Jump to content
poptart

Tithing

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, poptart said:

There's never an audit?  I'll be honest, i've read horror stories about people being audited by bishops.  Granted that stuff tends to be written by angry former mormons who were burned so I take it with a grain of salt.

I'm a finance clerk.  I am, at this very moment, sitting in the clerk's office helping the bishop with his tithing settlement appointments.  This is the busiest day of the year for him.  Basically, it's an opportunity for the bishop to meet with every single member of his ward and touch bases with them.  At some point during the meeting, he'll ask if they're a full tithe payer, and he'll record yes/no/partial.  He works with them on whatever is important to them, as much as he can.   That's about it.  

The average members aren't audited in any real sense of the word.   There are absolutely audits, though.  The stake will send someone to audit me, the ward finance clerk, to make sure I've been handling the Lord's funds correctly.  I get to prove why I wrote every check, and prove that every penny of donations was appropriately handled.  It happens twice a year, and lasts around 2-3 hours.  But that's just me.  Your average LDS going to church doesn't have that experience.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

Re auditing:

I had a Bishop refuse to give me a Temple recommend once because he decided that I didn't pay a full tithing based on my understanding of how to calculate tithing.  We argued and I had to bring in the Stake President to settle the dispute.  He forced the Bishop to sign my recommend.

Another reason I prefer to calculate tithing this way is because psychologically I find it more effective.  I feel it makes God more of a partner in my financial affairs.  That and it seems to align better with the parables in the New Testament in my mind.

 

Share this post


Link to post
19 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I think the proper thing would be for the farmer (or other business owner) to pay himself a salary and to pay tithing on the salary. That way, there would be no year in which does not pay tithing, even if, in some years the farm fails to make a profit. 

Unless the farm is a corporation the farmer cannot take a salary based in IRS regs.  Whether a partnership or sole proprietorship the owner must take a draw rather than a wage. Of course the draw can be like a wage and thus accomplish the same thing.  But some years the draw may exceed net profits or some years be less.

As a partner in a partnership I have based what my personal income from that business is on an annual basis as my share of the net profits. That number is the starting point for tithing computation.

Edited by Teancum
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Coop said:

He forced the Bishop to sign my recommend.

"Forced"?  You mean, not "asked", or "instructed", or "advised", or even "told"?  You figure "forced" is the best word to describe what your SP did to your bishop?

If you really think that's an appropriate word, please do tell.  Was it physical force?  Did he, like, kidnap the bishop's kid and refuse to let her go until the bishop signed your temple recommend?  Maybe he brought in a group of Danite toughs who started to, like, knock all the papers off the bishop's desk, and talk about how it would be a shame if the bishop's car caught on fire?

I'm genuinely interested.  Assuming for the moment, you're just not blowing things out of proportion from a position of having authority issues or something, how, exactly, did your stake president "force" your bishop to sign your recommend?

Edited by LoudmouthMormon
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
6 minutes ago, LoudmouthMormon said:

"Forced"?  You mean, not "asked", or "instructed", or "advised", or even "told"?  You figure "forced" is the best word to describe what your SP did to your bishop?

If you really think that's an appropriate word, please do tell.  Was it physical force?  Did he, like, kidnap the bishop's kid and refuse to let her go until the bishop signed your temple recommend?  Maybe he brought in a group of Danite toughs who started to, like, knock all the papers off the bishop's desk, and talk about how it would be a shame if the bishop's car caught on fire?

I'm genuinely interested.  Assuming for the moment, you're just not blowing things out of proportion from a position of having authority issues or something, how, exactly, did your stake president "force" your bishop to sign your recommend?

gun-to-head.jpg

Edited by Judd

Share this post


Link to post

When my Bishop signed my recommend he wasn't a happy camper and said the Stake President was forcing him against his better judgement.  It was a very emotionally charged process for him as a Bishop to reverse his initial decision.  This is only my opinion but I got the feeling he was considering resigning as a Bishop rather than bow to the wishes of the Stake President.

Share this post


Link to post
51 minutes ago, Coop said:

When my Bishop signed my recommend he wasn't a happy camper and said the Stake President was forcing him against his better judgement.  It was a very emotionally charged process for him as a Bishop to reverse his initial decision.  This is only my opinion but I got the feeling he was considering resigning as a Bishop rather than bow to the wishes of the Stake President.

This is really sad on so many levels...a bad situation  that brings nothing spiritual .  You handled it well!

Edited by Jeanne

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, Teancum said:

Unless the farm is a corporation the farmer cannot take a salary based in IRS regs.  Whether a partnership or sole proprietorship the owner must take a draw rather than a wage. Of course the draw can be like a wage and thus accomplish the same thing.  But some years the draw may exceed net profits or some years be less.

As a partner in a partnership I have based what my personal income from that business is on an annual basis as my share of the net profits. That number is the starting point for tithing computation.

Po-tay-to, po-tah-to. 

Edited by Scott Lloyd
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
36 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Po-tay-to, po-tah-to. 

Actually, no, there is a very big difference.

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, Coop said:

When my Bishop signed my recommend he wasn't a happy camper and said the Stake President was forcing him against his better judgement.  It was a very emotionally charged process for him as a Bishop to reverse his initial decision.  This is only my opinion but I got the feeling he was considering resigning as a Bishop rather than bow to the wishes of the Stake President.

Congratulations on your victory and possibly imagined near-defeat of your Bishop.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Po-tay-to, po-tah-to. 

 

2 hours ago, ttribe said:

Actually, no, there is a very big difference.

 

8 hours ago, Teancum said:

Unless the farm is a corporation the farmer cannot take a salary based in IRS regs.  Whether a partnership or sole proprietorship the owner must take a draw rather than a wage. Of course the draw can be like a wage and thus accomplish the same thing.  But some years the draw may exceed net profits or some years be less.

 

Emphasis added for reference.

 

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, The Nehor said:

If I were your Bishop I would have signed it and figured it was God’s business if he wanted to send you to hell for it. ;) 

Maybe the bishop was more in a mood to teach rather than merely pencil-whip.

 

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

 

 

Emphasis added for reference.

 

But, the method of determining the amount of income is largely dependent on the profitability of the business, rather than a simple flat wage amount.   That's the point.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, ttribe said:

But, the method of determining the amount of income is largely dependent on the profitability of the business, rather than a simple flat wage amount.   That's the point.

From Teancum's post:

Quote

 But some years the draw may exceed net profits or some years be less.

Functionally, this seems very like a wage to me -- at least in determining one's own income for tithing purposes.

Share this post


Link to post

Surplus 

 

just read section 119

Share this post


Link to post
18 hours ago, Coop said:

When my Bishop signed my recommend he wasn't a happy camper and said the Stake President was forcing him against his better judgement.  It was a very emotionally charged process for him as a Bishop to reverse his initial decision.  This is only my opinion but I got the feeling he was considering resigning as a Bishop rather than bow to the wishes of the Stake President.

That's interesting.  Well, now I wanna call the bishop into this thread and demand he defend his use of the word.  :)

Share this post


Link to post

I wouldn't be too hard on my Bishop.  He was called under very trying circumstances.  The previous Bishop, who was very well liked and a successful lawyer, was being investigate for embezzling funds from his clients.  As the rumors spread he stood in front of the Ward and claimed he was innocent of all charges.  Then on Monday his situation started to unravel and before he was arrested, he committed suicide.  The Ward was in a very sad state when the new Bishop took over.  He was doing the best he could to keep things from getting worse and unfortunately he made a lot of mistakes.  I just got caught up in his angst.

Share this post


Link to post
On 12/16/2018 at 1:36 PM, tulip said:

Church employees are audited to make sure they pay their tithing.

I see no one has yet done this, so I will: CFR. 

You’re new here, so I’ll explain. CFR stands for “call for references.” It means you have to document your assertion or withdraw it. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, Doctrine 612 said:

Surplus 

 

just read section 119

Another one of those, huh? 

Somehow, this reminds me of the wacko “sovereign citizens” movement. 

Share this post


Link to post

First of all, great question! A lot of people that do not know the church much would (and should) ask the same thing. I certainly did when I was investigating the church. 

 

The Holy Spirit is the guide to tell you if the amount is correct. Could be Gross, could be net, could be after before or after expenses to a personal business. All these things can be argued over, which solves nothing. If the Holy Spirit tells a member they are on track and OK. That's it. No one else's opinion matters.

It is only expensive if you think it isn't worth it. 

And when I say that, I do not mean it is worth it because I am buying my ticket to heaven. Rather, I give it because I know what we do with it and have seen it first hand. 

 

 

And I'll leave this last one to maybe address the next question that might be lurking in your mind about this subject. (2 Corinthians 9:7)

Every man according as he purposeth in his heart, so let him give; not grudgingly, or of necessity: for God loveth a cheerful giver.

 

 

Keep asking good questions PopTart! 

 

Share this post


Link to post

A statement from the Brethren some years ago pointed to D&C 119 and said that no one is authorized to teach anything other what it says there.

Therefore, the gross v net debate is a complete irrelevance.

The Brethren did venture that "increase" is interpreted as "income" but clearly wouldn't be drawn into what should be regarded as income.

Share this post


Link to post
37 minutes ago, Alan said:

A statement from the Brethren some years ago pointed to D&C 119 and said that no one is authorized to teach anything other what it says there.

Therefore, the gross v net debate is a complete irrelevance.

The Brethren did venture that "increase" is interpreted as "income" but clearly wouldn't be drawn into what should be regarded as income.

If they defined “increase” as “income,” then it would not be fair to say that how one defines “income,” be it the gross or the net, is completely irrelevant. 

Share this post


Link to post
On ‎12‎/‎18‎/‎2018 at 2:34 PM, Scott Lloyd said:

If they defined “increase” as “income,” then it would not be fair to say that how one defines “income,” be it the gross or the net, is completely irrelevant. 

Income can be defined as something other than gross or net.

Profit, surplus, over-plus, interest, excess etc. Just follow D&C 119 and you can't go wrong. If you do that, the gross v net debate is both redundant and irrelevant.

If further clarification is required, read Genesis 14:39 JST.

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...