Five-hole good point at the start (charitable vs non-profit status etc); you are correct, I believe. Haven't had enough coffee myself apparently for the start of the day. So I guess that mutes that point
.
Perhaps you are right, and really all it is a charity "doing the same thing" but just changing from "preventing poverty" to "alleviating it". (basically in a nut shell).
But it will create potential optics issues; and perhaps it should be framed differently by the CRA or whoever. Just on the face of things, "preventing poverty" not as a charitable cause, well, seems...odd.
Especially when you consider that an org like the United Way (if they are a registered charity, I assume so as they give tax reciepts for donations, but would have to double check), with a strong, strong anti-poverty focus (everything from relief to prevention), could be affected as well.