Recent reports in New Zealand media have highlighted that PayPal and Givealittle have restricted donations to Gaza, sparking outrage from some activists and donors.
But accusations of “discrimination” miss the point entirely. These decisions are not political — they’re legal, responsible, and necessary.
In one case, PayPal froze thousands of dollars in donations from New Zealanders intended for Palestinian recipients. In another, a donor-organised Givealittle fundraiser to send baby formula to Gaza was shut down, despite identity and account verification. The common complaint? That Palestinians are being unfairly blocked from receiving aid.
But these platforms aren’t acting out of bias — they’re complying with international anti-terror financing laws.
Gaza is governed by Hamas, a group recognised as a terrorist organisation by New Zealand, Australia, the EU, the UK, and the US. Under anti-money laundering and counter-terrorism financing regulations (AML/CFT), any financial transaction that could be diverted to Hamas — even unintentionally — exposes a company to serious legal and financial risk.
These restrictions aren’t new, nor are they unique to Gaza. PayPal does not operate in any high-risk zones, including Syria, Iran, North Korea — or even Israeli communities in parts of Judea and Samaria. The company cannot facilitate money transfers to areas where end-use verification is impossible or where aid is frequently co-opted by armed groups.
Similarly, Givealittle’s decision to block the baby formula fundraiser followed internal risk assessments. The platform stated that it could not confirm whether funds would be used as intended or safely delivered. With Gaza’s financial infrastructure unstable, and cash transfers notoriously vulnerable to diversion, this is a sound and justified decision — not a moral failing.
It is also worth remembering that Hamas has a documented history of stealing or manipulating aid, including through charities and NGOs. The infamous case of Mohammad El-Halabi, World Vision’s Gaza director convicted of diverting millions to Hamas, shows just how easily goodwill can be exploited. Even UNRWA, the UN’s own aid agency in Gaza, has faced scrutiny over Hamas infiltration.
Donors who genuinely want to help civilians in Gaza should channel funds through accredited, transparent international agencies that maintain strict oversight — not informal crowdfunding campaigns with no enforceable safeguards.
The outrage, then, is misdirected. The problem isn’t PayPal or Givealittle — it’s Hamas, and the ungoverned, terror-dominated ecosystem it maintains. Until that changes, financial platforms are right to exercise maximum caution.