Stimulus Check

[bluebell]

13 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Things don’t need to be alike in every respect, or even in most respects, for them to be conceptually similar in some respects. The similarity I see here is this:

 

At BYU, the attempt was made to let people govern themselves according to correct principles. The attempt failed among certain of the students, administrative staff and at least one faculty member. So, very early on, it became necessary to step in and give more explicit direction. 
 

Similarly, for many years it has been the practice with tithing to let people govern themselves according to sound principles. I’m saying that if absurd notions such as that propounded by Reel and others begin to hold sway, it might become necessary to step in with more explicit guidance. 
 

We saw that happen earlier in our history. The people did not manifest a widespread enough inclination to be guided by the principles of the Word of Wisdom, so eventually, it was more explicitly defined as pertaining to worthiness to hold temple recommends, certain callings in the Church, etc. 

The main difference, and the reason that I see it as an apples and oranges comparison, is because with no other doctrine has the church ever explicitly and specifically stated that no interpretation or explanation or clarification of the doctrine was to be taught.

For whatever reason, the "rules" (for lack of a better term) for teaching the application of the law of tithing is unique.  None of your examples above can compare because none of them started out with that same unique caveat that comes with teaching the law of tithing.  

[bluebell]

Yes, we did pay tithing on the full amount we received.  

[mnn727]

On 4/14/2020 at 5:40 PM, rongo said:

 

I know some people will recoil in horror at this, but when people genuinely asked for my opinion as their bishop, I told them my counsel was to pay on the gross (assuming they weren't a small business owner, self-employed, farmer, etc. That can be more complicated than a W2 employee). Some here have been adamant that this is completely inappropriate, and that bishops should simply stick their fingers in their ears and say, "That's your own decision, and I can't give any input. La, la, la la . . ." I never felt that way when asked for counsel. 

 

Then you went 100% against what The Brethren have said.

[Scott Lloyd]

4 hours ago, bluebell said:

The main difference, and the reason that I see it as an apples and oranges comparison, is because with no other doctrine has the church ever explicitly and specifically stated that no interpretation or explanation or clarification of the doctrine was to be taught.

For whatever reason, the "rules" (for lack of a better term) for teaching the application of the law of tithing is unique.  None of your examples above can compare because none of them started out with that same unique caveat that comes with teaching the law of tithing.  

As I understand it, the directive to which you refer did not come along until the 1970s. As we well know, the law of tithing was in place long before then. And, like other content in the Church’s handbooks, it is prone to adjustment to meet changing needs and conditions in the future. 
 

As I see it, there has so far not been a need to change the 1970s-era clarification. It has served us fairly well so far. Apart from the longtime but relatively trivial debate over whether to tithe the gross vs. the net income, our people have understood pretty well up to now what it means to pay tithing. 
 

Well, along  come the likes of Rock Waterman and acolytes such as Bill Reel who preach their strange take in the doctrine of tithing. I don’t know that their teachings have as yet taken hold among our people — I hope they never do — but if they do, it may become necessary for another clarification to be issued to the effect that, for tithing, income means income and is not to be twisted to mean the “surplus” that  you happen to have left over after you’ve paid for everything you need or want. 
 

I used the BYU Honor Code comparison because In that I see the process playing  out in a very short period of time: The people were expected to be sensible in their application of principles relating to chastity, courtship and marriage without the need to be “commanded In all things.” A significant portion demonstrated they would not exercise such common sense. Consequently, it became necessary to issue more explicit direction. 

Edited April 16, 2020 by Scott Lloyd

[bluebell]

15 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

As I understand it, the directive to which you refer did not come along until the 1970s. As we well know, the law of tithing was in place long before then. And, like other content in the Church’s handbooks, it is prone to adjustment to meet changing needs and conditions in the future. 
 

As I see it, there has so far not been a need to change the 1970s-era clarification. It had served us fairly well so far. Apart from the longtime but relatively trivial debate over whether to tithe the gross vs. the net income, our people have understood pretty well up to now what it means to pay tithing. 
 

Well, along  come the likes of Rock Waterman and acolytes such as Bill Reel who preach their strange take in the doctrine of tithing. I don’t know that their teachings have as yet taken hold among our people — I hope they never do — but if they do, it may become necessary for another clarification to be issued to the effect that, for tithing, income means income and is not to be twisted to mean the “surplus” that  you happen to have left over after you’ve paid for everything you need or want. 
 

I used the BYU Honor Code comparison because In that I see the process playing  out in a very short period of time: The people were expected to be sensible in their application of principles relating to chastity, courtship and marriage without the need to be “commanded In all things.” A significant portion demonstrated they would not exercise such common sense. Consequently, it became necessary to issue more explicit direction. 

Did strange takes on tithing not exist until this decade?

[Scott Lloyd]

8 minutes ago, bluebell said:

Did strange takes on tithing not exist until this decade?

I’ve no doubt they did, but not to the extent that a general clarification or revised direction has been necessary. Nor do I think it is necessary now as of yet. I’m hoping the Waterman doctrine (to coin a term) remains quirky and isolated enough that it doesn’t. 

[bluebell]

1 minute ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I’ve no doubt they did, but not to the extent that a general clarification or revised direction has been necessary. Nor do I think it is necessary now as of yet. I’m hoping the Waterman doctrine (to coin a term) remains quirky and isolated enough that it doesn’t. 

Guess only time will tell. 

[The Nehor]

23 hours ago, longview said:

It is called "Stealing from Future Generations."  

I gotta admit. It is nice to see that there are still other deficit hawks around.  

[Scott Lloyd]

On 4/15/2020 at 3:54 PM, mrmarklin said:

I checked no because I'm not going to get a stimulus check.

 

I don't think tithing is indicated, because this is borrowed money you are all getting.

Irrelevant.

If I work for an employer who is running his business on a loan from the Small Business Administration or from capital investors, the wage I receive is still income as far as I'm concerned. It doesn't concern me how the employer came up with the funds to meet the payroll -- unless he stole the money, in which case I wouldn't want to be working for him anyway.

 

[Scott Lloyd]

On 4/15/2020 at 7:22 PM, longview said:

It is called "Stealing from Future Generations."  

 

11 hours ago, The Nehor said:

I gotta admit. It is nice to see that there are still other deficit hawks around.  

Am I the only one who is getting a big, pink "No Politics" banner at the top of my screen?

 

[Calm]

1 hour ago, Scott Lloyd said:

 

Am I the only one who is getting a big, pink "No Politics" banner at the top of my screen?

 

Probably.

Mine is terra-cotta orange. 

[bluebell]

1 hour ago, Scott Lloyd said:

 

Am I the only one who is getting a big, pink "No Politics" banner at the top of my screen?

 

Mine seems to be brick red. 

[Scott Lloyd]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

Probably.

Mine is terra-cotta orange. 

I had to look that one up, but yeah, that’s probably closer to the mark. 

[Scott Lloyd]

Gotta say I’m a bit surprised at the poll results here in light of the worldwide fast in which we’ve just engaged seeking divine blessings and deliverance, what with our belief in the connection between tithing observance and the opening of the windows of heaven.
 

I wonder how reflective the poll results are of the Church as a whole. 

[The Nehor]

3 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

 

Am I the only one who is getting a big, pink "No Politics" banner at the top of my screen?

 

.........(quietly).....maybe......

[Calm]

2 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Gotta say I’m a bit surprised at the poll results here i

What poll?   

I rarely (less than 5 times in the life of the board I believe) do a poll.  I can view results without voting if curious. They are hardly a reliable method, so I would be very cautious about drawing any conclusions from it save these are the type of people who are willing to take polls on MDDB. 

Edited April 17, 2020 by Calm

[longview]

1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

4 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

 

Am I the only one who is getting a big, pink "No Politics" banner at the top of my screen?

 

.........(quietly).....maybe......

When the level of "tension" increases, the more frequently I get "warnings" (in the form baleful orange banner at the top of the screen).  💀

[Calm]

2 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

our belief in the connection between tithing observance and the opening of the windows of heaven.

Who are you referring to with “our”.  Surely not all MDDB members since there are a number of nonmembers.   I assuming you mean the subset of board members who are also Saints who are committed to paying tithing (as opposed to being more willing to pay offerings).  This could be around 60% of posters paying attention to this thread even if not posting or even 80%, but 20% don’t interpret the stimulus check as “income” which they define as their salary.  

So far this is how my husband and I approach our tithing; we don’t pay on gifts, for example.  We pay gross and assume rebates and such are covered by such.  Simple, one calculation is less anxiety producing.  We haven’t made a decision on SS yet.  We will probably look up how much we contributed over our lives with how much we get out and start paying after we move into the bonus rounds....unless my husband prefers more simple and treats it as salary instead. Retirement investment income will be treated most likely like income, but we may calculate how much put in with how much earned in investment and adjust for that.  My husband plans on working as long as he can, we won’t be able to travel so he would get pretty bored.  Hopefully we will be in a situation he can take one grandchild on a trip each summer while he won’t have classes so he gets to visit all the places he wants to.  Then there are his motorcycle buddies.  But unless something drastic  happens, we should be fine as long as we can continue to get decent health insurance.  And will continue therefore to contribute to various church projects, if less tithing, than more in others.

———

There is actual more choosing to pay tithing than I expected, by the way. 
 

Me, more likely to put it into fast offerings given the purpose it is being done this way.  While the tithing funded investments of the Church both in the Church and its work and any financial investments will greatly contribute (especially overhead costs of humanitarian efforts), I think it will have a more immediate impact being given to those in need now. And since I know the Church helps nonmembers as well, including supporting food banks and shelters as well as transients as well as doing lots beyond food give out, including training and education, help with finding jobs so as to help those in need be able to eventually get to where they no longer need that help...I see it as a very holistic and full community approach to humanitarian work imo...something that smaller, local organizations can’t afford to do as well. 

Edited April 17, 2020 by Calm

[Calm]

25 minutes ago, longview said:

When the level of "tension" increases, the more frequently I get "warnings" (in the form baleful orange banner at the top of the screen).  💀

I think it is more how often I log off rather than just leaving the window open. 

[rongo]

2 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Gotta say I’m a bit surprised at the poll results here in light of the worldwide fast in which we’ve just engaged seeking divine blessings and deliverance, what with our belief in the connection between tithing observance and the opening of the windows of heaven.
 

I wonder how reflective the poll results are of the Church as a whole. 

Not very. This message board is a very limited slice that represents only the small number of people posting here. And secondarily, the influences they bring, such as their limited social media conversations. 

Sometimes it's easy to forget that. My wife and I met at the Sear's Call Center in Provo. It was easy to have a skewed idea of the quality of Kenmore products, since we only got the calls with problems. People who had no issues never called us,  but it seemed from our limited experience like there were a lot of problems. 

The vast majority of members aren't dialed in to Facebook or message board discussions like those here. 

[Tacenda]

51 minutes ago, Calm said:

Who are you referring to with “our”.  Surely not all MDDB members since there are a number of nonmembers.   I assuming you mean the subset of board members who are also Saints who are committed to paying tithing (as opposed to being more willing to pay offerings).  This could be around 60% of posters paying attention to this thread even if not posting or even 80%, but 20% don’t interpret the stimulus check as “income” which they define as their salary.  

So far this is how my husband and I approach our tithing; we don’t pay on gifts, for example.  We pay gross and assume rebates and such are covered by such.  Simple, one calculation is less anxiety producing.  We haven’t made a decision on SS yet.  We will probably look up how much we contributed over our lives with how much we get out and start paying after we move into the bonus rounds....unless my husband prefers more simple and treats it as salary instead. Retirement investment income will be treated most likely like income, but we may calculate how much put in with how much earned in investment and adjust for that.  My husband plans on working as long as he can, we won’t be able to travel so he would get pretty bored.  Hopefully we will be in a situation he can take one grandchild on a trip each summer while he won’t have classes so he gets to visit all the places he wants to.  Then there are his motorcycle buddies.  But unless something drastic  happens, we should be fine as long as we can continue to get decent health insurance.  And will continue therefore to contribute to various church projects, if less tithing, than more in others.

———

There is actual more choosing to pay tithing than I expected, by the way. 
 

Me, more likely to put it into fast offerings given the purpose it is being done this way.  While the tithing funded investments of the Church both in the Church and its work and any financial investments will greatly contribute (especially overhead costs of humanitarian efforts), I think it will have a more immediate impact being given to those in need now. And since I know the Church helps nonmembers as well, including supporting food banks and shelters as well as transients as well as doing lots beyond food give out, including training and education, help with finding jobs so as to help those in need be able to eventually get to where they no longer need that help...I see it as a very holistic and full community approach to humanitarian work imo...something that smaller, local organizations can’t afford to do as well. 

I am with you! I've been seeing the following meme being shared by my friends who are very faithful in the church. But have to wonder if it was started by a not so believing member as a joke possibly, I vaguely remember seeing that it was. I don't have the heart to discount it quite yet because I'm unsure, if the church would do as the meme says it will. What do you and perhaps others think about it? Therefore, we might want to send in some money for fast offerings from the stimulus check to cover those poor bishops trying to meet needs. 

[Scott Lloyd]

2 hours ago, longview said:

When the level of "tension" increases, the more frequently I get "warnings" (in the form baleful orange banner at the top of the screen).  💀

It’s there all the time for me unless I click the x and make it go away — which I never bother doing anymore. 

[Stargazer]

On 4/15/2020 at 5:00 AM, Thinking said:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/advisor/2020/04/06/dont-worry-the-1200-stimulus-payment-wont-cut-into-your-tax-refund-next-april/#22ab52cb5ea8

Yes, that is pretty much what I wrote. Your Forbes article says:

What is an advance tax credit?
The stimulus checks are technically an advance of a special tax credit for the 2020 tax year. Some tax credits reduce your overall tax bill — the more credits you claim, the less in taxes you will owe. But other tax credits, such as the Earned Income Tax Credit, are refundable—-meaning that if you don’t owe any federal income taxes, the government sends you a check for the credit. In essence, they’re payments from the government delivered through the Internal Revenue Service. 

The stimulus payment is a unique fully refundable tax credit. Even if you don’t owe a penny of tax, you get the full $1,200 per person provided you don’t earn too much (and you’re not a dependent who is 17 years old or over).  Plus, you’re getting this special tax credit in advance—if the IRS has bank account information for you, you will likely see the stimulus money in your checking account in the next few weeks. (If the IRS has to mail you a check, it will take longer.) 

Yes, you will technically claim the tax credit on your 2020 taxes, provided you earn enough in 2020 to need to file a tax return. But there won’t be any double dipping here; assuming you already received the money, the credit will basically wash itself out so you won’t be able to benefit from it twice (once in the form of a payment now, and again later to lower your 2020 tax bill).

[Stargazer]

On 4/15/2020 at 12:56 AM, The Nehor said:

That is not the understanding I have.

Edit: And reading more I am convinced. The only possible change is that if you made money over the threshold in 2018 or 2019 and get a reduced amount or nothing and your 2020 tax return shows you made less and qualify for more you will get it then. If you make more as shown on your 2020 tax return even if that would have made you ineligible you do not have to repay it.

The only provisions I have seen is that because it is technically a tax credit and not a federal benefit your bank could take the money without your permission if you owe fees tied to a non-credit card loan or if you have some kind of pending fee on the account. For example an overdraft fee could be taken.

If you look at the Forbes article that @Thinking posted you will see that it is a tax credit as I explained it. Here's a quote:

What is an advance tax credit?
The stimulus checks are technically an advance of a special tax credit for the 2020 tax year. Some tax credits reduce your overall tax bill — the more credits you claim, the less in taxes you will owe. But other tax credits, such as the Earned Income Tax Credit, are refundable—-meaning that if you don’t owe any federal income taxes, the government sends you a check for the credit. In essence, they’re payments from the government delivered through the Internal Revenue Service. 

The stimulus payment is a unique fully refundable tax credit. Even if you don’t owe a penny of tax, you get the full $1,200 per person provided you don’t earn too much (and you’re not a dependent who is 17 years old or over).  Plus, you’re getting this special tax credit in advance—if the IRS has bank account information for you, you will likely see the stimulus money in your checking account in the next few weeks. (If the IRS has to mail you a check, it will take longer.) 

Yes, you will technically claim the tax credit on your 2020 taxes, provided you earn enough in 2020 to need to file a tax return. But there won’t be any double dipping here; assuming you already received the money, the credit will basically wash itself out so you won’t be able to benefit from it twice (once in the form of a payment now, and again later to lower your 2020 tax bill).

[mrmarklin]

On 4/15/2020 at 5:13 PM, The Nehor said:

Except you do not have to pay it back so it is not borrowed.

You or your children or your grandchildren will pay this back. There is no money in the treasury to pay for this...