> I'd donate to charities on my own.

But lots of people won't think to do so, and it can raise awareness too. And in terms of payment processing fees it is probably much more efficient to include a small amount extra in a larger preexisting transaction and pool it up across customers than if everyone were to go out and donate $0.50 or whatever on their own.

The problem is the store charaties are always awful. I donate to local charities that actually do good work with it (Non-affiliated-beyond-being-donor plug: https://www.nuci.org/), not to bloated “awareness” charaties like Komen.

I assume the main point of asking for charities at the POS system is to, in no order, a) give to that charity, and/or b) to get the tax deduction as if the company gave that charity. Ex: $1 charity = some $0.35 discount on company taxes.

And "awareness" is a big part of some cultures [0] as it allows for the distribution of the idea of caring without devoting some of one's life to the cause.

[0] https://stuffwhitepeoplelike.com/2008/01/23/18-awareness/

I don't think you get a tax deduction by processing someone else's donations. Even if you did, wouldn't you have to first treat it as income, so it cancels out?

People are downvoting you, but you are correct.

People believe all sorts of weird thing about tax deductions (almost always _income_ deductions).

Income $1 and then give away that $1 is a net negative, so I assume it's more like: I give you, the company, $1 as a "gift", which I'm allowed to gift you some hundreds of dollars per year without an extra tax form. You take that "gift" and donate it, thereby netting you the 35 cents.

Interested to hear specifics if anyone knows!

Why wouldn’t $1 that just be counted as regular income?

Upon some light internet diving (backstroking), it appears that the company cannot deduct the customer's donation, according to a couple random websites.

There's a beer here in the SF Bay Area that words its charitable claim like "up to 8% to local causes", which can mean anything from doing nothing at all to earmarking 8% of the revenue for their new yacht which is parked locally.

> to get the tax deduction as if the company gave that charity

This should be illegal.

I am pretty sure it is illegal. It is the donor that may claim the tax deduction, if any. The retailer may not claim it merely by being a conduit for donated funds.

Really, St Jude Children's hospital is awful? Would you like to give some sources for that? That's the only charity I get asked about often enough to remember and I'm happy to see companies going to bat for them (at least unless someone such as yourself manages to convince me of how awful they are).

You've never heard of the Ronald McDonald House?

At least McDonalds covers all the overhead and gives 100% of money donated to Ronald McDonald house.

The plague seems worse than that

You can avoid something like a much worse thing, that's not a problem. Avoid being insensitive with your bad thing reference, but "the plague" is not insensitive.

Also the plague responds well to antibiotics.

I know what you mean. When the cashier at Whole Foods asks you, it does feel somewhat petty to say no. I think there was a South Park episode on that.

But if the POS asks you, it doesn't feel as personal to turn down the option to donate, don't you think?

Anyway, not married to the idea, but I think there are some people that enjoy the endorphins that result from contributing to a charitable cause (especially when discretionary spending, like on a latte).

I think of it differently. Ads pervade your experience. You cannot pump gas without since video blasting in your face. You cannot buy groceries without hearing about the poor, pathetic children who this billion dollar company decided to collect money for. Hell, I was sitting on the ski lift the other day and the bar across your lap someone has added little advertising signs saying which is the best pro shop.

My point is, we are surrounded by useless requests for more of our time and money. I go to the coffee shop almost exclusively as a place to relax. There should be less intrusion into my headspace there, not more.

I think there is a distinction between a charitable donation pop-up that forces the user to round up, donate, or actively select 'no donation' is a dark pattern.

Whereas having the option to select a charitable donation, or passively ignore it, as a part of the normal checking out is fine.

Yeah, if these donations where accessible via a different menu (ie: you have cafes, cake, juices, donations) then I'd be fine with it. I'd go to the donation individually if I want to.

The problem is when you put the donation at checkout to "improve" conversion.

Related South Park reference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tsPHa8RG1pI

Nag-screens are awful but they do also need to explain their tipping because it creates customer confusion. They could simply put up a sign up that says "We pay our employees a living wage. We don't accept tips, but you can donate to our staff's preferred charity XYZ at URL."

> It was with small change but now McDonalds harasses you every time you make an order to round up for some charity I never heard about.

To be fair, the McDonalds charity is actually totally legit and really awesome and you should donate to it. It's one of the few exceptions to the general rule that these charity promotions are usually suspect tax laundering schemes.