60 Minutes Australia: "Cooking the Book of Mormon"

[Craig Speechly]

21 hours ago, sheilauk said:

How do you know other religions don’t already make use of this method of tax deductible donations?  Most churches I’m aware of don’t do tithing the same way the LDS do but a quick Google search shows that the Catholic Church has a charitable arm which states donations to it are tax deductible.  https://www.caritas.org.au/donate/a-just-world-for-all/?utm_source=Google&utm_medium=CPC&utm_campaign=AO_2022_DIGI_Catholic_Charities_Generic_Paid&utm_campaign=&utm_medium=cpc&utm_source=g&utm_kw=catholic charities australia&gclid=Cj0KCQiAg_KbBhDLARIsANx7wAwqFbXjg6JSXyiB5LLuqAdtz8sWzO88SiZoU3DF6Q7YZt8YLiBU94gaAty1EALw_wcB

People keep calling it a loophole, But a loophole is more an omission, shortcoming or ambiguity in legislation.  This isn’t any of those, it appears to be a straightforward tax exemption to encourage charitable giving.

ETA: it seems the Methodists, the Salvation Army and the anglicans all have charitable arms donations to which are tax deductible.

These other churches that you've mentioned keep a clear separation between funds donated to run their day to day operations and funds donated to humanitarian charities.  None of the churches named have received the Deductible Gift Recipient government designation required to make donated funds deductible, their charities have.

[Stormin' Mormon]

33 minutes ago, Craig Speechly said:

Correct

A deductible charity has to have been deemed a Deductible Gift Recipient to qualify LDS charities has received this designation, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has not nor have other churches chosen to follow suit.

Yes it is, although part of the reported story is questioning whether the charity funds are actually being directed by Australians since LDS charities show no expense for employee incomes.

 

So you ARE stating that the Church has violated the law?  
 

33 minutes ago, Craig Speechly said:

It is ONLY a controversy if deemed so by the Australian government.  Otherwise there is none.

 

Exactly.  There is no controversy.  This thing has been done out in the open for YEARS and no one in the government has batted an eye.  If I recall correctly from earlier in the thread, this was even set up under consultation with the Australian government to make sure everything was above board and all parties were satisfied.  

33 minutes ago, Craig Speechly said:

The victim is the Australian tax payer who does not benefit from the taxes not paid on the otherwise non tax deductible funds used to pay for the day to day operations of the church in Australia

Nope.  You're only looking at one side of the equation.  The Australian government deemed that only 75% of what the Church was doing was tax deductible.  Which means that 25% of that $93 million collected by the Church in Australia SHOULD have been used for basic upkeep, operations, and maintenance.  But that need doesn't just go away.  The corporate church in America has to then send $23 million to Australia for that purpose, which is then spent, circulated, taxed, and provides value to the Australian taxpayer.  The EXACT amount of money that SHOULD be taxed and isn't is now coming into the Australian economy from outside the country and expanding its economy and tax base.  

33 minutes ago, Craig Speechly said:

There may be none...we will have to wait and see

Wait for what?  It's been done in the open, with the consent and cooperation of the Australian government for YEARS.  The jury isn't just out, they've rendered their verdict and gone home.  

33 minutes ago, Craig Speechly said:

 

I am sorry if you have found what I have sincerely attempted to be as a balanced approach in my posts as offensive or trolling and white knighting as you say.  I merely entered this subject because I felt I had some unique insight on this subject that others might find of value.  Please feel welcome to ignore any future posts I may make in this thread,  I sincerely meant no offense.

You might want to have a doctor check you for vertigo, because your attempt at balance is severely lacking.  In one breath, you cross your heart and swear you aren't accusing the Church of any wrongdoing, but then in the next breath you say, "the law says such and such, and the Church did not comply."  

Edited November 23, 2022 by Stormin' Mormon

[Stormin' Mormon]

24 minutes ago, Stormin' Mormon said:

You might want to have a doctor check you for vertigo, because your attempt at balance is severely lacking.  In one breath, you cross your heart and swear you aren't accusing the Church of any wrongdoing, but then in the next breath you say, "the law says such and such, and the Church did not comply."  

I try very hard to maintain a snark-free persona on this board, but I think I let my emotions get the better of me with this comment.  I think that's a sign that I need to step back from the discussion for a bit.  

I doubt I have anything new to say on the subject anyways; I'd only end up repeating or restating stuff I've already said upthread.  

Thanks for the convo.  I'm out.

[Craig Speechly]

46 minutes ago, Stormin' Mormon said:

So you ARE stating that the Church has violated the law? 

I have never made that assertion.  I have merely stated that they have devised a means whereby Australian members tithing donations can be made 100% deductible by funneling those donations through the LDS charity rather then into the Church.  In my opinion, this is currently fully within the law but outside the spirit of the law.  Being outside the spirit of the law does not make it illegal.

46 minutes ago, Stormin' Mormon said:

Exactly.  There is no controversy.  This thing has been done out in the open for YEARS and no one in the government has batted an eye.

My understanding is that no one within the government was aware of the extent of how this loophole was being used to skirt the payment of of otherwise taxable donations. But they are now fully aware that it is taking place.  So we will see.  It will either be endorsed by the government or they will move to close the loophole. This is the exact same thing the US Congress does when the IRS finds a loophole, they either ignore it and let it continue or they close it by enacting new tax law or through legal court action.

46 minutes ago, Stormin' Mormon said:

If I recall correctly from earlier in the thread, this was even set up under consultation with the Australian government to make sure everything was above board and all parties were satisfied. 

I entered this thread late and have not read it in its entirety.  If this is the case, and the government has given the church its blessing in using this scheme (the use of scheme is not pejorative, it is a common word used in Australia to describe these loopholes) then all of what I have shared in this thread is moot.  But, my understanding is that the Australian minister who oversees the taxing agency in Australia was demanding an investigation before the recent election...so I seriously doubt that the church had been giving any government blessing.  I will add that this same minister is now being more shall I say "Governmental" in his approach to this matter.

46 minutes ago, Stormin' Mormon said:

Nope.  You're only looking at one side of the equation.  The Australian government deemed that only 75% of what the Church was doing was tax deductible.  Which means that 25% of that $93 million collected by the Church in Australia SHOULD have been used for basic upkeep, operations, and maintenance.  But that need doesn't just go away.  The corporate church in America has to then send $23 million to Australia for that purpose, which is then spent, circulated, taxed, and provides value to the Australian taxpayer.  The EXACT amount of money that SHOULD be taxed and isn't is now coming into the Australian economy from outside the country and expanding its economy and tax base.  

Not exactly.   The members are using a loophole in the tax law to avoid the payment of taxes on the tithing being donated.  The churches status and taxes being paid by the church have never been an issue. This matter only impacts taxes being or not being collected through tithing donations.  I do the same thing.  I take every legal step I can to avoid the payment of income taxes. There is no sin here.

46 minutes ago, Stormin' Mormon said:

Wait for what?  It's been done in the open, with the consent and cooperation of the Australian government for YEARS.  The jury isn't just out, they've rendered their verdict and gone home. 

Again not exactly. As I have stated earlier, the government minister who over sees the Australian tax system was caught off guard.  It is still in question whether or not anything official will come of all of this.

46 minutes ago, Stormin' Mormon said:

You might want to have a doctor check you for vertigo, because your attempt at balance is severely lacking.  In one breath, you cross your heart and swear you aren't accusing the Church of any wrongdoing, but then in the next breath you say, "the law says such and such, and the Church did not comply."  

Bro Stormin, I have merely stated the facts. The Australian tax law is designed to collect taxes on the donations used to pay for the day to day operations of the church.  The church has found a way to skirt having members pay these taxes.  How exactly would you frame this reality?  I have chosen to call this a loophole, brilliant and not in keeping with the spirit of the law.  But not being in keeping with the spirit of the law does not make it illegal.

Edited November 23, 2022 by Craig Speechly

[Stargazer]

On 11/14/2022 at 8:20 PM, teddyaware said:

The mere $100 billion we’re told that has been be accumulated thus far is only a small portion of what’s going to be needed to make possible the great promises of scripture concerning the triumph of the Church of Christ in the last days.

Yeah, sort of.

One needs to have a deeper understanding of economics than that, if one is going to have realistic expectations of the economy during the Millennium. 

The Church has some cash, some liquid investments, some slushy investments, and some hard investments. The hard investments are primarily land, the slushy ones are ownership of companies, and the liquid ones are ownership of stocks and bonds. The cash, of course, is accounting entries in one or more bank registers and loses value at the rate of inflation.

Which, if any of these, will survive the Tribulation? Pretty much only the land. If the Tribulation is as bad as it seems like it will be, the world economy will crater, stocks and bonds will become pieces of paper, as the companies that issued them and own them vanish in the confusion. Only ownership of land will be left. Not even gold and silver will survive, at least immediately. Because what will be more valuable than gold or silver will be food, shelter, and fuel. And who will trade their precious food for gold? Only fools. Later, after basic commodities become more available, that's when stores of value like precious metals will come back into style, as it were. 

You need to understand that the things we use for money, those "dollars" in paper form, and the bookkeeping entries in your banking record, aren't money at all. And neither are gold and silver if people will not give you important commodities like food in exchange. Money, when it comes down to it, is only a medium of exchange that replaces the most inefficient form of trade, which is barter. Does anyone recall from history how during the Great Depression, Germans had to go food shopping with bags and wheelbarrows of cash, only to come away with one loaf of bread? "Money" is whatever people will trade with. If they won't trade you for it, then it isn't money.

I do believe that in the early stages of the Millennium, immediately following the Tribulation, those who are left will probably not be hoarding commodities. I am hopeful that the greedy will already have been taken, and people will trade freely with one another for the sake of life. And then the rebuilding will begin.

Well, that's my theory, anyway.

[JustAnAustralian]

3 hours ago, Craig Speechly said:

Taken Directly from the Australian Tax Website

 

3 hours ago, Craig Speechly said:

Note: The timing of the nearly 3000% increase in funds donated to LDS Charities Australia in 2015

The church previously operated in Australia under the name

THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER-DAY SAINTS (AUSTRALIA) but voluntarily reorganized after the tax law change deemed it no longer eligible for tax deductibility.

 

3 hours ago, Craig Speechly said:

The Australian government clearly intended that donation made to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints NOT be tax deductible while donations made to LDS Charities Australia be Tax Deductible...thus the tax deduction illegibility designation clearly spelled out

Well it's lucky that our tithing doesn't go to "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints" legal organisation, OR "LDS Charities Australia".

As has been said previously here, it goes to the "LDS Charitable Trust Fund". The trust fund then sends it to (among other places) LDS Charities .

I have a copy of a Tithing slip from 2012 stating "I direct 75% of Tithing and 100% of Fast Offering donations listed below go to the LDS Charitable Trust Fund". The slip has both 2009 and 2011 copyright dates.

I also have a copy of my donation statement from 1994 stating "Donations for Tithing and Fast Offering are received into the LDS Charitable Trust Fund and may be claimed as an income tax deduction under Sec 78 (4) of the Income Tax Assessment Act"

So tithing going into the "LDS Charitable Trust Fund" is not new, and the percentage of tithing we could claim for tax purposes has varied over time.

 

Quote

ABN detailshelp

Entity name:	L.D.S. CHARITABLE TRUST FUND
ABN status:	Active from 01 Nov 1999
Entity type:	Other trust
Goods & Services Tax (GST):	Not currently registered for GST
Main business location:	NSW 2118

Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission (ACNC)help

L.D.S. CHARITABLE TRUST FUND is registered with the Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission (ACNC)  as follows:
ACNC registration	From
Registered as a charity view ACNC registration	03 Dec 2012

Charity tax concession statushelp

L.D.S. CHARITABLE TRUST FUND is a Charity endorsed to access the following tax concessions:
Tax concession	From
GST Concession	01 Jul 2005
Income Tax Exemption	01 Jul 2000

Deductible gift recipient statushelp

L.D.S. CHARITABLE TRUST FUND is endorsed as a Deductible Gift Recipient (DGR) from 01 Jul 2000. It is a public ancillary fund covered by Item 2 of the table in section 30-15 of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997 .

The ABN search doesn't pick anything up before then because ABNs were only introduced in 2000 as part of tax reform changes.

Edited November 23, 2022 by JustAnAustralian

[Craig Speechly]

19 minutes ago, JustAnAustralian said:

 

 

Well it's lucky that our tithing doesn't go to "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints" legal organisation, OR "LDS Charities Australia".

As has been said previously here, it goes to the "LDS Charitable Trust Fund". The trust fund then sends it to (among other places) LDS Charities .

I have a copy of a Tithing slip from 2012 stating "I direct 75% of Tithing and 100% of Fast Offering donations listed below go to the LDS Charitable Trust Fund". The slip has both 2009 and 2011 copyright dates.

I also have a copy of my donation statement from 1994 stating "Donations for Tithing and Fast Offering are received into the LDS Charitable Trust Fund and may be claimed as an income tax deduction under Sec 78 (4) of the Income Tax Assessment Act"

So tithing going into the "LDS Charitable Trust Fund" is not new, and the percentage of tithing we could claim for tax purposes has varied over time.

 

The ABN search doesn't pick anything up before then because ABNs were only introduced in 2000 as part of tax reform changes.

Thank you for this additional information, it just goes to confirm what I have been stating. That tithing donations are not paid to the church but to an entity the church has set up in order to help tithing donations receive 100% tax deductibility.   This is a good thing.  Tithing should be 100 % deductible. I honestly don't understand why the Australian government doesn't see value in donation to a religion.

[JustAnAustralian]

16 minutes ago, Craig Speechly said:

Thank you for this additional information, it just goes to confirm what I have been stating. That tithing donations are not paid to the church but to an entity the church has set up in order to help tithing donations receive 100% tax deductibility.

Your claim was that the church was directing members to do this to get around tax laws. Not that tithing donations are simply received by a different legal organisation.

  

On 11/22/2022 at 3:57 AM, Craig Speechly said:

To resolve this problem the church set up several humanitarian charities and instructed members to make their tithing donations to these charities instead of paying their tithing as tithing. This allows members to claim a tax deduction on their tithing and avoided millions in taxes potentially due the Australian government 

As I said before, we as members, do not use a dropdown list, or enter bank account details of any specific legal organisation. If we pay with the envelope system, the church puts it in the bank account it chooses to. If we pay electronically, the church pulls it from out bank account. As far as members are concerned, the church is the church regardless of what the legal name of the organisation is, or which bank account tithing goes into.

 

Your friends seem to be claiming that the church should be a single monolithic legal organisation (so having separate organisations is bad), but also claim that the church is a big monolithic organisation with all decisions determined in the USA (so being monolithic is bad).

Edited November 23, 2022 by JustAnAustralian

[Stargazer]

32 minutes ago, Craig Speechly said:

Thank you for this additional information, it just goes to confirm what I have been stating. That tithing donations are not paid to the church but to an entity the church has set up in order to help tithing donations receive 100% tax deductibility.   This is a good thing.  Tithing should be 100 % deductible. I honestly don't understand why the Australian government doesn't see value in donation to a religion.

There's a lot of things the Australian government doesn't see value in.

[Hamba Tuhan]

6 hours ago, Craig Speechly said:

I agree that the story relied too much on information and perspective from church critics.  The church was given the opportunity to comment and chose not to, which is their right.

Quoting myself from earlier in this thread:

On 11/1/2022 at 1:14 PM, Hamba Tuhan said:

I just spoke with an Australian friend who serves in a Communications calling. She said the Church was approached for information/clarification before the original stories ran in May and again before these stories/broadcast ran. In both cases, the journalists chose to include nothing from the Church's highly detailed and thoroughly referenced submissions.

 

[Craig Speechly]

36 minutes ago, JustAnAustralian said:

Your claim was that the church was directing members to do this to get around tax laws. Not that tithing donations are simply received by a different legal organisation.

  

As I said before, we as members, do not use a dropdown list, or enter bank account details of any specific legal organisation. If we pay with the envelope system, the church puts it in the bank account it chooses to. If we pay electronically, the church pulls it from out bank account. As far as members are concerned, the church is the church regardless of what the legal name of the organisation is, or which bank account tithing goes into.

 

Your friends seem to be claiming that the church should be a single monolithic legal organisation (so having separate organisations is bad), but also claim that the church is a big monolithic organisation with all decisions determined in the USA (so being monolithic is bad).

You and I have nothing to argue over.  Honestly you're there and I'm here and I'm happy to defer to you on specifics in how exactly the church turns your donation from being taxed at 25% into its 100% tax free deduction.  You've clearly shown that you do not pay tithing to the church.  Spectacular. You pay it to the L.D.S. CHARITABLE TRUST FUND.  That's wonderful, this makes your tithing tax deductible for Australian tax law.  Marvelous. The church then takes your donation and funnels it into one of its many Australian charities that qualify for full tax deductibility.  Fabulous.  The church takes a 100% of Australian tithing donations and applies them to wonderful humanitarian needs throughout the world.  That's Awesome. 

But let's not ignore the fact that had the church not created these many wonderful charitable entities that allow you to received the full Deductible Gift Recipient desegregation you would be taxed on 25% of your tithing donation. True?

Donations to the Corporate Church do not qualify for the deduction. True?

Only deductions made to this LDS Charitable Trust Fund or one of the other designated LDS charity funds that have been given the Deductible Gift Recipient designation qualify for the 100% deduction. True?

My friends have made no such assertions.  In fact when I met and spoke with Neville, he told me directly that what the church has done may be clearly legal. He only wants the government to give its official stamp of approval thereby allowing all Australian religious organizations to do the exact same things.

 

Edited November 23, 2022 by Craig Speechly

[Craig Speechly]

5 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

Quoting myself from earlier in this thread:

 

This is disappointing. The story specifically stated that the church was contacted but chose not to comment.

[JustAnAustralian]

 

10 minutes ago, Craig Speechly said:

You've clearly shown that the you do not pay tithing to the church.  Spectacular. You pay it to the L.D.S. CHARITABLE TRUST FUND. 

That's still the church as far as I'm concerned.

Unless you think "the church" didn't exist in the US between 1862 and 2019 because its legal organisations were "The Corporation of the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints" and "The Corporation of the Presiding Bishop of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints" (see footnote 164 https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3835265 ), then it should still be the church as far as you're concerned too.

Edited November 23, 2022 by JustAnAustralian

[Hamba Tuhan]

15 minutes ago, Craig Speechly said:

This is disappointing. The story specifically stated that the church was contacted but chose not to comment.

I should have included the rest of my earlier post then (I was reluctant because I wasn't sure what was said):

On 11/1/2022 at 1:14 PM, Hamba Tuhan said:

She also said that the 60 Minutes broadcast included a statement that the Church has chosen to 'remain silent' or something like that, which didn't go over too well with her!

 

[Craig Speechly]

17 minutes ago, JustAnAustralian said:

 

That's still the church as far as I'm concerned.

Of course it is.  I'm not disputing this.  You are paying tithes to the church

17 minutes ago, JustAnAustralian said:

Unless you think "the church" didn't exist in the US between 1862 and 2019 because its legal organisations were "The Corporation of the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints" and "The Corporation of the Presiding Bishop of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints" (see footnote 164 https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3835265 ), then it should still be the church as far as you're concerned too.

It's always been "the church" to me despite its many legal entities. 

[Calm]

3 hours ago, Craig Speechly said:

although part of the reported story is questioning whether the charity funds are actually being directed by Australians since LDS charities show no expense for employee incomes.

So the 4 volunteers listed as directors and past directors have been just twiddling their thumbs and doing nothing besides signing the paperwork put before them?  So who is the one making the decisions?

This is like claiming a local ward is unlikely to be doing any humanitarian work including handing out donations made through fast offerings because no one gets paid for it.

Many charities are run by volunteers, it is not impossible, especially when you considered the LDSCA is not doing the charity work directly, but giving money to charities that do.  If they donate to known reliable charities, ones they have partnered with before who submit requests to them for support for their projects, it may not involve a lot of work.  After all, they don’t have to do any fundraising, which tends to be a massive burden for charities usually.

Edited November 23, 2022 by Calm

[Hamba Tuhan]

1 minute ago, Craig Speechly said:

I'm not disputing this. You are paying tithes to the church

 

1 hour ago, Craig Speechly said:

It just goes to confirm what I have been stating. That tithing donations are not paid to the church ...

 

[Craig Speechly]

Quote

She also said that the 60 Minutes broadcast included a statement that the Church has chosen to 'remain silent' or something like that, which didn't go over too well with her!

I understand her frustration.  This doesn't speak well of the 60 Minutes broadcast.  I may reach out to the 60 Minutes team to seek clarification.  I would like to know why they would misrepresent this important point. 

[Hamba Tuhan]

3 minutes ago, Calm said:

This is like claiming a local ward is unlikely to be doing any humanitarian work including handing out donations made through fast offerings because no one gets paid for it.

IMO, it's more akin to claiming that (cue spooky music) Latter-day Saint wards aren't real churches because they don't have any paid staff (including clergy).

I can see why ignorant 'journalists' might find this suss, but, really, anyone who knows how the Church operates primarily on all-volunteer labour should be laughing at how a handful of Aussie apostates are trying to get traction out of this point.

[Calm]

1 hour ago, Craig Speechly said:

He only wants the government to give its official stamp of approval thereby allowing all Australian religious organizations to do the exact same things.

What is stopping them from doing it now besides having a parent organization willing to send even more money into the country to support its members?

Quote

My understanding is that no one within the government was aware of the extent of how this loophole was being used to skirt the payment of of otherwise taxable donations. 

The Church has been doing this for 7 years.  They have to submit reports yearly at least.  It is clear what the Church is doing (names on the report are the Church’s, contact info is the local church headquarters).  It is a massive amount of money.  It is also a straight forward process, easy to understand, easy to track.  It is not accounting sleight of hand directing money into one fund that then gives the money back through other funds.  There is no hidden slush fund.  If the ATO is competent at all, then when the tax law changed in 2015, they would have been on alert for any unusual issues….like a church organization suddenly giving $70 million or whatever the amount to DGRs in the first year.  The Charitable Trust Fund has to get approval to qualify as a 100% tax deductible charity.  Do you believe the ATO just rubber stamps any charity that submits a request to be such?

Do you really think this has gone under the radar of the ATO for so many years?  Is the ATO that incompetent or at least that poorly staffed?

 

Edited November 24, 2022 by Calm

[Calm]

12 minutes ago, Craig Speechly said:

I understand her frustration.  This doesn't speak well of the 60 Minutes broadcast.  I may reach out to the 60 Minutes team to seek clarification.  I would like to know why they would misrepresent this important point. 

Because they will be honest with you when they weren’t honest to the public?

[Craig Speechly]

18 minutes ago, Calm said:

So the 4 volunteers listed as directors and past directors have been just twiddling their thumbs and doing nothing besides signing the paperwork put before them?  So who is the one making the decisions?

This is like claiming a local ward is unlikely to be doing any humanitarian work including handing out donations made through fast offerings because no one gets paid for it.

Many charities are run by volunteers, it is not impossible, especially when you considered the LDSCA is not doing the charity work directly, but giving money to charities that do.  If they donate to known reliable charities, ones they have partnered with before who submit requests to them for support for their projects, it may not involve a lot of work.  After all, they don’t have to do any fundraising, which tends to be a massive burden for charities usually.

I agree. You have to understand where the concern is coming from.  I'm sure the Australian government is not familiar with how the church uses volunteers to fill so many of its leadership positions.  I'm sure that this is a minor point that can be easily resolved once they get clarification.

[Calm]

3 hours ago, Craig Speechly said:

But not being in keeping with the spirit of the law does not make it illegal.

Each law does not exist in isolation.  Laws were also made by the government to incentivize charitable donations to approved charities, including Developing Countries’ Relief Funds.  Why is it not in the spirit of the law to give money to these chosen organizations rather than the Australian government when the government itself set up the process to do so?

[Craig Speechly]

12 minutes ago, Calm said:

What is stopping them from doing it now besides having a parent organization willing to send even more money into the country to support its members?

The Church has been doing this for 7 years.  They have to submit reports yearly at least.  It is clear what the Church is doing (names on the report are the Church’s, contact info is the local church headquarters).  It is a massive amount of money.  It is also a straight forward process, easy to understand, easy to track.  It is not accounting sleight of hand directing money into one fund that then gives the money back through other funds.  There is no hidden slush fund.

Do you really think this has gone under the radar of the ATO for so many years?  Is the ATO that incompetent or at least that poorly staffed?

 

Australian law does require charities to submit financial reports.   It is these very reports that brought attention to this matter. These financial reports show more money flowing into Australia than from Australia.  It is clear what the church is doing by setting up these funds to provide cover for member to get the 100% deducitiblity on tithing donations.  They are then paying the day to day operating costs from non-Australian donations. Again nothing illegal here folks. It's using these humanitarian charity loopholes to provide cover for the Australian members of gain 100% tax free donation on their tithing that is at issue.  It's brilliant but to an outsider rather dodgy.

[Calm]

14 minutes ago, Craig Speechly said:

I'm sure the Australian government is not familiar with how the church uses volunteers to fill so many of its leadership positions.  I'm sure that this is a minor point that can be easily resolved once they get clarification.

Right, their ATO employees can’t read the tax forms they created themselves that sho no paid employees and it is way beyond any reasonable point to imagine that a church can have volunteers staffing important positions.