whistleblower on Church finances

[mnn727]

3 hours ago, gopher said:

I haven't followed the story closely, but I have some whistleblowing too.  In a recent welfare training I recently attended, we were told by the storehouse director that they give you what you asked for, not what they think you need.  If you want four loaves of bread, you get four loaves of bread even if they think two loaves should be enough.

That's just one example of the reckless spending by the church that explains why they are 100 billion dollars in debt as alleged by the article in the WP.

In my younger days, I also got food from the Bishops Storehouse during a period of unemployment - in 2 cases my order was changed, once by the RS President who added items to it, and once by the Bishops Storehouse, removing some of the meat items they wrote on the order sheet that we were only allowed x pounds of meat per person and I had requested more.

[rockpond]

11 hours ago, smac97 said:

Oh.  Okay.  Why not?  Dollars are, after all, the "coin of the realm."  

Let's say that the Church organizes 2 millions hours of volunteer work by its members.  Are you saying that those hours have no monetary value?  At all?  

Consider this article:

So are you saying the Church is legally prohibited from assiging a dollar value to volunteer time?  Ethically prohibited?

Do you extend this prohibition to all not-for-profit entities?  

Are you saying the Church does this?

I don't understand this.  What "cause?"  

Thanks,

-Smac

 

 

10 hours ago, Danzo said:

You can deduct your unreimbursed expenses (mileage, soup ingredients, perhaps a uniform).  If you just start serving soup to people you cannot deduct the expense.  Moreover the organization could report the value of your time on the 990 part three.  You can't deduct the value of your labor but the organization can report it.

 

First, thank you both for the interesting info that non-profits can assign a dollar value to donated labor and report it.  I was not aware of that.  Not entirely sure what the point is (sounds like it has something to do with grants) but still interesting.

 

As for my comments, I wasn't ever saying that volunteer work by members has no monetary value.  Nor was I trying to make an ethical argument or declare a "prohibition" for the Church or other not-for-profit entities.

What I said was in response to some discussion of the Church's report of how much money it had donated to humanitarian causes.  Someone replied that the actual figure was much higher because of all the volunteer hours.  And I replied that I think it would be odd for the Church to assign a dollar amount to the hours of service rendered by members and claim that dollar amount as a humanitarian aid donation by the church.  If they wanted to say:  We organized and directed 80,000 hours of volunteer work, that would be great.  But to just convert those hours to a dollar amount and claim it as a monetary donation would seem odd to me.

[Danzo]

2 hours ago, Tacenda said:

Then perhaps it doesn't fall under the guideline of being a tax exempt entity, or am I wrong on that? This is a tough subject, indeed.

You reallly know nothing about tax law and tax exempt entities, do you?

You should be asking questions to understand, not to attack. 

Charitable giving is just one of many reasons an organization can be considered tax exempt.

Hint: Its probably exempt for Religious reasons.

Edited December 18, 2019 by Danzo

[Nofear]

2 hours ago, Analytics said:

Given that Ensign Peak Advisors is a tax-exempt 501C3 charity, the fact that it hoards so much money without ever spending a single dime on charity seems to run afoul of IRS regulations. If it wants to hoard money that's fine, but its investment income should be taxed just as every other individual or corporation's investment income is taxed. That is the argument.

Quote

501(c)(3) tax-exemptions apply to entities that are organized and operated exclusively for religious, charitable, scientific, literary, or educational purposes, for testing for public safety, to foster national or international amateur sports competition, for the prevention of cruelty to children, women, or animals.

I think the word "charity" is going to continue to get thrown around a lot. I don't know why Ensign Peak Advisors is being called that, it's an organization dedicated to international amateur sports. It is preparing a massive worldwide hunger games event that will be at a date-yet-to-be-announced.

[bluebell]

Has this article from Forbes been discussed yet?

https://www.forbes.com/sites/peterjreilly/2019/12/17/100b-in-mormon-till-does-not-merit-irs-attention/?fbclid=IwAR0TkF9C_qUIlnawWyc2n49zN-3aTmKf-SjPzth6yhm5Ebo0hdfQvBBl5fg#430471095d5b

Quote

 

I don’t think David Nielsen will be able to retire on the reward from this case. That’s because there is not much of a case. The argument is that a private foundation is supposed to distribute 5% of its assets. Ensign is not a private foundation. It is an integrated auxiliary of a church. And there is nothing in the tax law that prevents churches from accumulating wealth.

PROMOTED

Paul Streckfus of the EO Tax Journal agrees that this matter does not merit IRS attention.

On the expenditures that the whistleblower objected to, Mr. Streckfus wrote me:

“The IRS does not attempt to question the beliefs or purposes of churches unless extreme (law violations, for example). In the case of the Mormon Church, if they honestly believe they should be saving for the `second coming of Christ,’ why should the IRS question that? Just because there is $100 billion involved? If so, how much is too much? While church leaders have not been forthcoming about this pot of gold, church members can always withdraw their support if they object to this extreme saving or seek to remove the leadership.”

If LDS has accumulated $100 billion and not been transparent about it, it is really up to the members to deal with their leadership. If it is bad policy to allow exempt organizations to accumulate so much, Congress should change the law. There is really nothing here for the IRS to do, making the whistleblower complaint pure drama.

 

[smac97]

2 minutes ago, bluebell said:

Has this article from Forbes been discussed yet?

https://www.forbes.com/sites/peterjreilly/2019/12/17/100b-in-mormon-till-does-not-merit-irs-attention/?fbclid=IwAR0TkF9C_qUIlnawWyc2n49zN-3aTmKf-SjPzth6yhm5Ebo0hdfQvBBl5fg#430471095d5b

 

Yes.  JAHS had the nerve to post about it eight minutes before I did (yesterday).

Thanks,

-Smac

[rockpond]

2 minutes ago, bluebell said:

Has this article from Forbes been discussed yet?

https://www.forbes.com/sites/peterjreilly/2019/12/17/100b-in-mormon-till-does-not-merit-irs-attention/?fbclid=IwAR0TkF9C_qUIlnawWyc2n49zN-3aTmKf-SjPzth6yhm5Ebo0hdfQvBBl5fg#430471095d5b

 

I agree with the conclusions.  I think that EPA will be able to show that the transfers to City Creek and Beneficial Life were capital contributions made to shore up legal investments that EPA had made with tithing funds.

Regarding the size of the fund (which seems to be the second half of the whistleblower complaint), this conclusion seems correct to me.

5 minutes ago, bluebell said:

If LDS has accumulated $100 billion and not been transparent about it, it is really up to the members to deal with their leadership. If it is bad policy to allow exempt organizations to accumulate so much, Congress should change the law. There is really nothing here for the IRS to do, making the whistleblower complaint pure drama.

 

[bluebell]

7 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Yes.  JAHS had the nerve to post about it eight minutes before I did (yesterday).

Thanks,

-Smac

Nice!  Way to go JAHS.

[rockpond]

If it's true that we have a $100b investment portfolio built up from tithing funds, one great use could be to fund missions.

A return of just 0.5% on that $100b could cover the $500 monthly payments for our entire missionary force.  Just a thought.

[smac97]

4 minutes ago, rockpond said:

If it's true that we have a $100b investment portfolio built up from tithing funds, one great use could be to fund missions.

Seems like missionary work is already heavily subsidized by the Church.

And like other consecrated gifts, the meaning of missionary work was augmented for me because I (and my family) paid for it.

4 minutes ago, rockpond said:

A return of just 0.5% on that $100b could cover the $500 monthly payments for our entire missionary force.  Just a thought.

Dunno.  "Sacrifice brings forth the blessings of heaven..."

Thanks,

-Smac

[bluebell]

4 minutes ago, rockpond said:

If it's true that we have a $100b investment portfolio built up from tithing funds, one great use could be to fund missions.

A return of just 0.5% on that $100b could cover the $500 monthly payments for our entire missionary force.  Just a thought.

True.  Maybe the church will eventually do this. 

But my mom and dad still go on about the impressive ways that they were blessed when they paid for my mission despite it not seeming to be financially possible before I left and it immediately not being financially possible again right after I got home.  It had a really big impact on them, spiritually, to see those blessings.  For them, and speaking only for them, what would have been lost had the church paid for me is much greater than what would have been gained.  

[pogi]

10 hours ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

The church, has accumulated a vast sum of money for no reasonable purpose with no disclosure to those paying in all built on the backs of the poor. It’s just dollars floating around in a money bin somewhere.

How do you know there is "no reasonable purpose"?  The Church has said:

Quote

 All church funds exist for no other reason than to support the church’s divinely appointed mission.

While I agree with the idea of transparency, I disagree that choosing not to disclose is immoral.  You mentioned "informed consent" earlier.  I've never heard that term used outside of healthcare.  It suggests that the patient has the right to understand and consent to potential risk and harm to medical interventions.  It is not a term used to describe any moral obligation for transparency. 

11 hours ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

What good has come of this money? 

It has put the Church on a solid financial footing n case of a massive recession (which is predicted) or depression.  It gives the Church a greater ability to do good.  One shouldn't assume that because it hasn't been used yet, that it has no purpose and won't be used in the future. 

11 hours ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

What lives are being blessed? 

I feel blessed with security in times of trouble.

100 billion may seem like a lot of money, and for any single person it is, but in a massive depression or famine, etc. it could vanish very quickly when 15 million members are in need. 

Quote

 

Church members are conscious of the fact that they live in a period of calamities, caused both by human actions and the furies of nature. The prophecies about the last days are unequivocal, and there is great wisdom in preparing for the future—whether it be for possible famine, disaster, financial depression, or any other unforeseen adverse circumstance. Church leaders have frequently counseled members to practice provident living by establishing home storage, including extra water, basic food items, medications, clothing, and other supplies that could be needed in case of emergency. Members have also been counseled to “gradually build a financial reserve by regularly saving a portion of their income.”

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/2018/07/the-spiritual-foundations-of-church-financial-self-reliance?lang=eng

 

Sounds like sound financial advice and not immoral at all.  They actually practice what they preach, which is refreshing for an organization.  Nothing immoral there at all.

Quote

 

Fourth Principle: In the Lord’s Own Way

Paul warned the Saints of Corinth that their “faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God.”15 I came to better understand the importance of this principle when I was called to serve in the Presiding Bishopric of the Church.

As a Bishopric, we counsel together to study issues, making use of our personal backgrounds, experiences, and areas of expertise. But ultimately our decisions are made in the spirit of prayer and the constant seeking of revelation as to the Lord’s will. While we consider such things as macro-economic indicators and financial analyses, our ultimate goal is to fulfill our responsibilities in a manner that will carry out the designs of the Lord and sacred mission of the Church to invite all to come unto Christ. This goal can only be achieved and implemented through inspiration and the power of His priesthood. Given the directive to do things in the Lord’s own way, this calling fills me with humility each and every day.

 

 

[rockpond]

2 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Seems like missionary work is already heavily subsidized by the Church.

And like other consecrated gifts, the meaning of missionary work was augmented for me because I (and my family) paid for it.

Dunno.  "Sacrifice brings forth the blessings of heaven..."

Thanks,

-Smac

 

1 minute ago, bluebell said:

True.  Maybe the church will eventually do this. 

But my mom and dad still go on about the impressive ways that they were blessed when they paid for my mission despite it not seeming to be financially possible before I left and it immediately not being financially possible again right after I got home.  It had a really big impact on them, spiritually, to see those blessings.  For them, and speaking only for them, what would have been lost had the church paid for me is much greater than what would have been gained.  

 

Fully agree with the blessings of sacrifice.  I think we all agree that the commandment to pay tithing isn't going away.  So, for the sake of discussion, let's say that this $100b investment portfolio does exist and that $1b in tithing is being put into it each year as a reserve.  Let's also say that they are earning a 6.5% return.  Within about 25 years the fund will reach a half a trillion dollars.  It would hit the one trillion mark a decade after that.  Is there ever a point at which we, as a church, can say:  Your tithing is sacrifice enough for the blessings of heaven and the Church can fully pay for missions.

We already did the same with contributions for meetinghouses, ward budgets, and temples.  I see missions as the next step.

[Amulek]

18 hours ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

And you wouldn’t ask for any tax cuts or rebates right? The government should keep amassing wealth. Correct?

If they were using the money to invest in US businesses and other sorts of activities that could help shore up or support the 'kingdom of the United States' on the earth, then I could live with that. 

After taxes and tithing, I'm still able to live a fairly comfortable life - far more comfortable, no doubt, than 99% of the people who have ever lived on this planet since it's creation. 

The only time I expect tithing to go away is when the kingdom of God is actually established on the earth. I don't know about you, but I'm in agreement with the leaders of the church in taking the very long run approach on that front - which means I plan on paying tithing for my entire natural life. 

 

[Duncan]

Something I don't get is that statement by Pres. Hinckley in 2002 to that reporter in Germany when he said that contributions (paraphrasing) are transparent to the people who pay them not to everyone else. That just isn't true though. I pay tithing, I did so yestarday even. I have never heard of EPA or any of these other corporations before, I don't see an accounting sheet on the ward or stake budget-I see somethings they spend their money on but not everything. what transparency is he talking about?

[Calm]

4 hours ago, Analytics said:

 the fact that it hoards so much money without ever spending a single dime on charity...

Isn’t this being assumed as proven when it has not been since Nielsen did not have full access?

[Prof]

1 hour ago, rockpond said:

If it's true that we have a $100b investment portfolio built up from tithing funds, one great use could be to fund missions.

 

That's a great idea. Also, more ward buildings, more temples...…..

[Calm]

 

48 minutes ago, pogi said:

100 billion may seem like a lot of money, and for any single person it is, but in a massive depression or famine, etc. it could vanish very quickly when 15 million members are in need. 

And the Church doesn’t limit help to its members now, so unlikely to do so when accessing these funds imo. 

[Amulek]

1 minute ago, Calm said:

4 hours ago, Analytics said:

 the fact that it hoards so much money without ever spending a single dime on charity...

Isn’t this being assumed as proven when it has not been since Nielsen did not have full access?

Correct. As I pointed out earlier, the original WaPo article makes it clear that this is an allegation, not a fact.

The article states the following (emphasis added): "While accumulating this wealth, Ensign has not directly funded any religious, educational or charitable activities in 22 years, the complaint said. No documents are provided to support this claim, which is attributed to information David Nielsen gleaned from working at the company." 

Moreover, who says that the firm has to be spending money on "charity" in order to be furthering the church's mission? Say, for example, the church decided that it wanted to purchase the state of Missouri (not just Jackson County) in preparation for the second coming. If the investment firm were to then go about buying up commercial real estate, that would be furthering the church's mission by acquiring ownership of the desired land - even as it used the returns on those holdings to purchase additional properties until such time as the church desired to make use of it for other purposes. 

 

[Analytics]

11 minutes ago, Calm said:

Isn’t this being assumed as proven when it has not been since Nielsen did not have full access?

There is a possibility that Ensign Peak Advisors was giving money back to the church for appropriate purposes and he just didn't see it, but that seems unlikely. 

When you are in charge of investing a big fund and the church adds to the fund but never takes money out of it, and you hear from your coworkers that the same thing is happening in all of the funds, and you look at the history and see that it's been that way for 22 years, you should have a solid basis to know what is going on. I'm sure lots of things were going on in the Church as a whole that Nielsen wasn't aware of, but I doubt big withdrawals from Ensign Peaks was happening without his knowledge.  

[pogi]

19 minutes ago, Duncan said:

Something I don't get is that statement by Pres. Hinckley in 2002 to that reporter in Germany when he said that contributions (paraphrasing) are transparent to the people who pay them not to everyone else. That just isn't true though. I pay tithing, I did so yestarday even. I have never heard of EPA or any of these other corporations before, I don't see an accounting sheet on the ward or stake budget-I see somethings they spend their money on but not everything. what transparency is he talking about?

I don't know what he was talking about either.  It could simply be proof that he was human.

[Bernard Gui]

2 hours ago, Duncan said:

we have a couple in our ward, totally inactive, never seen them before-they get 1400 clams a month on food from the storehouse

That’s a lot of chowder.

[Analytics]

1 hour ago, Nofear said:

I think the word "charity" is going to continue to get thrown around a lot. I don't know why Ensign Peak Advisors is being called that, it's an organization dedicated to international amateur sports. It is preparing a massive worldwide hunger games event that will be at a date-yet-to-be-announced.

Ensign Peak Advisors is being called a "charity" because it was incorporated as a tax-exempt 501C3 corporation. 

[Tacenda]

22 minutes ago, Calm said:

 

And the Church doesn’t limit help to its members now, so unlikely to do so when accessing these funds imo. 

I know the infants podcast I posted, won't sit well with true believing LDS, but just listening to Lars, he expands on the church's wealth. The 100 billion doesn't cover the other wealth in the church. The accumulation could easy be another 100 billion sum or probably much more, when you take in the land and business wealth, it could and is astounding the kind of wealth the church has. 

He also mentioned that the leadership of the church has visited his brother, and maybe him as well, can't remember, and also contacted his parents who are on an LDS mission at the moment, to have them presuade their son/sons to not go public. That doesn't sit well, but maybe it does to others.

I am low on posts so I hope it's okay I add more, I read a quote on FB from someone that posted in a private group I belong to, and who gave permission for those that read it, to share. They make some good points:

C/P below...

"I have read a range of justifications from the LDS Church and members regarding tithing and the discovery that the LDS Church in one of many corporate entities has over $100 billion dollars. The justifications range from (1) this is good fiscal management to (2) this is a "rainy day" fund. All of this is probably true and justifiable as good management and within their declared mission. However, IMO, there are several moral questions.

1. There is no way to justify this level of wealth hoarding and the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Christ instructs his apostles to go without money to proselyte. He tells a rich man to give all his wealth away to the poor. He teaches to not be concerned with tomorrow as God cares for the lilies of the field.

How does amassing $100 billion in one account, which is 14x the estimated total of a single year of all the tithing ($7 billion) taken in world-wide fit into anything Jesus ever taught?

How do you justify the church's own annual figure on charitable giving ($40 million annually) while hoarding $100 billion?

This is not a rainy day fund. $100 Billion is enough for the entire church to operate in perpetuity on the interest alone even if it never collected another dollar in tithing. Forever.

There is no world in which this priority correlates to the priorities Jesus advocates.

2. Members are completely fine allowing no accountability for LDS Church leaders. There is a reason the LDS Church doesn't want you, the member, to know they have $100 Billion, just in reserves. I am not saying leaders are profiting from the church, I am saying they are fully aware that these priorities would not be acceptable to the membership of the church.

3. The LDS Church constantly operates from a position of fear. We fear intellectuals. We fear feminists. We fear gays. We fear the world. So we amass an un-Godly amount of money greater than any other individual, church or comparable to whole countries so that when the world fails, the church survives.

That is fear.

God doesn't need your money saved for the end of days. He needs His church to feed the world and follow Christ. Stop taking from the poor and the widow and impoverished countries around the world, and just feed them. You literally could increase charitable giving from $40 million to $7 billion annually - and not decrease just one reserve. And the magical part is you would have a flood of new members and many of the members you are losing would look past other mistakes just to be a part of it.

Because it is actually what Christ would do.

For me, hoarding a $100 billion dollars is exactly what the Christ I know and have read and learned about being raised in the LDS Church, would not do and would have condemned loudly. I learned that in Primary."

Want to add to the the FB comment above...what about the quote often touted, maybe not so much now, about being burned if you don't pay your tithes. My MIL says this often to her children, and grandchildren. I have to wonder if she caught the fear bug as well. My BIL who helps her with her bills/tithing etc. Says she pays far more than she is expected. And I don't care to get any inheritance from her, if anyone is worried about that. 

And to add to this, she may well have been taught that she shouldn't give an inheritance to the children that aren't active or paying tithing, and instead to give it to the church. Which would be my husband and I. But that's the breaks, if so. This video may well be my distant relatives, they are in Sanpete County and have my mother's maiden name. This was shown on the LDS Philanthropies website at one time, until there was an outlash, most likely from the disaffected members. https://archive.org/details/JourneyToBecome

 

 

 

 

Edited December 18, 2019 by Tacenda

[Analytics]

5 minutes ago, Amulek said:

Correct. As I pointed out earlier, the original WaPo article makes it clear that this is an allegation, not a fact.

The article states the following (emphasis added): "While accumulating this wealth, Ensign has not directly funded any religious, educational or charitable activities in 22 years, the complaint said. No documents are provided to support this claim, which is attributed to information David Nielsen gleaned from working at the company." 

Moreover, who says that the firm has to be spending money on "charity" in order to be furthering the church's mission? Say, for example, the church decided that it wanted to purchase the state of Missouri (not just Jackson County) in preparation for the second coming. If the investment firm were to then go about buying up commercial real estate, that would be furthering the church's mission by acquiring ownership of the desired land - even as it used the returns on those holdings to purchase additional properties until such time as the church desired to make use of it for other purposes. 

 

On your first point, I find his allegations credible, and hope the IRS does a complete and fair investigation and that the results become publicly known.

On your second point, it depends upon how the IRS interprets the tax laws and the actual argument the church makes for why what EPA is doing is above board. Personally, I don't think hoarding money to purchase a state should be a tax-deductible endeavor.