. In the same legislation, it quietly extended the \u201canti-directed giving rule\u201d to registered charities for the first time, making it a potential ground for revocation if a charity accepts a gift that is expressly or implicitly conditional [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":122,"featured_media":12324,"parent":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[535],"insight-format":[416],"class_list":["post-56355","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-social-impact"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v28.5 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>One hand gives, the other hand takes: Why charities are still hesitant to use the qualifying disbursements rules | Miller Thomson<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"The qualifying disbursements rules were meant to help charities fund non-qualified donees\u2014but the anti-directed giving rule is creating uncertainty. Learn the compliance risks and how to mitigate them.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.millerthomson.com\/en\/insights\/social-impact\/one-hand-gives-the-other-hand-takes-why-charities-are-still-hesitant-to-use-the-qualifying-disbursements-rules\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"One hand gives, the other hand takes: Why charities are still hesitant to use the qualifying disbursements rules | Miller Thomson\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"The qualifying disbursements rules were meant to help charities fund non-qualified donees\u2014but the anti-directed giving rule is creating uncertainty. Learn the compliance risks and how to mitigate them.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.millerthomson.com\/en\/insights\/social-impact\/one-hand-gives-the-other-hand-takes-why-charities-are-still-hesitant-to-use-the-qualifying-disbursements-rules\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Miller Thomson\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/MillerThomsonLaw\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2026-09-25T16:19:35+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2026-09-25T16:19:38+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.millerthomson.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/09\/Expertise_Charities-And-Not-For-Profit_Featured.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1920\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"1098\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Sebastian Vives\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@millerthomson\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@millerthomson\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Sebastian Vives\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.millerthomson.com\\\/en\\\/insights\\\/social-impact\\\/one-hand-gives-the-other-hand-takes-why-charities-are-still-hesitant-to-use-the-qualifying-disbursements-rules\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.millerthomson.com\\\/en\\\/insights\\\/social-impact\\\/one-hand-gives-the-other-hand-takes-why-charities-are-still-hesitant-to-use-the-qualifying-disbursements-rules\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Sebastian Vives\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.millerthomson.com\\\/en\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/be05481ca4ee617c24b33993ade4c881\"},\"headline\":\"One hand gives, the other hand takes: Why charities are still hesitant to use the qualifying disbursements rules\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-09-25T16:19:35+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-09-25T16:19:38+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.millerthomson.com\\\/en\\\/insights\\\/social-impact\\\/one-hand-gives-the-other-hand-takes-why-charities-are-still-hesitant-to-use-the-qualifying-disbursements-rules\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":1936,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.millerthomson.com\\\/en\\\/#organization\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.millerthomson.com\\\/en\\\/insights\\\/social-impact\\\/one-hand-gives-the-other-hand-takes-why-charities-are-still-hesitant-to-use-the-qualifying-disbursements-rules\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.millerthomson.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2024\\\/09\\\/Expertise_Charities-And-Not-For-Profit_Featured.jpg\",\"articleSection\":[\"Social Impact\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.millerthomson.com\\\/en\\\/insights\\\/social-impact\\\/one-hand-gives-the-other-hand-takes-why-charities-are-still-hesitant-to-use-the-qualifying-disbursements-rules\\\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":[\"WebPage\",\"ItemPage\"],\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.millerthomson.com\\\/en\\\/insights\\\/social-impact\\\/one-hand-gives-the-other-hand-takes-why-charities-are-still-hesitant-to-use-the-qualifying-disbursements-rules\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.millerthomson.com\\\/en\\\/insights\\\/social-impact\\\/one-hand-gives-the-other-hand-takes-why-charities-are-still-hesitant-to-use-the-qualifying-disbursements-rules\\\/\",\"name\":\"One hand gives, the other hand takes: Why charities are still hesitant to use the qualifying disbursements rules | Miller Thomson\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.millerthomson.com\\\/en\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.millerthomson.com\\\/en\\\/insights\\\/social-impact\\\/one-hand-gives-the-other-hand-takes-why-charities-are-still-hesitant-to-use-the-qualifying-disbursements-rules\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.millerthomson.com\\\/en\\\/insights\\\/social-impact\\\/one-hand-gives-the-other-hand-takes-why-charities-are-still-hesitant-to-use-the-qualifying-disbursements-rules\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.millerthomson.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2024\\\/09\\\/Expertise_Charities-And-Not-For-Profit_Featured.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-09-25T16:19:35+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-09-25T16:19:38+00:00\",\"description\":\"The qualifying disbursements rules were meant to help charities fund non-qualified donees\u2014but the anti-directed giving rule is creating uncertainty. Learn the compliance risks and how to mitigate them.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.millerthomson.com\\\/en\\\/insights\\\/social-impact\\\/one-hand-gives-the-other-hand-takes-why-charities-are-still-hesitant-to-use-the-qualifying-disbursements-rules\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.millerthomson.com\\\/en\\\/insights\\\/social-impact\\\/one-hand-gives-the-other-hand-takes-why-charities-are-still-hesitant-to-use-the-qualifying-disbursements-rules\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.millerthomson.com\\\/en\\\/insights\\\/social-impact\\\/one-hand-gives-the-other-hand-takes-why-charities-are-still-hesitant-to-use-the-qualifying-disbursements-rules\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.millerthomson.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2024\\\/09\\\/Expertise_Charities-And-Not-For-Profit_Featured.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.millerthomson.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2024\\\/09\\\/Expertise_Charities-And-Not-For-Profit_Featured.jpg\",\"width\":1920,\"height\":1098},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.millerthomson.com\\\/en\\\/insights\\\/social-impact\\\/one-hand-gives-the-other-hand-takes-why-charities-are-still-hesitant-to-use-the-qualifying-disbursements-rules\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.millerthomson.com\\\/en\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"One hand gives, the other hand takes: Why charities are still hesitant to use the qualifying disbursements rules\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.millerthomson.com\\\/en\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.millerthomson.com\\\/en\\\/\",\"name\":\"Miller Thomson\",\"description\":\"National law firm providing business law expertise and litigation and disputes services for businesses across Canada since 1957.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.millerthomson.com\\\/en\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.millerthomson.com\\\/en\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.millerthomson.com\\\/en\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Miller Thomson\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.millerthomson.com\\\/en\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.millerthomson.com\\\/en\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.millerthomson.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2024\\\/10\\\/miller-thomson.svg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.millerthomson.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2024\\\/10\\\/miller-thomson.svg\",\"width\":380,\"height\":50,\"caption\":\"Miller Thomson\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.millerthomson.com\\\/en\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/MillerThomsonLaw\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/millerthomson\",\"https:\\\/\\\/www.linkedin.com\\\/company\\\/miller-thomson-llp\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/www.youtube.com\\\/@millerthomson\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.millerthomson.com\\\/en\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/be05481ca4ee617c24b33993ade4c881\",\"name\":\"Sebastian Vives\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/9c50194d3d05da0f277cc6ce0c163d04a4150aed35e0d008c0cba4866c37cc31?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/9c50194d3d05da0f277cc6ce0c163d04a4150aed35e0d008c0cba4866c37cc31?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/9c50194d3d05da0f277cc6ce0c163d04a4150aed35e0d008c0cba4866c37cc31?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Sebastian Vives\"}}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"One hand gives, the other hand takes: Why charities are still hesitant to use the qualifying disbursements rules | Miller Thomson","description":"The qualifying disbursements rules were meant to help charities fund non-qualified donees\u2014but the anti-directed giving rule is creating uncertainty. Learn the compliance risks and how to mitigate them.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.millerthomson.com\/en\/insights\/social-impact\/one-hand-gives-the-other-hand-takes-why-charities-are-still-hesitant-to-use-the-qualifying-disbursements-rules\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"One hand gives, the other hand takes: Why charities are still hesitant to use the qualifying disbursements rules | Miller Thomson","og_description":"The qualifying disbursements rules were meant to help charities fund non-qualified donees\u2014but the anti-directed giving rule is creating uncertainty. Learn the compliance risks and how to mitigate them.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.millerthomson.com\/en\/insights\/social-impact\/one-hand-gives-the-other-hand-takes-why-charities-are-still-hesitant-to-use-the-qualifying-disbursements-rules\/","og_site_name":"Miller Thomson","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/MillerThomsonLaw\/","article_published_time":"2026-09-25T16:19:35+00:00","article_modified_time":"2026-09-25T16:19:38+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1920,"height":1098,"url":"https:\/\/www.millerthomson.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/09\/Expertise_Charities-And-Not-For-Profit_Featured.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Sebastian Vives","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@millerthomson","twitter_site":"@millerthomson","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Sebastian Vives","Est. reading time":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.millerthomson.com\/en\/insights\/social-impact\/one-hand-gives-the-other-hand-takes-why-charities-are-still-hesitant-to-use-the-qualifying-disbursements-rules\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.millerthomson.com\/en\/insights\/social-impact\/one-hand-gives-the-other-hand-takes-why-charities-are-still-hesitant-to-use-the-qualifying-disbursements-rules\/"},"author":{"name":"Sebastian Vives","@id":"https:\/\/www.millerthomson.com\/en\/#\/schema\/person\/be05481ca4ee617c24b33993ade4c881"},"headline":"One hand gives, the other hand takes: Why charities are still hesitant to use the qualifying disbursements rules","datePublished":"2026-09-25T16:19:35+00:00","dateModified":"2026-09-25T16:19:38+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.millerthomson.com\/en\/insights\/social-impact\/one-hand-gives-the-other-hand-takes-why-charities-are-still-hesitant-to-use-the-qualifying-disbursements-rules\/"},"wordCount":1936,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.millerthomson.com\/en\/#organization"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.millerthomson.com\/en\/insights\/social-impact\/one-hand-gives-the-other-hand-takes-why-charities-are-still-hesitant-to-use-the-qualifying-disbursements-rules\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.millerthomson.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/09\/Expertise_Charities-And-Not-For-Profit_Featured.jpg","articleSection":["Social Impact"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.millerthomson.com\/en\/insights\/social-impact\/one-hand-gives-the-other-hand-takes-why-charities-are-still-hesitant-to-use-the-qualifying-disbursements-rules\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":["WebPage","ItemPage"],"@id":"https:\/\/www.millerthomson.com\/en\/insights\/social-impact\/one-hand-gives-the-other-hand-takes-why-charities-are-still-hesitant-to-use-the-qualifying-disbursements-rules\/","url":"https:\/\/www.millerthomson.com\/en\/insights\/social-impact\/one-hand-gives-the-other-hand-takes-why-charities-are-still-hesitant-to-use-the-qualifying-disbursements-rules\/","name":"One hand gives, the other hand takes: Why charities are still hesitant to use the qualifying disbursements rules | Miller Thomson","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.millerthomson.com\/en\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.millerthomson.com\/en\/insights\/social-impact\/one-hand-gives-the-other-hand-takes-why-charities-are-still-hesitant-to-use-the-qualifying-disbursements-rules\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.millerthomson.com\/en\/insights\/social-impact\/one-hand-gives-the-other-hand-takes-why-charities-are-still-hesitant-to-use-the-qualifying-disbursements-rules\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.millerthomson.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/09\/Expertise_Charities-And-Not-For-Profit_Featured.jpg","datePublished":"2026-09-25T16:19:35+00:00","dateModified":"2026-09-25T16:19:38+00:00","description":"The qualifying disbursements rules were meant to help charities fund non-qualified donees\u2014but the anti-directed giving rule is creating uncertainty. Learn the compliance risks and how to mitigate them.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.millerthomson.com\/en\/insights\/social-impact\/one-hand-gives-the-other-hand-takes-why-charities-are-still-hesitant-to-use-the-qualifying-disbursements-rules\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.millerthomson.com\/en\/insights\/social-impact\/one-hand-gives-the-other-hand-takes-why-charities-are-still-hesitant-to-use-the-qualifying-disbursements-rules\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.millerthomson.com\/en\/insights\/social-impact\/one-hand-gives-the-other-hand-takes-why-charities-are-still-hesitant-to-use-the-qualifying-disbursements-rules\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.millerthomson.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/09\/Expertise_Charities-And-Not-For-Profit_Featured.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.millerthomson.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/09\/Expertise_Charities-And-Not-For-Profit_Featured.jpg","width":1920,"height":1098},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.millerthomson.com\/en\/insights\/social-impact\/one-hand-gives-the-other-hand-takes-why-charities-are-still-hesitant-to-use-the-qualifying-disbursements-rules\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.millerthomson.com\/en\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"One hand gives, the other hand takes: Why charities are still hesitant to use the qualifying disbursements rules"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.millerthomson.com\/en\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.millerthomson.com\/en\/","name":"Miller Thomson","description":"National law firm providing business law expertise and litigation and disputes services for businesses across Canada since 1957.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.millerthomson.com\/en\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.millerthomson.com\/en\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.millerthomson.com\/en\/#organization","name":"Miller Thomson","url":"https:\/\/www.millerthomson.com\/en\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.millerthomson.com\/en\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.millerthomson.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/10\/miller-thomson.svg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.millerthomson.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/10\/miller-thomson.svg","width":380,"height":50,"caption":"Miller Thomson"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.millerthomson.com\/en\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/MillerThomsonLaw\/","https:\/\/x.com\/millerthomson","https:\/\/www.linkedin.com\/company\/miller-thomson-llp\/","https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/@millerthomson"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.millerthomson.com\/en\/#\/schema\/person\/be05481ca4ee617c24b33993ade4c881","name":"Sebastian Vives","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/9c50194d3d05da0f277cc6ce0c163d04a4150aed35e0d008c0cba4866c37cc31?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/9c50194d3d05da0f277cc6ce0c163d04a4150aed35e0d008c0cba4866c37cc31?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/9c50194d3d05da0f277cc6ce0c163d04a4150aed35e0d008c0cba4866c37cc31?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Sebastian Vives"}}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.millerthomson.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/56355","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.millerthomson.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.millerthomson.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.millerthomson.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/122"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.millerthomson.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=56355"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/www.millerthomson.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/56355\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":56382,"href":"https:\/\/www.millerthomson.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/56355\/revisions\/56382"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.millerthomson.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/12324"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.millerthomson.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=56355"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.millerthomson.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=56355"},{"taxonomy":"insight-format","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.millerthomson.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/insight-format?post=56355"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}