James Huntsman's Tithing Refund Lawsuit Thrown Out

[Scott Lloyd]

9 hours ago, JustAnAustralian said:

How do you pay tithing on a share that has increased in value? And at what point do you do that? What about when it decreases in value? If it bounces between $20 and $21 do you have to repeatedly pay 10c over and over or is just the once enough?

I use the “unrealized gains” principle. I have investments through my 401(k) that have increased in value over time. The government will not tax me on those gains until I withdraw them. Until that time, they are “on paper” only and have not brought me any real benefit. They are gains that have not been “realized.”

Similarly, I will not tithe those gains until I withdraw them and have thereby “realized” them, and I will only tithe the portion that I withdraw at any given time. 
 

Once this principle is employed, the questions you raise cease to be problematic or complicated. 
 

https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/04/021204.asp

Edited January 15, 2022 by Scott Lloyd

[JustAnAustralian]

32 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Similarly, I will not tithe those gains until I withdraw them and have thereby “realized” them, and I will only tithe the portion that I withdraw at any given time. 

Yes, that's how I address it too. I was more wondering how Tacenda expects Ensign Peak to do it though.

[Scott Lloyd]

1 hour ago, JustAnAustralian said:

Yes, that's how I address it too. I was more wondering how Tacenda expects Ensign Peak to do it though.

A good question. 
 

To me, the very notion that EP should tithe seems misguided. As the investment arm of the Church of Jesus Christ, EP has as its raison d’etre to support the Church in its benevolent and soul-saving work. Therefore, any monetary gain achieved by EP is devoted to that purpose, and to tithe it would be redundant. It’s not in business for its own sake, but rather, that of the Church of Jesus Christ. 
 

It would be like expecting the Church itself to tithe itself on the tithing it receives. Makes no sense. 

Edited January 15, 2022 by Scott Lloyd

[Stormin' Mormon]

6 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

 

It would be like expecting the Church itself to tithe itself on the tithing it receives. Makes no sense. 

And then it would have to tithe on the tithing it received from the tithing. And then tithe on the tithing that was tithed from the tithing. And then...

Well, and then it gets ridiculously recursive.

[Tacenda]

2 hours ago, Stormin' Mormon said:

And then it would have to tithe on the tithing it received from the tithing. And then tithe on the tithing that was tithed from the tithing. And then...

Well, and then it gets ridiculously recursive.

I think you and @Scott Lloyd missed where I said not necessarily tithe, but pay to legit charities or even pay to fast offering recipients. Do you know that LDS children at one time were going hungry? And some people started a foundation for actual LDS children in a third world country that were going hungry. Have you been on a mission? If so, was it to where you saw needs going unmet, and you wished the church could help out? I've heard mission stories where that happens.

Well, I think the 100 billion or much more than that really, could start paying their 10% like members do, Ensign Peak for instance, since it's not tithing money but interest all stemming from members tithing long ago and money from many different stocks.

I need to find it, but I believe it was surrounding the case with the whistle-blower and it may have been the Washington Post that said Ensign Peak shows that they don't donate anything. But hopefully I'm wrong and they donate something.

ETA: It's now called Bountiful Children's Foundation but was called something different a few years ago. And it started out where they were helping actual members of the church which I found hard to believe and why was that. Maybe now they have spread out the donations to help non members since it does say they help anyone. I'm sure it was like that before, but to include members of the church in those that need help really upsets me to the core. I don't know if their website says it but it used to, that there were members of the LDS church that were starving. 

https://bountifulchildren.org/who-we-are/our-story

Oh, I just found the article by Washington Post below and need to say it's past time that the church starts showing transparency on it's holdings and outputs of finances. It's surely able to right? It's a large scale, but other churches do it. And we certainly have the man power. Like the article below says...it's going by someone who worked at Ensign Peak that says no charitable funds went out either to the LDS church or other charities. If the church was transparent and Ensign Peak did, then they'd have a good comeback.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/mormon-church-has-misled-members-on-100-billion-tax-exempt-investment-fund-whistleblower-alleges/2019/12/16/e3619bd2-2004-11ea-86f3-3b5019d451db_story.html

Here are some c/p's:

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.

Philip Hackney, a former IRS official who teaches tax law at the University of Pittsburgh, said the complaint raised a “legitimate concern” about whether the church’s investment arm deserved its tax-exempt status.

“If you have a charity that simply amasses a war chest year after year and does not spend any money for charity purposes, that does not meet the requirements of tax law,” Hackney said in an interview. Hackney, who served in the IRS chief counsel’s office, has been retained by The Post to analyze the whistleblower documents.

IRS rules dictate that a nonprofit organization must carry out charitable activity that is “commensurate in scope with its financial resources” to maintain its tax-exempt status. No threshold for this test is specified, and the agency instead considers examples case by case.

Edited January 15, 2022 by Tacenda

[webbles]

1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

I think you and @Scott Lloyd missed where I said not necessarily tithe, but pay to legit charities or even pay to fast offering recipients. Do you know that LDS children at one time were going hungry? And some people started a foundation for actual LDS children in a third world country that were going hungry. Have you been on a mission? If so, was it to where you saw needs going unmet, and you wished the church could help out? I've heard mission stories where that happens.

Well, I think the 100 billion or much more than that really, could start paying their 10% like members do, Ensign Peak for instance, since it's not tithing money but interest all stemming from members tithing long ago and money from many different stocks.

I need to find it, but I believe it was surrounding the case with the whistle-blower and it may have been the Washington Post that said Ensign Peak shows that they don't donate anything. But hopefully I'm wrong and they donate something.

You seem to be treating Ensign Peak as a separate thing outside of the church.  Instead, treat it as if it is just the bank for the church.  Whatever Ensign Peak does, the church does.  Whatever the church does, Ensign Peak does.  They aren't separate things, except in a specific legal definition.  And even in that specific legal definition, it doesn't have independence.  It is beholden to the church.  It follows the church's orders.  It can't do anything by itself.

So, if the church helps people, then Ensign Peak does as well.  Those $100 billions of dollars are the church's, not Ensign Peak's.

 

[Tacenda]

19 minutes ago, webbles said:

You seem to be treating Ensign Peak as a separate thing outside of the church.  Instead, treat it as if it is just the bank for the church.  Whatever Ensign Peak does, the church does.  Whatever the church does, Ensign Peak does.  They aren't separate things, except in a specific legal definition.  And even in that specific legal definition, it doesn't have independence.  It is beholden to the church.  It follows the church's orders.  It can't do anything by itself.

So, if the church helps people, then Ensign Peak does as well.  Those $100 billions of dollars are the church's, not Ensign Peak's.

 

I'm fully aware of that. That's the problem.

[Rain]

4 hours ago, Tacenda said:

I think you and @Scott Lloyd missed where I said not necessarily tithe, but pay to legit charities or even pay to fast offering recipients. Do you know that LDS children at one time were going hungry? And some people started a foundation for actual LDS children in a third world country that were going hungry. Have you been on a mission? If so, was it to where you saw needs going unmet, and you wished the church could help out? I've heard mission stories where that happens.

Well, I think the 100 billion or much more than that really, could start paying their 10% like members do, Ensign Peak for instance, since it's not tithing money but interest all stemming from members tithing long ago and money from many different stocks.

I need to find it, but I believe it was surrounding the case with the whistle-blower and it may have been the Washington Post that said Ensign Peak shows that they don't donate anything. But hopefully I'm wrong and they donate something.

ETA: It's now called Bountiful Children's Foundation but was called something different a few years ago. And it started out where they were helping actual members of the church which I found hard to believe and why was that. Maybe now they have spread out the donations to help non members since it does say they help anyone. I'm sure it was like that before, but to include members of the church in those that need help really upsets me to the core. I don't know if their website says it but it used to, that there were members of the LDS church that were starving. 

https://bountifulchildren.org/who-we-are/our-story

Oh, I just found the article by Washington Post below and need to say it's past time that the church starts showing transparency on it's holdings and outputs of finances. It's surely able to right? It's a large scale, but other churches do it. And we certainly have the man power. Like the article below says...it's going by someone who worked at Ensign Peak that says no charitable funds went out either to the LDS church or other charities. If the church was transparent and Ensign Peak did, then they'd have a good comeback.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/mormon-church-has-misled-members-on-100-billion-tax-exempt-investment-fund-whistleblower-alleges/2019/12/16/e3619bd2-2004-11ea-86f3-3b5019d451db_story.html

Here are some c/p's:

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.

Philip Hackney, a former IRS official who teaches tax law at the University of Pittsburgh, said the complaint raised a “legitimate concern” about whether the church’s investment arm deserved its tax-exempt status.

“If you have a charity that simply amasses a war chest year after year and does not spend any money for charity purposes, that does not meet the requirements of tax law,” Hackney said in an interview. Hackney, who served in the IRS chief counsel’s office, has been retained by The Post to analyze the whistleblower documents.

IRS rules dictate that a nonprofit organization must carry out charitable activity that is “commensurate in scope with its financial resources” to maintain its tax-exempt status. No threshold for this test is specified, and the agency instead considers examples case by case.

My last reply to you want meant to be an accusation, but clarifying how you felt. I did that poorly.  I'm sorry.  

We just go in circles over this all the time.  So I'm trying to figure out what your true concerns are and help you with them.  

So if the church opened its books and you found that 10% was being given to charity would you be happy?

[Tacenda]

17 minutes ago, Rain said:

My last reply to you want meant to be an accusation, but clarifying how you felt. I did that poorly.  I'm sorry.  

We just go in circles over this all the time.  So I'm trying to figure out what your true concerns are and help you with them.  

So if the church opened its books and you found that 10% was being given to charity would you be happy?

10 percent of 130 billion is a start. And threaten them they might be burned if they don't. 

[The Nehor]

8 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

10 percent of 130 billion is a start. And threaten them they might be burned if they don't. 

[Rain]

On 1/12/2022 at 3:27 PM, Navidad said:

Please consider this a reply to your last two messages. I have struggled whether and how to reply to them. You are wonderfully eloquent and although I don't know you, I believe you are equally a wonderfully genuine person. Now to my reply. I hope I do this well, because that is what is within my heart to do.

Let me give you my testimony and then ask you one question - one very basic but critically important question - for me that is. My testimony is that I am a Christian whose salvation and sanctification comes only through the atonement - birth, life, death, and resurrection of Christ as the final and sufficient sacrifice for sin. No more lambs, scapegoats, nor rituals needed to procure that eternal life. Christ's shed blood is the ultimate expression of love freely-given to me. I testify that I am confident that the promise of everlasting and eternal life from the New Testament means a life eternally with the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. I will have the privilege of continuing the sanctification process on the other side. I look forward to worshiping, learning, growing with the Savior forever. I believe I will face a final judgment as an individual - not as a Mennonite, nor as a non-Mormon. I believe I will be judged by a Savior who is my advocate, prosecutor, judge, and jury all in one. I believe that judgment is what Christ means when He saying "no man cometh unto the Father but by me." When Christ sees me I testify that he will see me covered with His blood. It will be the same as the OT Passover Egypt experience.

This testimony is the most important thing in my life. It is the core and foundation of my identity as a Christian, a person, a husband, and a father. It is my reason for getting up in the morning and the last thing I think about at night. I cannot stress to you how important this testimony is to me.

Having said all that, I ask you what is perhaps a several part question . . . a rather personal question for such a forum. Do you believe that my testimony is true and will come true with no assistance whatsoever from any LDS ordinance or influence on my judgment and final destiny? Whatever you deem the place where the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost will dwell forever (heaven or the Celestial Kingdom) will you grant me the truth of my testimony that I will live with them and you forever, assuming I never join the LDS church nor accept any LDS ordinances or "work" in the spirit world?

If you hesitate or answer "no," please understand the anguish and pain that causes me given the depth of my commitment to Christ, just as it is right now. You may not intend to be the cause of that, you may even say to me "don't let it bother you, just say I am wrong and move on." You may not intend to be mean or unkind. You may even say, "Hey, Navidad" I am offering you another way, a truer way." Isn't that the ultimate kindness?

It isn't that easy. You see I, as an Evangelical Christian Mennonite 100% accept and believe that you will experience that same eternal life about which I am talking, just as you are. I accept your testimony and your commitment to the Savior. Will you do the same for me? If you say no, you are no different than those Fundamentalists and Evangelicals you speak so eloquently about who mock and take away from the LDS their dignity as Christians.  They do that! No question about it. I apologize to you and anyone else on this forum that has experienced that pain, even if it was me who caused it. You need nothing from me in regard to the certainty of your salvation and sanctification. I can and would in no way take that away from you.

If you say no to my question, you would strip me of the core essence of who I am. It will be a searing pain.  On the other hand, if I choose not to become LDS, I take nothing away from you. I will join hands with you as we cross to the other side. I will stand next to you waiting my turn for the judgment. I will have "your back" in encouraging you that you will be fine. If you say "no" to my question, what will you do at my judgment? Will you have my back, or simply say "Well I offered him my truth, he rejected it, so all I can think of to do is commend him for one of the other two kingdoms, either one an eternity without Christ or the Father.

I hope this isn't too direct a reply. I may get a host of downvotes for it. Please however, this is my testimony of my salvation and sanctification. That is more important than any votes!  You may not stand on the corner at the local Mennonite church, you may not mock other Christians, but if you deny me the truth of my testimony that may be an expression of disregard for the truth and validity of my faith that is as great as any Fundamentalist ever did to an LDS Christian. Thanks for reading this. If I did not do it well, I apologize in advance.

I'm not asking for your start.  What would make you happy?

[Navidad]

12 hours ago, Rain said:

I'm not asking for your start.  What would make you happy?

Sorry I am not sure for what you are asking? I did not post on this thread. I don't know anything about Huntsman.

[Rain]

2 hours ago, Navidad said:

Sorry I am not sure for what you are asking? I did not post on this thread. I don't know anything about Huntsman.

Sorry, quoted the wrong person.

[Rain]

17 hours ago, Tacenda said:

10 percent of 130 billion is a start. And threaten them they might be burned if they don't. 

I'm not asking for your start.  What would make you happy?

[Tacenda]

3 hours ago, Rain said:

I'm not asking for your start.  What would make you happy?

10% of the earnings from investments would be nice. ETA: And that would hopefully satisfy the rules of being able to be tax exempt for companies like Ensign Peak.

Edited January 16, 2022 by Tacenda

[Kenngo1969]

20 hours ago, Rain said:

... So if the church opened its books and you found that 10% was being given to charity would you be happy?

Well, they'd have to be "legit" charities, and since people's measuring sticks for what is "legit" and what isn't, for what causes deserve priority over others, and so on, vary, we're simply right back pretty much where we started, with people's varying opinions that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints should spend more money on [x], and should spend less money on [y].

And around and around she goes!

[webbles]

1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

10% of the earnings from investments would be nice. ETA: And that would hopefully satisfy the rules of being able to be tax exempt for companies like Ensign Peak.

The church (in Ensign Peak) has about $100 billion in investments.  The whistleblower says they are getting about 7% growth.  So yearly, that would be $7 billion in earnings.  10% of that would be $700 million.  I'm pretty sure that the church spends over $1 billion a year.

Edited January 16, 2022 by webbles

[Tacenda]

10 minutes ago, webbles said:

The church (in Ensign Peak) has about $100 billion in investments.  The whistleblower says they are getting about 7% growth.  So yearly, that would be $7 billion in earnings.  10% of that would be $700 million.  I'm pretty sure that the church spends over $1 billion a year.

I'm not asking the church per se, I'm asking the church's arm which can be considered the church but in reality it's like their profit side of church. Which is making bank on having so much money and accumulating without any going out, if the article is correct. Which is breaking the rule for being tax exempt. And often the church says the members donations go out for charity, so we can take that into account for the 1 billion a year. And since Ensign Peak isn't getting taxed it's in a way ripping off the people by not going to help our country with what our taxes pay.

[Rain]

4 hours ago, Kenngo1969 said:

Well, they'd have to be "legit" charities, and since people's measuring sticks for what is "legit" and what isn't, for what causes deserve priority over others, and so on, vary, we're simply right back pretty much where we started, with people's varying opinions that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints should spend more money on [x], and should spend less money on [y].

And around and around she goes!

I'm taking Tacenda for her word in this conversation.  I'm going for a win win conversation not a "let's see how many knives can be thrown."

[Rain]

5 hours ago, Tacenda said:

10% of the earnings from investments would be nice. ETA: And that would hopefully satisfy the rules of being able to be tax exempt for companies like Ensign Peak.

I don't know what the legal rules are here so I can't really comment on that.  

So what I am understanding.  You would be happy if

1. The church opened its books

2. Ensign peak gave 10% to charity

3. Stopped having a financial arm which is doing illegal practices

Anything else?

[bsjkki]

Wasn’t this already debated to death? I think the answer is if you don’t like how the church manages it’s money, don’t give them money.

If I didn’t believe in the divine appointment of the prophet and apostles, I certainly would not pay tithing. 
 

If I do, telling the prophet what to do would take a certain amount of hubris. 
 

On the other hand, some policies recently have changed that I am happy with and had complained about. So… 

 

I overall feel when I pay tithing, it is the Lord’s to do with what He wills. I believe a large rainy day fund could be necessary for the Church’s survival. Seems wise. 
 

As members, we give much to help the poor and our fellow members. The church also gives to many partner charities. This is not the main mission of the church. 

[mrmarklin]

23 hours ago, Rain said:

I'm not asking for your start.  What would make you happy?

Based on my observations, nothing makes Tacenda happy. 

[Tacenda]

3 hours ago, Rain said:

I don't know what the legal rules are here so I can't really comment on that.  

So what I am understanding.  You would be happy if

1. The church opened its books

2. Ensign peak gave 10% to charity

3. Stopped having a financial arm which is doing illegal practices

Anything else?

 

2 hours ago, mrmarklin said:

Based on my observations, nothing makes Tacenda happy. 

Okay mom and dad...

https://www.wikihow.com/Deal-With-an-Adult's-Temper-Tantrum

[Tacenda]

3 hours ago, Rain said:

I'm taking Tacenda for her word in this conversation.  I'm going for a win win conversation not a "let's see how many knives can be thrown."

Very kind of you Rain. 🤗

[Calm]

4 hours ago, Rain said:

2. Ensign peak gave 10% to charity

10% of what?  
 

10% of yearly increase (webbles calculated likely amount).

Initially 10% of the full amount (because of an assumption perhaps that this income was completely separate from any other income and donations the church made so any donations made by the Church through other ‘arms’ are irrelevant?) and thereafter 10% of increase?

Or something else?

Sincere question. There is a huge difference in the amount between the two.  There is a huge difference when Ensign Peak is viewed as independent and if it is viewed as part of the Church and thus donations made through other arms apply to it just as its investment amount is counted in as part of the property of the Church. 
 

To be consistent, if Ensign Peaks’ money counts as part of the wealth of the Church, then all donations should be included when calculating if coming from the Church, such as overhead for humanitarian efforts, and not just administered by the Church (are fast offerings counted as income of the Church that is then dispensed by the Church or just monies that is given to the poor by church members by agents of the church  administered by the Church?).  Iow, it is inaccurate to say the Church has $100 billion in Ensign Peak and pays no donations if one is using the $100 billion is part of their wealth.
 

 We don’t say someone who earns $2000 a month through a consulting job pays no tithing on it if they direct deposit the $2000 in one bank every month if they also earn $20,000 a month through teaching and besides their usual and luxury expenses, they set aside $2200 out of the $20,000 for tithing every month out of a checking account in another bank.  We assume they are calculating their full income which includes the $2000 even if technically that part of their income gets direct deposited into a separate savings account that is never touched. 

Edited January 17, 2022 by Calm