President Monson Issued A Court Summons? Is This For Real?

[juliann]

You don't seem to get how this works. We, in the "bloggernacle" are in the tiny, tiny minority. The vast majority of people who reach mormonthink will do so because they googled a general Mormon phrase which MT appears on the front page for. They will read the articles and might not have ever heard of FAIRmormon/Mormondialogue etc. This is a massive coup for MT's search rankings. MT has no "brand" for the vast majority of people because most people have never heard of it. Try it. Go and ask a few of your church friends, they'll mainly not have heard of it. Then go and ask the missionaries' investigators. They will also not have heard of it. This is simply a website that most people will land on during a google search.

 

Also, those newspaper articles will never appear on the first page for the key search terms because they don't have inbound links mentioning the terms that are searched for.

 I get it, Canard.  And googling words doesn't raise search ranking, something else does.

[ALarson]

Here's something I found regarding the question I'd asked earlier (written by a church member in the UK).

 

I'd love comments on it:

 

"We are also anxious to see the church offer assurances about the position with Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs of members and former members who now feel, as we do, that our tithing and other offerings were obtained by the church under false pretenses. For every pound paid to the church by LDS members in the UK who, (following leadership counsel), have availed themselves of Deeds of Covenant and Gift Aid, £0.20 has been added by the British Taxpayer to the church’s bank accounts. The sum paid out by HMRC in this connection must now amount to tens of millions of pounds. It is understood that in most cases the resulting tax rebates made to individuals, were handed over to the church at its request. We seek an assurance from the church therefore, that in the event that at some future time these payments made by HMRC will be deemed to have been fraudulently obtained, the LDS church will offer immunity to those individuals, and ensure that such sums as were rebated will be returned with the due interest to HMRC."

This just got messy!

let me explain the tax issue. We are all encouraged in the UK to pay via Gift Aid. What happens is we pay our tithing and for each pound of tithing we pay the church, the church claims 0.20p from the Government, because it's a charity.

Basically if you pay £1 the government has pledged to pay the charity £0.20p which it would otherwise have taken as tax from the individual. 

So what they are saying is the church has defrauded the british government out of millions of dollars. Or rather, not the British Government, but rather the British Taxpayer - the citizens of whom the majority of whom are not Mormons. And if there's one thing the British taxpayer does not like, is to be screwed over by a american corporation never mind one they will perceive as masking as a religion. If you want to see what happens when that is perceived, just google the outcry when Starbucks and Amazon were discovered to pay no taxes to the UK!

Their wording is clear. They are going for the jugular. I feel a bit ill. The church may get away with this quietly but if the tabloids (the local rag newspapers) pick up on that blog, I'm sorry but you may just see the church's worst PR nightmare occur overnight. Bearing in mind the biggest local rag - the Daily Mail - has already done a story on this.

Oh my. It may not be the best thing for any UK saint to even dare tell their neighbour they are a mormon after this if they don't want to be verbally abused!

Oh no. Call me an idiot but I just realised the possible repercussions and why they are calling for 'immunity'.

If the government demands this money back, they will be demanding it from the members, who may all get letters demanding years of unpaid tax. This would include me - HRMC could decide I underpaid them every year of my working life. It could see members owe tens of thousands of pounds in unpaid tax, which was originally donated to the church.

Edit: To make matters worse, UK members can claim charitable deductions in order to reduce their income in order to claim state benefits, worth anything between a few hundred to tens of thousands of pounds a year. They would be hit for that too. Actually, this is horrendous. I'm not sure if it is even possible, yet they are suggesting this might be a repercussion in this statement? 

Just to be clear - how many faithful latter-day saints will there be when HMRC come calling on them with tax and benefit refund bills worth hundreds of thousands of pounds? This is insane.

Edited February 8, 2014 by ALarson

[bluebell]

Isn't this tax thing true for all churches in the UK though, and not just the LDS church?

 

I mean, doesn't it work the same way with the catholic church, for example?  Couldn't people declare their donations under that special charity tax thingy and allow the state to pay a portion of back to the Catholic church?

 

This quote above makes it sound like this only applies and/or is utilized by the LDS church but it doesn't, does it?

[Mystery Meat]

Here's something I found regarding the question I'd asked earlier (written by a church member in the UK).

 

I'd love comments on it:

 

"We are also anxious to see the church offer assurances about the position with Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs of members and former members who now feel, as we do, that our tithing and other offerings were obtained by the church under false pretenses. For every pound paid to the church by LDS members in the UK who, (following leadership counsel), have availed themselves of Deeds of Covenant and Gift Aid, £0.20 has been added by the British Taxpayer to the church’s bank accounts. The sum paid out by HMRC in this connection must now amount to tens of millions of pounds. It is understood that in most cases the resulting tax rebates made to individuals, were handed over to the church at its request. We seek an assurance from the church therefore, that in the event that at some future time these payments made by HMRC will be deemed to have been fraudulently obtained, the LDS church will offer immunity to those individuals, and ensure that such sums as were rebated will be returned with the due interest to HMRC."

This just got messy!

let me explain the tax issue. We are all encouraged in the UK to pay via Gift Aid. What happens is we pay our tithing and for each pound of tithing we pay the church, the church claims 0.20p from the Government, because it's a charity.

Basically if you pay £1 the government has pledged to pay the charity £0.20p which it would otherwise have taken as tax from the individual. 

So what they are saying is the church has defrauded the british government out of millions of dollars. Or rather, not the British Government, but rather the British Taxpayer - the citizens of whom the majority of whom are not Mormons. And if there's one thing the British taxpayer does not like, is to be screwed over by a american corporation never mind one they will perceive as masking as a religion. If you want to see what happens when that is perceived, just google the outcry when Starbucks and Amazon were discovered to pay no taxes to the UK!

Their wording is clear. They are going for the jugular. I feel a bit ill. The church may get away with this quietly but if the tabloids (the local rag newspapers) pick up on that blog, I'm sorry but you may just see the church's worst PR nightmare occur overnight. Bearing in mind the biggest local rag - the Daily Mail - has already done a story on this.

Oh my. It may not be the best thing for any UK saint to even dare tell their neighbour they are a mormon after this if they don't want to be verbally abused!

Oh no. Call me an idiot but I just realised the possible repercussions and why they are calling for 'immunity'.

If the government demands this money back, they will be demanding it from the members, who may all get letters demanding years of unpaid tax. This would include me - HRMC could decide I underpaid them every year of my working life. It could see members owe tens of thousands of pounds in unpaid tax, which was originally donated to the church.

Edit: To make matters worse, UK members can claim charitable deductions in order to reduce their income in order to claim state benefits, worth anything between a few hundred to tens of thousands of pounds a year. They would be hit for that too. Actually, this is horrendous. I'm not sure if it is even possible, yet they are suggesting this might be a repercussion in this statement? 

Just to be clear - how many faithful latter-day saints will there be when HMRC come calling on them with tax and benefit refund bills worth hundreds of thousands of pounds? This is insane.

 

Are you honestly look for comments or just trying to prod? Based on the general direction of your posts I think it is safe to assume you have picked your side on the matter.

 

This individual is over reacting. Tom Phillips has NO case. End of story.

[ALarson]

Are you honestly look for comments or just trying to prod? Based on the general direction of your posts I think it is safe to assume you have picked your side on the matter.

 

This individual is over reacting. Tom Phillips has NO case. End of story.

What are you talking about?  I am trying to find information on that paragraph in the joint statement.  This was written by a member of the church in the UK and I found it doing an online search.  I asked for comments (especially from anyone with any knowledge on this subject earlier in this thread).  I know nothing about UK laws or taxes, etc.

 

Your accusation is ridiculous!!  Asking questions and trying to find information is picking sides?  Good grief.

Edited February 8, 2014 by ALarson

[ALarson]

Isn't this tax thing true for all churches in the UK though, and not just the LDS church?

 

I mean, doesn't it work the same way with the catholic church, for example?  Couldn't people declare their donations under that special charity tax thingy and allow the state to pay a portion of back to the Catholic church?

 

I have to imagine that this is true.  Why would the laws be different for the Mormon church vs. any other church in the UK?  It seems that any ruling against the church ordering them to refund money would open the door to demand the same from every other religion.  That would never happen.  That paragraph is just hard to understand (at least for me).

Edited February 8, 2014 by ALarson

[canard78]

 I get it, Canard.  And googling words doesn't raise search ranking, something else does.

 

Huhh? I didn't say googling words raises search rankings. Getting significant websites linking to your website with relevant content on the pages does factor in. That's what MT has just achieved by getting USAtoday, Telegraph etc to link to them.

[Lightbearer]

Nothing worse than an Atheist Apostate! One of his points is also against the book of Genesis! Why not bring in the Church of England or the Catholic Church into the complaint? When I first saw the headline I wondered what could they be claiming? That President Monson made off with the Tithing funds?! Then reading the article I realized it was just another bitter apostate that has nothing better to do with his life than to oppose the Kingdom of God and waste the time of the British Courts with not only a frivolous lawsuit but also to put before the court something that they could not possibly rule on (elements of faith). Oh and as reported in the USA Today, almost at the end of the story I spotted the political angle (the reason the US media even carries this non-story) it tells about some book written by Phillips, that does a hatchett job on Mitt Romney! Are they afraid he will try to make a comeback in 2016? But actually the whole thing is rather laughable, sort of reminds me of the first lawsuit filed against the prophet Joseph for "being a disorderly person and preaching the Book of Mormon"! If he is serious about this it is also a rather pathetic attempt. I will make predictions of my own, President Monson will never stand trial for these baseless charges (I respect the British legal system more than that) and the UK would never try to extradite him even if the US government were foolish enough to offer it! And even if both governments had completely lost their marbles and did... there is one factor that the apostates and Anti-Mormon minions would never count on... that God would not allow His prophet to be treated in this way, unless like Paul and Peter and Joseph Smith he had a mission to perform to further the work of the Lord. Of one thing I am sure, even if President Monson does not have to answer for charges at the Old Baily, Mr Phillips will have to answer for his apostasy and false witness to a much higher tribunal...

[Avatar4321]

Nothing worse than an Atheist Apostate! One of his points is also against the book of Genesis! Why not bring in the Church of England or the Catholic Church into the complaint? When I first saw the headline I wondered what could they be claiming? That President Monson made off with the Tithing funds?! Then reading the article I realized it was just another bitter apostate that has nothing better to do with his life than to oppose the Kingdom of God and waste the time of the British Courts with not only a frivolous lawsuit but also to put before the court something that they could not possibly rule on (elements of faith). Oh and as reported in the USA Today, almost at the end of the story I spotted the political angle (the reason the US media even carries this non-story) it tells about some book written by Phillips, that does a hatchett job on Mitt Romney! Are they afraid he will try to make a comeback in 2016? But actually the whole thing is rather laughable, sort of reminds me of the first lawsuit filed against the prophet Joseph for "being a disorderly person and preaching the Book of Mormon"! If he is serious about this it is also a rather pathetic attempt. I will make predictions of my own, President Monson will never stand trial for these baseless charges (I respect the British legal system more than that) and the UK would never try to extradite him even if the US government were foolish enough to offer it! And even if both governments had completely lost their marbles and did... there is one factor that the apostates and Anti-Mormon minions would never count on... that God would not allow His prophet to be treated in this way, unless like Paul and Peter and Joseph Smith he had a mission to perform to further the work of the Lord. Of one thing I am sure, even if President Monson does not have to answer for charges at the Old Baily, Mr Phillips will have to answer for his apostasy and false witness to a much higher tribunal...

 

Considering all the Prophets who have been imprisoned, how could you think that the Lord wouldn't allow His prophets to be treated like this?

 

Heck, Christ was arrested and crucified. And He was God's Son!

[Lightbearer]

Considering all the Prophets who have been imprisoned, how could you think that the Lord wouldn't allow His prophets to be treated like this?

 

Heck, Christ was arrested and crucified. And He was God's Son!

Actually I did note that it would be possible if it was part of his mission (note my references to Paul, Peter, and Joseph Smith), but I do not think it necessary to further the work of the Lord now. Remember it is not the work of the Lord that is frustrated but the work of men. So I am not concerned about it.

[Scott Lloyd]

And this is another good point. Many members will see it as persecution...a persecution that has existed since the very beginnings of the church. And of course it is persecution.

In fact, this is eerily like the persecution that anti-Mormons and apostates heaped upon the Church and its members in the early days. A common practice among the enemies of Joseph Smith was to bring frivolous or vexatious lawsuits against him as a means of harassment.

 

In short, the devil is up to his old tricks.

[Scott Lloyd]

I went ahead and threw my own two cents' worth in over at Catholic Answers, since they have at least one thread going over there now.

No surprise there. I said I doubt the case goes anywhere. Funny, however.

I wouldn't be surprised to see the Catholic Church as an institution take our side in this. Our Church has aligned with them recently on freedom-of-religion issues.

[why me]

In fact, this is eerily like the persecution that anti-Mormons and apostates heaped upon the Church and its members in the early days. A common practice among the enemies of Joseph Smith was to bring frivolous or vexatious lawsuits against him as a means of harassment.

 

In short, the devil is up to his old tricks.

That was my point. I see members finally beginning to understand that there is a concerted effort against the lds church now. It seems that there is a lot of attacks going on now by exmembers and by critics. So much angst is being directed against the church and its members that one cannot help but see the forces behind it.

 

The exmormons and critics who are now doing such attacks can see themselves during the early days of the lds church. They just need to read lds history.

[why me]

I wouldn't be surprised to see the Catholic Church as an institution take our side in this. Our Church has aligned with them recently on freedom-of-religion issues.

The catholic church is germany, as I have point out on this thread, has its members pay a state tax. If a german does not pay the state tax, he or she cannot take part in catholic ordinances. They also may be excommunicated unless that law was recently changed.  And Islam requires its believers to pay 2.5 percent of their income for the poor. This is part of the five pillars of islam. I don't think that the UK courts wish to take the five pillars to task.

Edited February 8, 2014 by why me

[alexis]

Missionaries come and go in an area, as you well know. If the area book isn't kept up-to-date - specifically notes like DNC on the ward directories being transferred to the new ones - then after a few months or so, you're probably going to have a new set of elders knocking. I made a special effort to note the DNCs in one of my areas, and after six months there I was still getting chewed out by new ones that I'd find. And since I wasn't - and am still not - the most Christlike person when it comes to that, I tended to bite back if they gave me crap for something I had no control over.

 

 

My parents have this issue on occasion. They've requested no contact, yet missionaries still show up.  It's not random tracting because the missionaries request or call my parents by name. My parents are generally polite people,  plus my dad served a two-year mission in South America and knows what it's like to be far away from home and treated rudely, so they don't take the faulty communication out on the missionaries, but many people would.  

 

The missionaries are representatives of the church. If they show up on doorsteps as representatives of the Church when contact has been specifically "un-requested" (I know that's not an actual word), they will at least on occasion face hostile responses. if they in turn respond in a less-than-Christ-like manner, they're certainly not furthering the work.

[flameburns623]

My parents have this issue on occasion. They've requested no contact, yet missionaries still show up. It's not random tracting because the missionaries request or call my parents by name. My parents are generally polite people, plus my dad served a two-year mission in South America and knows what it's like to be far away from home and treated rudely, so they don't take the faulty communication out on the missionaries, but many people would.

The missionaries are representatives of the church. If they show up on doorsteps as representatives of the Church when contact has been specifically "un-requested" (I know that's not an actual word), they will at least on occasion face hostile responses. if they in turn respond in a less-than-Christ-like manner, they're certainly not furthering the work.

Missionaries must be a real pain in some parts of the world. I spent years as an inactive LDS member and scarcely ever saw 'em. Once every two or three years, mebbe.

And they knew where I lived and that I was a member. Once they were in the neighborhood and had a catastrophic bike failure and knocked on the door. My wife answered (I wasn't home), borrowed some tools, and when they couldn't fix the bicycle, got permission to leave it a day or two on our porch. No biggie. I came home, found this expensive bicycle sitting there (probably worth more than the car I was driving at the time) and got the story from my wife. Neither one of us cared, except I worried about bicycle thieves a bit.

They came back, got the bicycle a day or so later, thus is life. I don't think I ever even saw those guys before they got rotated to wherever LDS Missionaries rotate to.

Sorry. Back to your regularly scheduled, MormonCourtTV programming.

[why me]

Sorry. Back to your regularly scheduled, MormonCourtTV programming.

 

Mormon missionaries, unless the name is crossed out in their contact book will keep contacting. They seem to get lost in the switches and the new missionaries usually don't know about the contact problem unless it is in the book.

Edited February 8, 2014 by why me

[why me]

Sorry. Back to your regularly scheduled, MormonCourtTV programming.

Can you please point out on the CA site where you are posting that the catholic church requires its members in Germany to pay the state tax. if they don't pay the state tax, they can't take part in the ordinances or the receiving of the eucharist.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk...europe-19699581

 

http://en.mercopress...tax-rules-court

 

American catholics seem to have an american understanding of the catholic church. As we can see if german catholics do not pay the state tax they lose church benefits and cannot receive the communion. This can also sound like extortion which is what some are some claiming about tithes and temple recommends. I just think that it is sad that some there are chiding the tithing principle without realizing how the situation is in europe with state churches. And one of the poster's on that forum is correct. Militant atheists will go after state taxes if they succeed in the UK:

 

http://en.wikipedia....wiki/Church_tax

 

Thanks for the favor if you do this for me. I believe, because of your name, you are also posting there.

Edited February 8, 2014 by why me

[flameburns623]

Can you please point out on the CA site where you are posting that the catholic church requires its members in Germany to pay the state tax. if they don't pay the state tax, they can't take part in the ordinances or the receiving of the eucharist.

http://www.bbc.co.uk...europe-19699581

http://en.mercopress...tax-rules-court

American catholics seem to have an american understanding of the catholic church. As we can see if german catholics do not pay the state tax they lose church benefits and cannot receive the communion. This can also sound like extortion which is what some are some claiming about tithes and temple recommends. I just think that it is sad that some there are chiding the tithing principle without realizing how the situation is in europe with state churches. And one of the poster's on that forum is correct. Militant atheists will go after state taxes if they succeed in the UK:

http://en.wikipedia....wiki/Church_tax

Thanks for the favor if you do this for me. I believe, because of your name, you are also posting there.

Done. Why not join the fracas, ummm, errrr, the forum?

[why me]

Done. Why not join the fracas, ummm, errrr, the forum?

I was banned as well as my daughter. But I wish I could.

[flameburns623]

I was banned as well as my daughter. But I wish I could.

You should be able to rejoin under another user name. Just try to honor their rules. I work hard over here at being respectful: it's doable.

But I think it might be an infraction at CAF for me to post messages from excluded members.

Not that you said anything wrong in this post but---hadn't thought of your not being allowed to post.

It was a fair contribution to the conversation, but I probably shouldn't do it again.

Sorry.

[sheilauk]

Hopefully, in the unlikely and unfortunate event that the Church of Jesus Christ suffers an adverse result at trial in this case, appellate judges will pay due attention to Justice Jackson's (albeit dissenting) opinion.

Sorry, but appellate judges in the UK will pay no attention to anything a US Judge has said.  They will, however, pay due regard to anything said by the European Court of Justice and Court of Human Rights even if in relation to other countries because we are signatories to that treaty and bound to consider European Human Rights matters and EU law.

[Kenngo1969]

Sorry, but appellate judges in the UK will pay no attention to anything a US Judge has said.  They will, however, pay due regard to anything said by the European Court of Justice and Court of Human Rights even if in relation to other countries because we are signatories to that treaty and bound to consider European Human Rights matters and EU law.

Which may be a good thing ... or a bad thing.

 

P.S.: Some U.S. judges and justices think we should pay more attention to the laws of other countries in the U.S., and that they may constitute precedent in deciding some U.S. cases.  I'm not sure how I feel about that.  I'm ambivalent at best.

 

P.P.S.: While you know this, for the benefit of others who may not, I should, of course, also mention that since Justice Jackson's opinion is a dissent, it's not binding here, either ... which does not, of course, mean that Justice Jackson is wrong.

Edited February 8, 2014 by Kenngo1969

[sheilauk]

Here's something I found regarding the question I'd asked earlier (written by a church member in the UK).

 

I'd love comments on it:

 

"We are also anxious to see the church offer assurances about the position with Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs of members and former members who now feel, as we do, that our tithing and other offerings were obtained by the church under false pretenses. For every pound paid to the church by LDS members in the UK who, (following leadership counsel), have availed themselves of Deeds of Covenant and Gift Aid, £0.20 has been added by the British Taxpayer to the church’s bank accounts. The sum paid out by HMRC in this connection must now amount to tens of millions of pounds. It is understood that in most cases the resulting tax rebates made to individuals, were handed over to the church at its request. We seek an assurance from the church therefore, that in the event that at some future time these payments made by HMRC will be deemed to have been fraudulently obtained, the LDS church will offer immunity to those individuals, and ensure that such sums as were rebated will be returned with the due interest to HMRC."

This just got messy!

let me explain the tax issue. We are all encouraged in the UK to pay via Gift Aid. What happens is we pay our tithing and for each pound of tithing we pay the church, the church claims 0.20p from the Government, because it's a charity.

Basically if you pay £1 the government has pledged to pay the charity £0.20p which it would otherwise have taken as tax from the individual. 

So what they are saying is the church has defrauded the british government out of millions of dollars. Or rather, not the British Government, but rather the British Taxpayer - the citizens of whom the majority of whom are not Mormons. And if there's one thing the British taxpayer does not like, is to be screwed over by a american corporation never mind one they will perceive as masking as a religion. If you want to see what happens when that is perceived, just google the outcry when Starbucks and Amazon were discovered to pay no taxes to the UK!

Their wording is clear. They are going for the jugular. I feel a bit ill. The church may get away with this quietly but if the tabloids (the local rag newspapers) pick up on that blog, I'm sorry but you may just see the church's worst PR nightmare occur overnight. Bearing in mind the biggest local rag - the Daily Mail - has already done a story on this.

Oh my. It may not be the best thing for any UK saint to even dare tell their neighbour they are a mormon after this if they don't want to be verbally abused!

Oh no. Call me an idiot but I just realised the possible repercussions and why they are calling for 'immunity'.

If the government demands this money back, they will be demanding it from the members, who may all get letters demanding years of unpaid tax. This would include me - HRMC could decide I underpaid them every year of my working life. It could see members owe tens of thousands of pounds in unpaid tax, which was originally donated to the church.

Edit: To make matters worse, UK members can claim charitable deductions in order to reduce their income in order to claim state benefits, worth anything between a few hundred to tens of thousands of pounds a year. They would be hit for that too. Actually, this is horrendous. I'm not sure if it is even possible, yet they are suggesting this might be a repercussion in this statement? 

Just to be clear - how many faithful latter-day saints will there be when HMRC come calling on them with tax and benefit refund bills worth hundreds of thousands of pounds? This is insane.

Please note - this is my opinion and understanding - I'm not a tax lawyer, I think you'd need to hear from a tax expert for the full and complete picture - tax law can get messy.  So, for what its worth:

 

1st - the statement of the two men is garbled.  The first part is correct.  In the UK you can gift aid.  If you donate to a charity (any charity which would include almost every religion) and you are a UK taxpayer, you sign a form and the Government also donates the equivalent of the tax - currently 20%.  The charity has to be one approved by the Government (via the Charities Commission - they give a certificate and unique reference number which is quoted to identify the charity.)  The seond part is what is garbled.  I think that, if you choose to, you can use your charitable donations to offset the amount of tax you have to pay annually.  I think you can get the 20% back.  I'm guessing, as most people in the UK pay tax through their employee and do not make an annual tax claim that most people do not do this. I certainly don't.  Second, if the charitable tax status of the Church were to change, the UK government would not come calling on individuals who had donated previously.  I doubt it would be legal and it would certainly not have the resources!  Third - assuming that you had not lied on your tax return, the fraud of others would not create a fiduciary obligation on you.  If the Church were held to have fraudently declared its charitable status and obtained a donation from the UK incorrectly, it would be the Church who would have to give the money back.  After all, it would be the Church who would have had the money that the Government otherwise would have had, not the individual taxpayer. 

 

Threats and bluster to cause panic.

 

Edited to add:

 

This is how gift aid is described by our Tax Authority (HMRC - Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs)

How Gift Aid works

The Gift Aid scheme is for gifts of money by individuals who pay UK tax. Gift Aid donations are regarded as having basic rate tax deducted by the donor. Charities or CASCs take your donation - which is money you've already paid tax on - and reclaim the basic rate tax from HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) on its 'gross' equivalent - the amount before basic rate tax was deducted.

Basic rate tax is 20 per cent, so this means that if you give £10 using Gift Aid, it’s worth £12.50 to the charity. For donations between 6 April 2008 and 5 April 2011 the charity or CASC will also get a separate government supplement of three pence on every pound you give.

 

You can use Gift Aid if the amount of Income Tax and/or Capital Gains Tax you’ve paid for the tax year in which you make your donation is at least equal to the amount of basic rate tax the charity or CASC and any other charities or CASCs you donate to will reclaim on your gift. A tax year runs from 6 April one year to 5 April the next. If you make a number of Gift Aid donations, you will need to consider the tax you’ve paid on each donation on an accumulative basis. If you don’t pay enough tax you will need to pay any shortfall in tax to HMRC.

 

 

Essentially (I think) - you have already paid this money to the Government and they pay it on to the Charity and so they would reclaim it from the Charity, not you.

 

Edited again (I'm supposed to be at work but researching this is more interesting!)

 

Having looked at a few cases that did come to Court and a few more sites, I feel more certain that the HMRC would reclaim the money from the Church and not ever come near the taxpayer/donor who won't have had any money back from the HMRC.  Certainly, nothing suggests anything different.  The phrase "scare tactics" comes to mind.

Edited February 8, 2014 by sheilauk

[Five Solas]

Seems Thomas S. Monson has a real choice.  He can--

 

Speak BOLDLY and CLEARLY answering each of the 7 points before the eyes of the WHOLE WORLD (owing to the attention so generously donated by the opposition)

 

OR

 

Lawyer up & hunker down

 

Which do you think it will be?  And what would Joseph Smith do?

 

--Erik