Sins of Commission, Part II: How Much Is Too Much for a Fundraiser to Keep?

Adapted from the writings of Dayan Yitzhak Grossman

April 3, 2025

In our previous article, we discussed a rule, attributed to various named and unnamed gedolei Torah, that a fundraiser for a tzedakah organization may take as his compensation up to 49% of the funds raised. We concluded by noting that R’ Mendel Shafran is very skeptical of this rule; here is his analysis:

There is a rumor—some attribute it to our master the Chazon Ish[1]—that it is permitted to take up to 49%.

In my opinion, there is nothing to this rumor, and in any event, if the Chazon Ish or another gadol did say something in this vein, it appears that his statement was taken out of context.

In my opinion, this question should be considered from the perspective of the givers of the tzedakah as well as that of the community of recipients, and we will explain this in detail: All work has a value in the marketplace, and just as a carpenter or plumber estimates the value of his work based on the amount of time and effort he must expend, so must an official who collects donations estimate and appraise how much time and effort he is forced to expend in his work, and establish his compensation level accordingly.

Rav Shafran explains that the amount of work involved in fundraising varies greatly, so the appropriate compensation may be as low as 5% (where relatively little effort is required to raise a large amount) or as high as 90% (where much effort is required to raise a paltry sum). He accordingly concludes:

In any event, this figure of 49% appears to have no source or basis whatsoever in halacha. According to the halacha, if he performs work that is worth 90% of the donations, he is entitled to 90%, and if he performs work that is worth 1%, it is prohibited for him to take more than 1%.

Rav Shafran then proceeds to suggest, however, that a 90% commission, even where that is indeed the value of the fundraiser’s work, may actually be a problem both from the perspective of the tzedakah fund as well as from that of the donors:

From the perspective of the charity fund, we must consider whether it is permitted to collect tzedakah when 90% of the donations will be spent on collection expenses and only 10% will remain in the fund for the needs for which purpose the collection was arranged…

It is untenable to maintain a fund where 90% of the donated monies are spent on fundraising and collection and only 10% remain in the fund.

And beyond this, it appears that we must consider this from the perspective of the donors, for they are not aware that 90% of their funds are intended to cover collection costs. It is likely that were they aware of this, they would not have agreed, so it would appear that this entails theft from the donors as well.

And perhaps it was in this context that the Chazon Ish or another gadol said that it is permitted to take up to 49%. That is, as long as the collector does not take more than 49% and the fund retains 51% of the donations, this sort of collection is justifiable—both from the perspective of the fund and from that of the donors—because the majority of the money does indeed reach the tzedakah and those who deserve to benefit from it.

And according to this explanation, we must include in the 49% not only the compensation that the collector takes, but all the expenses that accompany the operation of the fund, such as photography, advertising, bank commissions, and the like.

Rav Shafran concludes that according to this approach, the 49% rule would mean that even where the portion that the fundraiser wishes to take for himself does constitute fair compensation for his work, it still may not exceed 49%.[2]

Rav Shafran prefaces his discussion by asserting that the Jewish custom of fundraisers taking a percentage of the funds they raise is not accepted anywhere else in the world, and that everywhere else, fundraisers are paid either a fixed salary based on their skills and fundraising success or a base salary plus commission (which he says typically results in a figure fairly close to that of the fixed-salary model). He explains that even among Jews, this was not historically the custom, and that from the teshuvos it appears that the modern system began about a century ago. (See, however, the testimony of R’ Moshe Galanti cited below that fundraisers of four centuries ago commonly did take a percentage of the funds they raised.) He concedes, though, that since it has become customary, the practice is permitted.

Various halachic authorities are reported to have set forth other limits:

R’ Ben-Tzion Mutzafi[3] reports that R’ Ben-Tzion Abba Shaul permitted a fundraiser to take up to 10%.[4]

One writer reports that R’ Shlomo Zalman Auerbach said a fundraiser should take only 10-15%, and R’ Yosef Shalom Elyashiv is quoted saying that a fundraiser should take as little as possible.[5]

R’ Chaim Pinchas Scheinberg reportedly maintained that fundraisers should ideally take up to 25%, but that up to 50% is permitted bedieved.[6]

The Steipler (R’ Yaakov Yisrael Kanievsky) is cited allowing up to 35% plus expenses.[7]

R’ Shmuel Wosner rules that fundamentally (mei’ikar hadin), one should raise funds gratis, due to the prohibition against charging to perform a mitzvah (see the previous article)—except for someone for whom this is his parnasah, who is permitted to take a salary for his work.[8] He cites the Knessess Hagedolah[9] in the name of the Maharam (R’ Moshe) Galanti (the first, a talmid of R’ Yosef Karo[10]) that a third or a quarter of the funds raised was the customary compensation of fundraisers in his time.[11]

[1]See Ma’asei Hatzedakah p. 43 n. 4, cited in Hilchos Tzedakah siman 19 se’if 1 p. 60 n. 2.

[2]Kovetz Hayashar Vehatov #12 p. 25.

[3]See our collection of a number of Rav Mutzafi’s statements on matters of health and safety in Counter a Tax: Disincentivizing Unhealthful Behavior. Jan. 19, 2023.

[4]R’ Ben-Tzion Mutzafi, She’al Ess Harav #140541.

[5]Maskoress Lematrim Litzdakah, Klalim Ba’inyan. Din—She’al Ess Harav, and cf. here.

[6]Ma’asei Hatzedakah ibid.

[7]Orchos Rabeinu cheilek 3 p. 139, cited in Hilchos Tzedakah ibid. n. 1.

[8]See Tosfos Ksubos 105a s.v. Gozrei gzeiros; Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 246:5; Nishmas Avraham (Second Expanded Edition) Y.D. p. 439.

[9]Knessess Hagedolah C.M. siman 331, Hagahos Bais Yosef os 7.

[10]Shu”t R’ Moshe Galanti siman 7.

[11]Shu”t Sheivet Halevi cheilek 2 siman 122, cited in Hilchos Tzedakah ibid. n. 3.

Cf. Chashukei Chemed Shvuos pp. 56-58; R’ Dani Schwartz, Kamah Achuzim Mutar Le’irgun Tzedakah Laseis Lematrimim? Emunas Itecha 114 (5777) pp. 55-57; R’ Ratzon Arusi, Amlas Gabai Tzedakah.