Corporate gifts to charity
By this time, most ongoing businesses would have finalized their list of the people they would give Christmas presents.
The customers or clients who had made substantial contributions to this year’s bottom line would be the priority. For strategic business considerations, their goodwill has to be nurtured, especially if the competition for their patronage is intense.
In this season, that Christmas gift would be considered an investment rather than an expense that, depending on the way it is booked, may or may not be deductible for tax purposes.
There is an unwritten pecking order on corporate gift-giving. On top of the list are the executives or officers who have the final say on to whom products or services contracts should be awarded.
Their gifts have to be commensurate to their financial or social standing. Giving gifts that bear the giver’s logo or are tacky would be a serious breach of business protocol and must be avoided at all costs.
If, for example, wine is to be given to them as a gift, it better be at the level of a Dom Pérignon or real French champagne that they serve or are served in formal dinners.
For the staff at the lower rung of the corporate totem pole, their gifts could be food baskets or popular gizmos whose monetary value or degree of sophistication would depend on the scope of their involvement in the award of those contracts.
To avoid possible comparison of gifts, the rule of thumb in the latter case is for them to be delivered directly to their residence or discreetly brought to their cars.
Those who may feel “discriminated” against in the choice of gifts may be less cooperative or approachable in the future.
For some companies, deciding on what gift to give, aside from figuring out their cost, could be a pain in the neck because of the variables, e.g., suitability and appropriateness, involved in making that decision.
That’s a guessing game because the extent of their interaction with the intended recipient is often limited to their business relationship and whatever information can be gathered from people who had dealt with them earlier or read in social media.
A way out of this hassle that some companies avail of is to donate to a charitable institution, with the intended gift receiver indicated as its donor, the monetary value of the gift that he or she is supposed to get.
In this scheme, the amount of the donation is not disclosed and instead is simply described as substantial or sufficient to, for example, provide three square meals for a week to a family of six or partially pay for a child’s high school tuition fees.
Thereafter, a Christmas card is sent to the intended gift recipient with a note that a gift to the institution has been made on his or her behalf, accompanied by a statement of appreciation from the donee.
If the donee happens to be a church or religious organization, the letter of thanks usually includes a statement that he or she would be included in its prayer intentions in their masses, together with a scapular or prayer card.
In a way, that donation shoots two birds with one stone, i.e., it spares the gift giver the trouble of buying, wrapping and delivering the gifts, and the benefits of the gifts are directly and immediately enjoyed by the charitable or religious organization concerned.
Add to that the donor’s sense of satisfaction that the donation would actually benefit the people who deserve to be given or to receive the blessings of the Christmas season.
Considering the gift-giving process that most Filipinos are used to, i.e., physical receipt of material gifts, this gift-giving mode may be described as nontraditional or unorthodox.
It depends on the intended gift recipient’s moral values whether to consider the “substituted” gift-giving as an exemplary act, or unacceptable because it deprives him or her of the opportunity to enjoy the gift that he or she should have received.
On this point, the saying “it’s better to give than to receive” would be fitting and proper to invoke.
