Net or Gross Tithing?

[Nathair/|\]

I'm too lazy to figure out my tithing to that level of detail. My wife gets 674 from her SSI every month and I get 610 from the GI Bill. I simply pay 130 each month in tithing on the whole amount.

[Jeff K.]

I once went down to the Antarctic, the seas in the straits of Magellan from Punto Arenas are crazy and dangerous. The region gets about 24 feet of rain a year. A calm day can mean 24 foot swells. Anyway it was a supply ship going to the Bernardo O Higgin science station. I bummed a ride with a scientist friend of mine. Well, it turned out to be a rougher trip than expected. To walk outside the pilot house or along the deck, everyone had a tether tied to a rail. Even with that I was thrown over the rail, and hanging semi conscious when my head hit the outer plating. So there I was hanging by a thin tether, getting slapped by high waves, and not even sure of the chain would hold, and not even sure which way was up or down. No one knew I was hanging there either, or at least I thought they didn't. And I couldn't seem to pull myself up.

A head popped over and the guy was shouting down at me. In my semi conscious state it seemed like the guy was hundreds of feet away, but it wasn't that far at all, only a few feet. He and another person reached down, grabbed me by my life vest and pulled me back over the rail.

I would have given just about everything I had to that guy for saving my life. I wouldn't have quibbled over my net worth, or gross. I thought I would be dead without him.

Tithing is not, and has never been an exercise in accounting. It isn't about net, gross, or anything else. Its about your attitude and the level of gratitude you have towards the man who saved you. If you think that what was done deserves some finer points of finance, you may be missing the big picture.

[bluebell]

You could be doing so. I know of people with new mortgages who have had bankruptcies and foreclosures. You would most likely qualify.

Yeesh Lehi, I'm sure you are very smart and excellent at what you do but you have no information to be making pronouncments like this.

We would not qualify to buy a home because we do not make enough a year to do so. We are also moving in 2 years, so it would not be financially smart to try to buy, even if we had the means.

$20/week * 52 weeks/year = $1,040/year. If you don't want it, I'll gladly take it weekly, and even give it back at the end of the year. That's another rent payment, or the beginning of a nice down payment. While the interest from a savings account would not be a lot (banks are not paying much now), you could use it in any of several other ways that could make a big difference to you.

I do want it, and i do get it, even doing it the way we choose to do it and not the way you choose to do it.

Besides, for me, I despise government so much that denying them the use of my money is return enough to make it worthwhile without any of the other benefits. Your mileage may vary.

Lehi

My mileage does vary quite a bit from yours, which is a good reason for why i don't do everything the way you do it.

[katherine the great]

And just to kill the false doctrine, there's no such thing as getting blessed on 10% gross vs. 10% net. If you pay your tithing, you're blessed 100%. There's no extra-credit.

PacMan

Well said. . My DH is a wonderful businessman and we have a lot going on all time. Our taxes are quite complicated because we are an S corporation (if its still called that?). He insists on paying way more tithing than it seems like we should (to me). He's kind of unconventional in his interpretation of some other LDS matters though (ie: sports a beard, eats out on Sunday, etc.) My banker brother pays tithing basically on the net. He's a Bishop. I think they are both exemplary LDS men who are square with the Lord.

[katherine the great]

I once went down to the Antarctic, the seas in the straits of Magellan from Punto Arenas are crazy are dangerous. The region gets about 24 feet of rain a year. A calm day can mean 24 foot swells. Anyway it was a supply ship going to the Bernardo O Higgin science station. I bummed a ride with a scientist friend of mine. Well, it turned out to be a rougher trip than expected. To walk outside the pilot house or along the deck, everyone had a tether tied to a rail. Even with that I was thrown over the rail, and hanging semi conscious when my head hit the outer plating. So there I was hanging by a thin tether, getting slapped by high waves, and not even sure of the chain would hold, and not even sure which way was up or down. No one knew I was hanging there either, or at least I thought they didn't. And I couldn't seem to pull myself up.

A head popped over and the guy was shouting down at me. In my semi conscious state it seemed like the guy was hundreds of feet away, but it wasn't that far at all, only a few feet. He and another person reached down, grabbed me by my life vest and pulled me back over the rail.

I would have given just about everything I had to that guy for saving my life. I wouldn't have quibbled over my net worth, or gross. I thought I would be dead without him.

Tithing is not, and has never been an exercise in accounting. It isn't about net, gross, or anything else. Its about your attitude and the level of gratitude you have towards the man who saved you. If you think that what was done deserves some finer points of finance, you may be missing the big picture.

That's a great analogy. My oldest son would give his right arm for an antarctic adventure like that! (Personally, I hate subzero temps AND I get horribly seasick!)

[awesome0]

"Nosy"? I haven't asked a single question. I don't care about the details.

Perhaps they do, but my experience (and as I said, I've been doing this for seven years) is that most people, nearly all people, have very little idea about how to manage their finances. That's why I have a job teaching them.

Whether bluebell and hubby know what is best for their family or not is not as obvious as one may like to believe.

Ignorance of fundamental economics and financial information is common: almost no one I know (outside my peers) understands how money really works. The specific, started by H (as I recall), of letting government use money for free, is just one example.

Lehi

There is a difference between accounting and economics. Accounting-wise it is best to keep the money yourself of course. Economics, its not so simple.

For rational behavior in economics, one fundamental assumption is transitivity. That means if I prefer apples to oranges, and oranges to bananas, I should prefer apples to bananas.

Sounds pretty simple, right?

Things are a little more complicate in the real world with some things.

Take for instance weight loss/gain. People can tell the difference between eating 50 or 100 calories extra/less a day, but a 50 calorie difference a day adds up to 6lbs etc a year. Left uncheck for 5 or 10 years, and you have gained an extra 50 lbs.

With small amounts of saving/budgeting it can be very similar. Many people would not notice the difference between an extra 20-50 dollars a week in their bank account. But if you spend an extra 50 dollars a week that could add up to 2500 dollars a year.

For many small purchases or budgeting decisions, rationality defined by transitivity of preferences is difficult. This leads to time inconsistency of individuals preferences. They on their own would prefer to have an extra 3000 dollars a year for a big purchase, a vacation, or for saving in general. But on their own it is difficult to tell the difference between spending 20 or 50 dollars less a week.

[ERayR]

There is a difference between accounting and economics. Accounting-wise it is best to keep the money yourself of course. Economics, its not so simple.

For rational behavior in economics, one fundamental assumption is transitivity. That means if I prefer apples to oranges, and oranges to bananas, I should prefer apples to bananas.

Sounds pretty simple, right?

Things are a little more complicate in the real world with some things.

Take for instance weight loss/gain. People can tell the difference between eating 50 or 100 calories extra/less a day, but a 50 calorie difference a day adds up to 6lbs etc a year. Left uncheck for 5 or 10 years, and you have gained an extra 50 lbs.

With small amounts of saving/budgeting it can be very similar. Many people would not notice the difference between an extra 20-50 dollars a week in their bank account. But if you spend an extra 50 dollars a week that could add up to 2500 dollars a year.

For many small purchases or budgeting decisions, rationality defined by transitivity of preferences is difficult. This leads to time inconsistency of individuals preferences. They on their own would prefer to have an extra 3000 dollars a year for a big purchase, a vacation, or for saving in general. But on their own it is difficult to tell the difference between spending 20 or 50 dollars less a week.

The principle of transivity does not alter the fundamental principles of accounting or economics. They remain just as valid and Lehi knows them well. What you are talking about is the logic people use in their decision making. The principles of economics and accounting still hold. Some choose not to apply them in thier decision making. If they are not applied then they cannot be effective for those who do not apply them.

[bluebell]

There is a difference between accounting and economics. Accounting-wise it is best to keep the money yourself of course. Economics, its not so simple.

For rational behavior in economics, one fundamental assumption is transitivity. That means if I prefer apples to oranges, and oranges to bananas, I should prefer apples to bananas.

Sounds pretty simple, right?

Things are a little more complicate in the real world with some things.

Take for instance weight loss/gain. People can tell the difference between eating 50 or 100 calories extra/less a day, but a 50 calorie difference a day adds up to 6lbs etc a year. Left uncheck for 5 or 10 years, and you have gained an extra 50 lbs.

With small amounts of saving/budgeting it can be very similar. Many people would not notice the difference between an extra 20-50 dollars a week in their bank account. But if you spend an extra 50 dollars a week that could add up to 2500 dollars a year.

For many small purchases or budgeting decisions, rationality defined by transitivity of preferences is difficult. This leads to time inconsistency of individuals preferences. They on their own would prefer to have an extra 3000 dollars a year for a big purchase, a vacation, or for saving in general. But on their own it is difficult to tell the difference between spending 20 or 50 dollars less a week.

Exactly.

[krose]

I would pay on net, then pay 10% of whatever I received back as a tax return.

Don't forget to figure in the amount gained in the form of reduced taxes if you claim it as a charitable deduction.

[LDSToronto]

Ignorance of fundamental economics and financial information is common: almost no one I know (outside my peers) understands how money really works. The specific, started by H (as I recall), of letting government use money for free, is just one example.

Hi Lehi,

I appreciate your willingness to share your professional advice; such is a rare gift given. I would like to point out that I have run the numbers a few times, and gone over it with a financial planner. There are a number of variables that I need to factor in - a bonus that ranges from meager to substantial in any given year, timing of that bonus payout, tithing based on variable income rates, etc.

If I were a disciplined saver, I could have the government reduce deductions at source and then sock away the difference. However, at today's rates of return, and given market instability, I'm willing to treat the government as a zero interest piggy bank. The few bucks I don't gain on interest (which by the way, is taxable if it's not sheltered), I gain in peace of mind.

I'm no fool with money - for my age, I'm doing better than most with respect to retirement savings, mortgage balance, and debt load. I just know what I am comfortable with, and for my money, I'm comfortable with the way I'm doing things.

H.

[LDSToronto]

And just to kill the false doctrine, there's no such thing as getting blessed on 10% gross vs. 10% net. If you pay your tithing, you're blessed 100%. There's no extra-credit.

When I said I pay on my gross, I hope I didn't give the impression that I was more blessed than someone who pays on their net. For me, it boils down to a personal decision, affordability, and taxes.

H.

[awesome0]

The principle of transivity does not alter the fundamental principles of accounting or economics. They remain just as valid and Lehi knows them well. What you are talking about is the logic people use in their decision making. The principles of economics and accounting still hold. Some choose not to apply them in thier decision making. If they are not applied then they cannot be effective for those who do not apply them.

The principle of transitivity is necessary for rationality. If we have trouble being rational, individuals often seek commitment devices like automatic withdrawl, or follow diets, or use points. It is often difficult to keep track of exact expenses, especially in a debit card/credit card world. I am not saying their choices are efficient in a first best scenario, but they might help as commitment devices.

[Jeff K.]

Economics is the study of choices. Finance and accouting are the mehtods used in those choices. I don't see it as an either/or. Much like transitivity is part of the utilization process. The point still rolls down to desire. The incident in my life in which it was saved reflected a desire to give thanks for something I knew clearly saved me from a horrible predicament.

So do I pay gross or net to the man that saved me? Is it even worth the discussion. I think grateful generosity (and that is something between the individual and the Lord) is the term that comes to mind.

[dougtheavenger]

If you aren't paying now due to changes in your faith or some other reason, please indicate what you personally would do as a faithful LDS under normal circumstances.

Thank you!

You always pay on the net. I think the real question is how do taxes come into play.

If you claim you should pay tithes on tax withholdings, then that is debatable. You may recieve services far less than the tax withheld or in excess of the tax withheld ; ie, 7 kids in public school vs no kids in public school.

[awesome0]

Economics is the study of choices. Finance and accouting are the mehtods used in those choices. I don't see it as an either/or. Much like transitivity is part of the utilization process. The point still rolls down to desire. The incident in my life in which it was saved reflected a desire to give thanks for something I knew clearly saved me from a horrible predicament.

So do I pay gross or net to the man that saved me? Is it even worth the discussion. I think grateful generosity (and that is something between the individual and the Lord) is the term that comes to mind.

A few points. People don't use finance or accounting to make most choices, they are dictated by preferences and their constraints (or at least so says my Ph.D in economics). Is tithing a way of thank the Lord for his atonement...not for me. I'd like to think we pay tithing to help build the church and its administration. If you want to thank the Lord for saving you, I don't think our decision in tithing (net vs. gross) matters IMHO. We thank Him in how we treat and bless the lives of others. My view, I'd prefer save the difference between net and gross and donate it to Haiti.

[Jeff K.]

I would disagree, I use finance and accounting to see the potential of most of the choices I make where any substantial amount of money is concerned. Preferences and constraints are simply another term for desire and the amount of money one has (and for of course social values). Your Phd Economics guy should have added that.

Tithing is NOT a way to thank the Lord for the atonement, anymore than repentance is merely saying "I'm sorry". It is an acknowledgement that all that I have, all potential that I achieve is possible only for the atonement, a small step in dedication. I think to presume that a deep soulful grateful atitude is the equivalent of "thank you" is a cheap and tawdry thing. Is repentance is merely "I'm sorry"? Or is there much more to it than that? But then, those are word games that perhaps escape the context.

It is telling that when the Lord states someone has robbed Him, He in effect shows that the money is not yours to decide what to do with, but His. I acknowledge this, and I don't play financial games with God. Rather than split the sum and play the financial game, why not pay a full tithe, gross if you will, AND donate to Haiti. I do it, and unlike some of my friends continue to do so, through select charities that don't waste the money on admin.

So the money is already God's. Do we want to be miserly with someone whose money we already acknowledge is His?

Secondly, "thank you" doesn't begin to scratch the surface. The more I understand the atonement, the greater my awe is for what it has done to me. Will I look to skimp on the money given to Him after what He has done? Did Christ "skimp" on the atonement and simply pay for the "net sins" of those who will be saved? Not from my reading.

[awesome0]

Jeff. I agree with your definitions. The fact that you use accounting to help with decision making process doesn't change the fact that your preferences determine decisions and not tools you use to help you make your make decisions when it would otherwise be difficult. I don't have a guy with a Ph.d. in econ to talk, I am the "guy". In any case, economics and decisions making rules are all approximations to the real world and its not hard to come up with examples to show how those approximations can fall short. One example would be cases such as those involving minor difference in consumption, as we were discussing above in regards to whether it is right for a person to receive a large tax refund.

Your implications that a gross tithe a "FULL TITHE" I believe are unfounded. I refer to the last official statement the brethren made on the issue. In regards to gratitude, I believe I would show more gratitude by helping my fellow man as opposed to paying extra tithing on top of what I have consulted the Lord with to determine my honest tithe. Giving money to sustain the church is not the same thing as giving money to God, in my view. Besides, once one is obedient to tithing, serving your fellow man is the same as serving God. So lets save some lives in Haiti instead of putting down a new basketball floor in stake center (probably the difference between a net and gross tithe for me)?

[rongo]

As do we as non-LDS.

But I would like to see whether a bishop would deny a temple recommend to a member who provided proof of giving 10% or more to the poor (including a large amount in fast offerings), rather than paying tithing. I wonder how many would insist on following the letter of the law?

I absolutely would. Tithing is paid to the Church, to be used as the Church determines. Insisting on donating to charities of your choice, while comendable, is not tithing.

During tithing settlement, I also ask families to prayerfully consider their offerings as well (particularly for active families who are full tithe payers, but have donated none or very little fast offerings). I remind them that converts commit to pay both tithing and fast offering. This has led to discussion about fast offering vs. humanitarian donations (one couple felt very drawn towards beefing up their donations to Church humanitarian at the expense of fast offering), and I have explained that while tithing is set by priesthood authority at 10%, other donations, including fast offering, are between the couple and God. I encouraged them to seek to follow the Spirit in making this personal decision.

[BookofMormonLuvr]

Don't forget to figure in the amount gained in the form of reduced taxes if you claim it as a charitable deduction.

I would never claim tithing as a charitable donation, so it is not an issue (for me at least).

[bluebell]

I would disagree, I use finance and accounting to see the potential of most of the choices I make where any substantial amount of money is concerned. Preferences and constraints are simply another term for desire and the amount of money one has (and for of course social values). Your Phd Economics guy should have added that.

Tithing is NOT a way to thank the Lord for the atonement, anymore than repentance is merely saying "I'm sorry". It is an acknowledgement that all that I have, all potential that I achieve is possible only for the atonement, a small step in dedication. I think to presume that a deep soulful grateful atitude is the equivalent of "thank you" is a cheap and tawdry thing. Is repentance is merely "I'm sorry"? Or is there much more to it than that? But then, those are word games that perhaps escape the context.

It is telling that when the Lord states someone has robbed Him, He in effect shows that the money is not yours to decide what to do with, but His. I acknowledge this, and I don't play financial games with God. Rather than split the sum and play the financial game, why not pay a full tithe, gross if you will, AND donate to Haiti. I do it, and unlike some of my friends continue to do so, through select charities that don't waste the money on admin.

So the money is already God's. Do we want to be miserly with someone whose money we already acknowledge is His?

Secondly, "thank you" doesn't begin to scratch the surface. The more I understand the atonement, the greater my awe is for what it has done to me. Will I look to skimp on the money given to Him after what He has done? Did Christ "skimp" on the atonement and simply pay for the "net sins" of those who will be saved? Not from my reading.

Are you saying that if a person isn't tithing on their gross, they aren't paying a full tithe?

Just wanting to make sure i understand your point.

[Let_Us_Reason]

cion:

Depends. Do you want blessings based on your net income or gross income?

I think you're kind of saying this tongue in cheek so take my response with the same thing in mind.

I think comments like this (that I've heard in EQ, too) is rather Pharisaitical (sp?). I think we might as well say when it comes to keeping the Sabbath Day holy that we make sure not to take more than 100 steps thus qualifying for "gross" blessings.

[Jeff K.]

Jeff. I agree with your definitions. The fact that you use accounting to help with decision making process doesn't change the fact that your preferences determine decisions and not tools you use to help you make your make decisions when it would otherwise be difficult. I don't have a guy with a Ph.d. in econ to talk, I am the "guy". In any case, economics and decisions making rules are all approximations to the real world and its not hard to come up with examples to show how those approximations can fall short. One example would be cases such as those involving minor difference in consumption, as we were discussing above in regards to whether it is right for a person to receive a large tax refund.

I agree that decisions are approximations to the real world. But I haven't seen the counter to my point that preferences and cosntraints are synoyomous with desire and resources. Minor differences in consumption are not very good in deciding larger distinctions due to the estimated impact on resource allocation in the future.

Your implications that a gross tithe a "FULL TITHE" I believe are unfounded. I refer to the last official statement the brethren made on the issue. In regards to gratitude, I believe I would show more gratitude by helping my fellow man as opposed to paying extra tithing on top of what I have consulted the Lord with to determine my honest tithe. Giving money to sustain the church is not the same thing as giving money to God, in my view. Besides, once one is obedient to tithing, serving your fellow man is the same as serving God. So lets save some lives in Haiti instead of putting down a new basketball floor in stake center (probably the difference between a net and gross tithe for me)?

I have yet to see how giving money to the church is not the same as giving it to God. Malachi 3:9 makes it very clear that giving money to the church is the same as giving it to God.

Will a man rob God? Yet ye have robbed me. But ye say, Wherein have we robbed thee? In tithes and offerings.

Ye [are] cursed with a curse: for ye have robbed me, [even] this whole nation.

Bring ye all the tithes into the storehouse, that there may be meat in mine house, and prove me now herewith, saith the LORD of hosts, if I will not open you the windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing, that [there shall] not [be room] enough [to receive it].

In other words, God instructed clearly that the tithes and offering be given to His warehouse, or those who have stewardship over His warehouse. There is not doubting the position that the Lord has that giving it to His church is the equivalent of giving it to Him. If you have a scripture or perhaps talk from a prophet or apostle that countermands such a view, I would be interested in seeing it. It would appear that in that case your view is incorrect both scripturally and by revelation of our modern prophets.

As to the question of a full tithe, and giving the tithing to someone else in a charitable manner, I would raise two points. One is the law of sacrifice and the other is the question of who the primary debt holder is.

Law of sacrifice. Sacrifice which comes from the root "to make sacred" reflects a certain giving in its old English meaning. But more to the point, it is doing without, in order to give to the Lord. The New Testament is repleat with examples of sacrifice. Sacrifice is an act of worship. Tithing, per Dallin Oaks prepares us for sacrifice (April 1994 Ensign). So we are expected to give something that causes loss (rather than equal choice).

So do we only fast when we are not hungry? Do we only tithe our discretionary income? Personally I wish I could only fast when I was simply desireous of a hamburger instead of hungry for food. But I believe the principle holds that a net tithe is no more a sacrifice than a net hunger is a fast.

Again I would turn to Dallin Oaks in regard to priorities of payment (who should be paid first).

The payment of tithing is a test of priorities. The Savior taught that reality when he gave this parable:

[Jeff K.]

I think you're kind of saying this tongue in cheek so take my response with the same thing in mind.

I think comments like this (that I've heard in EQ, too) is rather Pharisaitical (sp?). I think we might as well say when it comes to keeping the Sabbath Day holy that we make sure not to take more than 100 steps thus qualifying for "gross" blessings.

Perhaps, but then, would you consider net fasting as opposed to fasting. Ie, I am really not hungry so I will pass on the creme brulee and count it as a fast. Tongue in cheek of course.

Remember one can count any rule adhered to as pharisaitical (I think its right), the difference is whether one is following the spirit of the law, or simply following the law. In both the law is almost always followed.

[Brenda]

Just in case this hasn't been said here yet:

"The simplest statement we know of is the statement of the Lord himself, namely, that the members of the Church should pay 'one-tenth of all their interest annually,' which is understood to mean income. No one is justified in making any other statement than this." Gordon Hinckley, 1970.

[thesometimesaint]

I pay 10% of my increase in Tithing, a generous Fast Offing(the cost of eating in a nice restaurant), am generous to the Perpetual Education Fund, and the Humanitarian Fund, and help keep a young missionary on his mission. I am well blessed.